Tuesday, June 20, 2017

City of Oakland Poised to Give Public Land to Nonprofit that Improperly Received $710,000 in County Funds

by Darwin BondGraham
Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 2:40 PM

Elaine Brown is the CEO of Oakland and the World Enterprises, and also a staff member in Supervisor Keith Carson's office. - OAKLAND AND THE WORLD ENTERPRISES, INC.
  • Oakland and the World Enterprises, Inc.
  • Elaine Brown is the CEO of Oakland and the World Enterprises, and also a staff member in Supervisor Keith Carson's office.

The Oakland City Council is scheduled to vote tonight on a deal to sell city-owned land near West Oakland's BART station to a nonprofit that improperly obtained hundreds of thousands in county tax dollars, according to the Alameda County Grand Jury. The city would sell the land for a nominal price, even though it's worth $1.4 million, in order to subsidize an affordable housing project on site.

Further complicating the deal is the fact that the nonprofit's leader sued the City of Oakland last year, alleging that councilmember Desley Brooks attacked her at a barbecue restaurant. The lawsuit is ongoing, and Brown is seeking millions in damages from the city.

The nonprofit, Oakland and the World Enterprises, was set up by former Black Panther Elaine Brown to build affordable housing and operate an urban farm in West Oakland. It also plans to build a grocery store, restaurant, fitness center, and technology center at the location.

But according to the Grand Jury, Brown's group was given $710,000 by Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson at the same time Brown was a paid staff member in Carson's office. "[T]he dual role of the county employee in these transactions constituted both a failure of good governance practices by the county of Alameda and a conflict of interest," concluded the Grand Jury in their investigation, which was published yesterday.

Brown is currently listed as a staff member in charge of job creation and West Oakland constituent services on Carson's supervisor web site.

According to tax records and other documents, Brown incorporated Oakland and the World Enterprises in 2014. The organization's 2015 tax return states that she received no salary or other pay.

In 2015, the organization received $290,000 in government grants. According to the grand jury, this was money allocated to the group by Alameda County's Housing and Community Development program through the proper channels and procedures.

But according to the grand jury, the organization's invoices sent to the county seeking payment of these funds "insufficiently explained" the reasons for certain expenditures.

Then, according to the grand jury, "over the ensuing months, there were multiple communications between HCD (including a contractor retained by HCD) and [Brown] about OAW’s request for funds under the contract," which ultimately resulted in $102,527 paid to Oakland and the World on May 2, 2016.

No other funds under the county's contract with the group were dispersed.

Over the same period of time, Supervisor Carson's office used its own funds that were available under the county's Fiscal Management Reward Program, to pay Oakland and the World a total of $710,000. The largest payments were made in April 2015 (for $290,000) and March 2016 (for $300,000). These payments don't appear in any publicly available tax forms filed by the organizations.

The grand jury found that there are not sufficient oversight rules to limit the ways the supervisors can use their FMRP funds, which add up to millions each year.

There isn't a 2016 tax return available for Oakland and the World Enterprises, according to the grand jury. The Express searched for the group's 2016 tax return through Guidestar.org and the California Attorney General's Office and confirmed that a copy isn't yet available.

Furthermore, the organization's 2015 tax return doesn't explain how it spent the $290,000 grant from the county HCD program. Instead, there is a $181,733 expenditure for "other" types of "fees for services" to non-employees. The attached schedule that is supposed to detail the spending is incomplete.

On March 24, the California Attorney General's office sent Oakland and the World Enterprises a letter warning the group that it's ability to operate as a nonprofit is in jeopardy because it hasn't provided its 2014 and 2015 tax returns along with other disclosure reports.

The Oakland City Council is currently considering whether to sell the West Oakland land, located at the corner of 7th Street and Campbell Street to the nonprofit.

The proposal to sell the land cleared a council subcommittee last week with councilmembers Larry Reid, Noel Gallo, Annie Campbell Washington, and Lynette Gibson McElhaney all voting yes.

According to a city staff report, Oakland and the World Enterprises first approached the city about the land in 2014. Under the proposed deal, the nonprofit would acquire the real estate, which is worth $1.4 million, at virtually no cost. The city would also provide a $2.6 million loan for the affordable housing project.

Brown sued the City of Oakland last year claiming that she was assaulted by Councilmember Desley Brooks in the Everett and Jones restaurant in October 2015. The district attorney never pressed charges, but Brown is seeking $7 million in damages from the city and Brooks.

Monday, June 19, 2017

Grand Jury: Oakland’s ‘Backroom Dealing’ to Sell City-Owned Land Is Systemic Problem ‘Vulnerable to Undue Influence’

by Darwin BondGraham
Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:56 AM

The Grand Jury investigated three public land deals in Oakland. - ALAMEDA COUNTY GRAND JURY
  • Alameda County Grand Jury
  • The Grand Jury investigated three public land deals in Oakland.
An investigation by the Alameda County Grand Jury alleges that Oakland city officials routinely violate state and city open meetings laws by discussing multimillion-dollar real estate deals in closed session.

According to the Grand Jury, Oakland officials do not properly notify the public through city council agendas when they’re discussing the sale of a city-owned property, keeping the public in the dark about ongoing deliberations.

The Grand Jury concluded that "the city’s misuse of closed sessions in discussing development of city property is a systemic problem."

Furthermore, the councilmembers and city staff don’t report on the substance of their private conversation to the public, which frequently includes matters such as "project vision, project scope, feasibility issues, community benefits, and selection of a developer" — all of which should be discussed in a public meeting, according to the Grand Jury. Furthermore, opportunities for members of the public to provide input on the deals is extremely limited.

The Grand Jury also found that individual councilmembers frequently hold private, one-on-one talks with the same developers the city is negotiating with. The city has no rules prohibiting these discussions, nor any requirement the contacts be disclosed to the public. As a result, the Grand Jury wrote that it is "concerned that private discussions during the pendency of the selection process favor well-connected developers, and make the process vulnerable to undue influence, or at least the perception thereof."

The Grand Jury is recommending that Oakland update its practices to comply with the Brown Act (the state's open meetings law) and the city's Sunshine Ordinance, and also require councilmembers to disclose when they privately meet with developers who are seeking public real estate.

Oakland's City Attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Grand Jury Report. The city administrator's office replied to an email that the city council will be preparing a response to the Grand Jury report.

"Backroom deals that exclude our communities have resulted in land use decisions that don’t serve existing residents and negatively impact Oakland’s vulnerable residents," said Ernesto Arevalo, an East Oakland resident who is part of a coalition of community groups that have been asking the city to develop a comprehensive public lands policy for several years now.

"We need more community representation in development, not developer lobbyists and or backroom deal making," said Arevalo. "And by stripping the public of its rightful role in this process, the [city] has spawned lopsided deals which only accelerate the mass displacement of marginalized Oaklanders."

The deals investigated by the Grand Jury include city-owned land at 1911 Telegraph Avenue, 2100 Telegraph Avenue, and the E. 12th Street Remainder Parcel. Negotiations for the Telegraph Avenue lands began in 2014, while the E. 12th Remainder Parcel began in 2015.

The city has 90 days to respond to the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.

Friday, June 16, 2017

Photos: Warriors Celebrate Second Title in Three Years with Parade and Rally in Oakland

by Ruth Gebreyesus
Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 12:04 PM

  • Photo By Nick Wong
The Golden State Warriors paraded for the second time in three years in downtown Oakland yesterday. Players rode by in topless busses, paired with teammates and families, along with coaches, members of the team's ownership group, and of course the odd ambassadorial pairing of Mayor Libby Schaaf and MC Hammer. Somewhere near 1 million fans lined the parade route through downtown and to the Henry J. Kaiser Memorial Auditorium, where a rally was held.

Warriors' fans belief that their team could win a championship was crystalized after 2015's victory. But this year, the team and its fans had much to prove after the devastating loss to the Cleveland Cavaliers in 2016.

This championship, and its ensuing celebrations, felt much more redemptive, and pointed at their fiercest rivals, led by Lebron James. Warriors forward Draymond Green embodied this mood with a T-shirt that read "Quickie," the "Q" shaped in a nod to the Quicken Loans Arena, where the Cavs play, and also a reference to the relatively brisk five games it took the Warriors to reclaim the Larry O'Brien trophy.

Green was also the highlight of the rally, where he took the stage dancing to Vallejo's SOBxRBE hit "Anti," before some choice words on the topic of "Superteams" and praise for Warriors general manager Bob Myers.

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

New Housing Development in Berkeley Could Uproot Popular Vegan Mexican Spot Flacos

by Ashley Wong
Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:12 PM

The popular vegan taquitos at Flacos in Berkeley. - FILE/PHOTO BY CHRIS DUFFEY
  • File/Photo By Chris Duffey
  • The popular vegan taquitos at Flacos in Berkeley.
Last Thursday, at a Zoning Adjustments Board meeting in Berkeley, a new housing development was proposed for the intersection of Adeline Street and Ashby Avenue. If successful, the construction of this new building will mean much-need new housing — but also the demolition of Flacos, a popular vegan Mexican restaurant.

The building, designed by Moshe Dinar and owned by Nathan Magganas, is proposed to be a five-story, mixed-use, residential and commercial building, with 42 units, 38 parking spaces, and 4,324 square feet of ground-floor commercial space.

Magganas says that he and Dinar want Flacos to operate out of their ground-floor commercial space, saying that they would be “very proud” for Flacos to make use of a brand new facility in a new building.

But Danny Sampaga, a Flacos employee, expressed reluctance and uncertainty about whether Flacos would agree to move into the new building, or where the business would go during the construction period.

“We would have to restart again, and we’ve been here for seven years,” Sampaga said. “If the city says okay, what can we do?”

Berkeley development standards limit all new constructions to a maximum of three stories, so Dinar and Magganas are currently in the process of acquiring permits to exceed this height limit.

At Thursday’s meeting, Dinar initially proposed two units of affordable housing, but mentioned that he was open to building more.

Board member John Selawsky said that the city might be reluctant to grant permits for two extra floors if the entire building includes only two below-market-rate units, and that he would like to see as many as 10. Magganas, however, said that the maximum number of affordable housing units they would be able to build is six. To build more than that, he said, would not create enough revenue to support their construction budget.

“In order to be able to build affordable units, the market rate units have to be built more,” Magganas said. “We try to have as high of a number as possible, but sometimes it’s not so easy. Trying to meet everyone’s concerns and expectations costs money.”

Altogether, the new development is projected to cost well over $2 million. If they get approval from the city, Magganas says it will take around 10 months to complete construction.

Crucial Legislation for New Oakland Police Commission Stalls in Committee as Activists and Councilmembers Fight Over Rules

by Darwin BondGraham
Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:24 PM

Councilmember Noel Gallo (right) and Dan Kalb co-sponsored the ballot measure to establish the new police commission.
  • Councilmember Noel Gallo (right) and Dan Kalb co-sponsored the ballot measure to establish the new police commission.

At last night’s public-safety committee meeting, Oakland Councilmember Dan Kalb told his colleagues he was “thrilled” to introduce detailed legislation that will govern the city’s new and powerful police commission. But by the end of the meeting, Kalb was visibly frustrated.

So too were dozens of activists, who have been a driving force behind the new police accountability board.

The committee deadlocked on a split vote over whether to advance Kalb’s version of the enabling ordinance or a competing ordinance favored by a broad coalition of community groups.

Kalb, who isn't a member of the committee, gave a brief presentation, to his colleagues.

Committee members Abel Guillen and Larry Reid sided with Kalb, while Desley Brooks and Noel Gallo voted for a version that’s preferred by police-accountability activists.

As a result, the all-important package of rules died in committee.
It’s unclear how, or when, a version of the rules, which are necessary to set up the commission, will come to the full council for final approval.

“There’s a reason for the expression, ‘The devil is in the details,’” said Rashidah Grinage, of the Coalition for Police Accountability, at last night’s meeting.

Grinage was referring to the numerous powers and rules spelled out in the ordinance that will determine whether or not the new police commission can fulfill its mission civilian oversight, transparency, and accountability of OPD.

According to Grinage — who worked closely with Kalb and Gallo’s offices to draft the ballot measure that created the police commission — Kalb’s version of the enabling ordinance weakens the commissioners’ independence from the Mayor’s office, and would also prevent some Oakland residents from serving on the board.

The biggest disagreements are whether potential commissioners will be subjected to criminal background checks, and if the mayor’s three commission appointees will be allowed to comprise a majority on the powerful discipline subcommittee.

Kalb’s version of the ordinance requires criminal background checks for potential commissioners. And his version would allow two, or even three, of the mayor’s appointees to serve on the discipline committee at that same time.

“A person is more than the sum of their mistakes,” said John Jones, a member of the selection panel that will appoint four of the commission’s members. Jones and the rest of the selection panel voted several weeks ago to not require criminal background checks, but the panel’s vote isn’t binding. Rather, it’s only a recommendation to the council for how to proceed.

Jones, who is formerly incarcerated and now works as a criminal-justice-system reformer, said at last night’s meeting that he objects to the “idea that everything in my mast could preclude me from doing something in the future.”

George Galvis, the executive director of Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, wrote in an email to the Express that background checks are “an example of the first layer of discrimination for formerly incarcerated people that denies and discourages civic participation and community involvement.” He said requiring background checks goes against recent public-policy changes in Oakland, such as “ban the box” rules that are meant to help formerly incarcerated people transform their lives and prevent discrimination from employers.

Another member of the selection panel, Shikira Porter, said required criminal background checks will likely dissuade people from applying to be commissioners, because of the impression the information will be used against them.

“It’s just another way to block and marginalize people who have been most impacted by the criminal-justice system,” she said.

But Kalb told the Express that he thinks the selection panel and mayor should have as much information as possible when choosing commissioners. He underscored that a background check shouldn’t be seen as an effort to weed out people with past convictions.

“Nothing in the ordinance says it would disqualify anyone from serving,” he said.

Oliver Luby, who works as a policy analyst in Kalb’s office, said “a criminal background might actually be considered a bonus” when the mayor or selection panel is considering someone for the commission, because the city wants some of its commissioners to represent the communities that have the most contact with the police, and have been most affected by police misconduct and mass incarceration.

On the issue the mayor having too much influence over the discipline committee’s composition, Kalb said critics were making “a big deal out of nothing.” He said it would be “insulting” to the commissioners to force them into different categories based on who appointed them, and prevent some of them from serving on the discipline committee.

“They should see themselves as all one, working together, toward the same goals,” said Kalb. He also said that the proposal to limit the mayoral appointees ability to serve on the discipline committee could lead to an unbalanced workload for other commissioners.

But members of the Coalition for Police Accountability said that allowing the discipline panel to be comprised of a majority of mayoral-appointees would undermine the independence of the commission from the mayor and city administrator’s offices.

Saied Karamooz told the public-safety committee last night that the reason the mayor’s office fought for three direct appointments to the seven-member police commission was to have some influence over its work. She explained that this is why many opposed giving the mayor the power to pick commissioners, but they compromised in the end.

“The principal has already been set,” said Karamooz, “not to have a majority of the commission be appointed by the mayor. We need to extend that simple logic to the discipline committee.”

Gabriel Haaland, the political director of the union SEIU 1021, which supported the police commission ballot measure, said it’s crucial to make sure the mayor’s appointees don’t have a majority on the discipline committee, and that it’s not a matter who the mayor happens to be at any given point in time. Haaland said it’s about “checks and balances” over the long-term.

“Ten years from now, you don’t want a mayor who can just pick up the phone to lean on someone,” said Haaland.

The public-safety committee’s deadlock means that one of the councilmembers will have to pull both version of the enabling ordinance up to the full council at a future meeting. But Kalb and other councilmembers that this could delay a final vote on the legislation until possibly after the council’s summer recess.

The police commission is scheduled to start meeting in the fall — if the new rules are approved in time.

It's also unclear where other councilmembers and Mayor stand on the differing versions of the ordinance. Mayor Libby Schaaf's office didn't respond to questions about how she might vote on the different versions, if there's another deadlock when the full council votes.

“This is the final step in working for twenty years for police accountability,” said Pamela Drake, just before the committee’s vote last night. “Even the perception that the mayor of administrator will have more power to control what goes one, especially with discipline, will weaken us.”

Kalb and the activists acknowledged that their competing versions of the ordinance are “95 percent” the same. After the vote, the councilmember debated several members of the Coalition for Police Accountability in the lobby of City Hall.

They say they’ll work with each other to try to settle their differences before the next vote.

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Reports: Warriors Unanimously Reject Trump White House Visit After Winning Championship

by Nick Miller
Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 8:26 AM

CNBC sports personality Josh Brown and others reported on Twitter early this morning that the entire Golden State Warriors have unanimously agreed not to partake in the traditional White House visit, because of their opposition to President Trump:
The two-time champions' distaste for Trump is no secret, so it wouldn't be a surprise were the team to announce that it wouldn't head to D.C. for the customary presidential photo-op. Head coach Steve Kerr called the president a "blowhard" earlier this year. Steph Curry deviated from his sponsor Under Armour to insinuate that Trump was an ass. And pretty much everyone from David West to Shaun Livingston has denounced the man.

But the Warriors' non-visit would break precedent. The New England Patriots posed with Trump after winning this year's Super Bowl (though more than a handful of players did not make an appearance).

President Ronald Reagan was the first commander-in-chief to regularly honor sports champions, and only a handful of champs have spurned presidential invites over the years.

A representative for the Warriors was not immediately available to discuss reports of the team's alleged decision not to visit Trump. released a statement this morning: “We have not been invited to the White House. Today is all about celebrating our championship. We will make those decisions when and if necessary.”

So, even if it's true that the players and coaches made some type of decision or pact, the Warriors' official spokespeople aren't making any statements.

Monday, June 12, 2017

Photos from the ANSWER and Indivisible Counter-Protests Against ACT for America's 'March Against Sharia'

by Karlos Rene Ayala
Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 8:52 AM

  • Photo By Karlos Rene Ayala
ACT for America, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated as an anti-muslim hate group, showed up on Saturday morning in cities nationwide, dubbing its protest a "March Against Sharia." Berkeley was spared, but the group appeared in nearby Santa Clara, and in Roseville, a suburb of Sacramento. Upward of 300 ACT demonstrators and President Trump supporters occupied a small mound of grass in front of a BJ's Restaurant and Brewhouse at the intersection of Roseville Parkway and Galleria Boulevard about two hours from the Bay. Rally attendees held signs that cited women's rights and the safety of children as the catalyst to their concerns with the Muslim community. Across the street, at an open-air shopping mall called the Fountains, a counter-protest took up two blocks, with nearly 800 people representing ANSWER, Indivisible, and other organizations opposing ACT's rally, which they called Islamaphobic. Despite high tensions, the event saw no violence. Here are pictures:

Town Business: Oakland Discovers Extra $7.13 Million Hidden in Police Department's Proposed Budget

by Darwin BondGraham
Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 6:13 AM

When Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf released her initial budget proposal in April, she projected a small deficit and relied on dipping into soda tax money as a balancing measure. She also wanted to suspend payments into the city's rainy day fund.

In a revised budget proposal published in May, Schaaf found more revenue in real estate transfer taxes and hotel taxes. This allowed her administration to set the soda tax money aside for an advisory board to spend, as voters intended when they approved the sugary beverage tax last November.

Now, the city administrator's office has discovered an error in the police department's proposed budget for the next two years that amounts to an extra $7.13 million, according to a staff report published last Friday.

"After further careful analysis of the budget, staff identified that the current Oakland Police Training Academy (a third or supplemental academy paid for with one-time funds to begin at the end of the current fiscal year) was budgeted as a continual expense through the end of [fiscal year] 2018-19, rather than ending in November 2017," explains the staff report.

The result is that the police were set to receive an extra $2.54 million next year, and $4.59 million the year after.

Now that the mistake has been caught, these millions can be allocated to other priorities.

The budget memo calls for using these extra funds to make payments into the city's rainy day fund and preserve some jobs in the parks department. The newly discovered money also helps increase the funds available for homeless services.

Friday, June 9, 2017

LGBTQ Groups In Alameda Reject Mayor's Pride Month Proclamation, Demand Apology For Vote Against Same-Sex Curriculum

by Steven Tavares
Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:12 PM

Eight years after Mayor Trish Herrera Spencer voted against allowing same-sex curriculum in Alameda schools, members of the LGBTQ community showed up at City Council on Tuesday to reject her proclamation of Pride Month — and to demand an apology.

  • Photo By Steven Tavares
On Tuesday night, prior to the council meeting, the city held a well-attended celebration in front of City Hall in honor of Pride. But some members of the Alameda LGBTQ community declined to pose for a group photo with the mayor (right). Instead, they formed an equally large alternative photo opportunity next to the city-sanctioned one.

The city’s four councilmembers also joined the protest photo-op, in solidarity with the community’s stance against the mayor’s past positions on LGBTQ issues (see below). Councilmember Frank Matarrese said he intended to take part in both photo-ops, however.

  • Photo By Steven Tavares
Olivia Higgins, a member of the Alameda Unified School District’s LGBTQ round table, said at the event that her group wants “direct acknowledgement of the hurt and the pain [Spencer’s vote] put on our community so many years ago."

She was referring 2009, when then-school board member Spencer voted against allowing references to gays and lesbians in Alameda elementary-school curriculum. The mayor’s vote came in the shadow of the Proposition 8 campaign against marriage equality in California, and, according to news reports at the time, Spencer said supporting the same-sex curriculum would promote bullying against those who oppose it for religious reasons.

Spencer’s school-board vote was not much of an issue during her unexpected 2014 mayoral victory over the incumbent Marie Gilmore.

But on Tuesday, the LGBTQ group's protest continued after the photo-op and during the council meeting, when members declined to accept a formal city proclamation declaring June “Pride Month” in Alameda. (See the video at the top of the story.)

Rev. Dr. Laura Rose, senior minister at First Congregational Church of Alameda, United Church of Christ, said the city’s invitation to participate in the group photo with Spencer “re-opened a very deep wound.” She told council that her group “would like to return the proclamation, respectfully, to Mayor Spencer, and would like to ask for a public apology for the pain that was caused during that time."

“We believe that will lend credibility and integrity to the signature at the bottom of the proclamation. We believe that Mayor Spencer wants to do the right thing,” Rose said.

Spencer responded by stating that the proclamation was not intended for a particular group, then asked if any other LGBTQ community members would accept the proclamation and pose for a photo. Three members of the public stood and joined the mayor.

After the meeting, Spencer told the Express that she did not know a separate photo op was being organized. She also said protesters “were detracting from the powerful statement that our city is making.”

“I wish the focus was on what our city did. I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to apologize for them detracting from what our city is doing,” the mayor said. “I don’t appreciate it.

She continued: “I will not apologize for wanting all children to be protected and feel safe. It’s sad we are where we are,” then added that she fully supports the LGBTQ community

Spencer also noted that some of the individuals who declined to accept Tuesday night’s proclamation had no qualms accepting a different proclamation, last October, in celebration of LGBT history month.

“I don’t know what happened from then to Tuesday night for them to have such a different response?” Spencer asked.

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Oakland Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan Sponsoring Legislation to Cut Police Ties with Immigration Enforcement

by Darwin BondGraham and Ali Winston
Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM

Oakland City Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan is following a recommendation from the city's privacy committee and requesting a council vote to cut ties with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency.

Last week, the Oakland privacy committee held a hearing on the city's multiple task force agreements with federal law enforcement agencies, focusing on ways these joint operations agreement could violate people's privacy and civil rights. The hearing uncovered a previously unknown memorandum of understanding between the Oakland police and ICE that allows OPD officers to work in task forces alongside ICE agents.

OPD told the privacy commission that they haven't conducted any joint operations with ICE under the agreement. OPD also insists that its policy is to never enforce immigration laws, and that any possible joint operations with ICE are to combat international drug and human trafficking and other serious felonies.

But privacy committee chair Brian Hofer said the fact that OPD hasn't conducted joint operations with ICE is all the more reason to terminate the agreement.

Kaplan told the Express today that the city should do what it can to protect its residents from any possible abuses by immigration authorities.

"I think in this era when we've seen more and more concerns about ICE exceeding what is appropriate for public safety, that people are being arrested purely for their immigration status, that it's all the more important for Oakland to make clear we won't collude with this kind of behavior," said Kaplan.

"ICE has been at the forefront of the inappropriate racial targeting we say we're against in Oakland," she continued. "We need to take action locally to make sure our communities feel safe interacting with our law enforcement."

Kaplan's proposal goes to the city council's rules and legislation committee tomorrow. She's asking that it be heard on its merits at the July 11 meeting of the council's public safety committee.

Most Popular Stories

© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation