Uncategorized

State Bans Grand Juries in Police-Involved Deaths

Published

10 years ago

August 20, 2015

Public reaction was enormously positive last week when California became the first state to ban the use of grand juries in police-involved killings, but civil rights experts say the change is not significant.

Signed by Gov. Jerry Brown, the law – Senate Bill 227 – strips prosecutors of the option of allowing secret grand jury proceedings to decide whether or not to press criminal charges against local, state and federal law enforcement officers who commit violence against civilians.

The use of grand juries in these cases has come under severe public scrutiny last year after local police officers in Ferguson and Staten Island were not indicted for causing the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, sparking protests across the country.

Under the new law, prosecutors will solely be responsible for weighing evidence against law enforcement and deciding whether to file criminal charges, that is, whether to take the complaint to a preliminary hearing.

Unlike grand juries, preliminary hearings are presided over by a judge and the prosecutor presents live witnesses and evidence that are subject to cross-examination by the defense.

It is then up to the judge to answer whether there is enough probable cause that a crime was committed by the defendant.

All preliminary hearings are open to the public, whereas grand jury proceedings are held behind closed doors and rarely are the proceedings made public if the jury votes not to indict.

The California District Attorneys Association and the California Police Chiefs Association opposed the ban, while many civil rights workers say the banning of grand juries in these cases is a small step in the right direction but not enough to ensure that just decisions be made.

John Burris, Oakland civil rights attorney

John Burris, civil rights attorney in Oakland, says the ban is not a significant change to the pre-existing process and will not secure more appropriate criminal prosecutions of police officers when deserving.

“The real issue is and has always been from the DA’s office because they make the decision on whether or not to indict,” said Burris.

“Now they don’t have the option of grand juries, which had transparency issues, but the local DAs in California rarely if ever used grand juries to begin with.”

According to Alameda County Assistant District Attorney Teresa Drenick, her office “does not use grand juries in these matters.”

In the widely publicized case of the killing of Oscar Grant, BART officer Johannes Mehserle was indicted through a preliminary hearing and found guilty of second-degree murder.

Assistant DA Drenick also has stated that there are times when grand juries are vital, such as in cases where witnesses and victims need to testify safely behind anonymity without threat or intimidation.

Contra Costa County District Attorney Mark Peterson said the ban on grand juries was a mistake and would not yield more transparency, contrary to the law’s intention.

“The district attorney always had the power to make criminal charges, and then a judge decides whether to indict,” said Peterson. “But a grand jury allows a community of 19 or so people to hear the charges, weigh the evidence and make the decision.”

“I admit they don’t return non-indictment transcripts to the public, but if that’s the concern, then just make those grand jury transcripts public,” said Peterson.

Walter Riley (right) attends rally where Jeralynn Blueford (speaking) addresses supporters demanding justice for Alan Blueford. Photo courtesy of Workers World.

According to Walter Riley, a criminal defense and police misconduct attorney in Oakland, it is an important step for more transparency in the process, even if it does not mean that there will be more appropriate prosecutions.

Like other civil rights attorneys, Riley criticizes the “strong connection between the DA and the police, who work very close together.”

“As a result of working together, they don’t do a very good job of prosecuting police officers,” he said.

Three years ago, Riley spoke out against the Alameda County prosecutors’ decision not to press criminal charges against Oakland Police officer Miguel Masso in the shooting death of Alan Blueford.

Natasha Minsker, Director of the ACLU of California Center for Advocacy & Policy

The prosecutors decided that Masso had acted in self-defense and would not face criminal charges, a decision Riley questioned after examining the police report.

To solve the alleged biases between district attorneys and law enforcement, Burris says assigning independent prosecutors appointed by the attorney general to investigate police shooting cases is the essential next step.

Natasha Minsker, director of the ACLU of California Center for Advocacy & Policy, said “proposed legislation for independent prosecutors was killed by law enforcement lobbyists earlier this year.”

AB 953, a bill addressing the problem of racial profiling, is set for a vote in Senate, said Minsker. “Over 100 community groups and organizations, including #BlackLivesMatter, are supporting it but it’s facing very strong opposition from law enforcement.”

“We really need to push legislature to back necessary bills (like this one),” said Minsker. “Otherwise we won’t end police discrimination.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Uncategorized

Oakland Housing and Community Development Department Awards $80.5 Million to Affordable Housing Developments

Published

6 months ago

June 17, 2025

Oakland Post

Special to The Post

The City of Oakland’s Housing and Community Development Department (Oakland HCD) announced its awardees for the 2024-2025 New Construction of Multifamily Affordable Housing Notice of Funding Availability (New Construction NOFA) today Five permanently affordable housing developments received awards out of 24 applications received by the Department, with award amounts ranging from $7 million to $28 million.

In a statement released on Jan. 16, Oakland’s HCD stated, “Five New Construction Multifamily Affordable Housing Development projects awarded a total of $80.5 million to develop 583 affordable rental homes throughout Oakland. Awardees will leverage the City’s investments to apply for funding from the state and private entities.”

In December, the office of Rebecca Kaplan, interim District 2 City Councilmember, worked with HCD to allocate an additional $10 Million from Measure U to the funding pool. The legislation also readopted various capital improvement projects including street paving and upgrades to public facilities.

The following Oakland affordable housing developments have been awarded in the current round:

Mandela Station Affordable

238 Affordable Units including 60 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $15 million + previously awarded $18 million
Developer: Mandela Station LP (Pacific West Communities, Inc. and Strategic Urban Development Alliance, LLC)
City Council District: 3
Address: 1451 7th St.

Liberation Park Residences

118 Affordable Units including 30 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $28 million
Developer: Eden Housing and Black Cultural Zone
City Council District: 6
Address: 7101 Foothill Blvd.

34th & San Pablo

59 Affordable Units including 30 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $7 million
Developer: 34SP Development LP (EBALDC)
City Council District: 3
Address: 3419-3431 San Pablo Ave.

The Eliza

96 Affordable Units including 20 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $20 million
Developer: Mercy Housing California
City Council District: 3
Address: 2125 Telegraph Ave.

3135 San Pablo

72 Affordable Units including 36 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $10.5 million
Developer: SAHA and St. Mary’s Center
City Council District: 3
Address: 3515 San Pablo Ave.

The source of this story is the media reltations office of District 2 City Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Housing and Community Development Department Awards $80.5 Million to Affordable Housing Developments

Published

11 months ago

January 30, 2025

Oakland Post

Rebecca Kaplan, interim District 2 city councilmember. File photo.

Special to The Post

The following Oakland affordable housing developments have been awarded in the current round:

Mandela Station Affordable

238 Affordable Units including 60 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $15 million + previously awarded $18 million
Developer: Mandela Station LP (Pacific West Communities, Inc. and Strategic Urban Development Alliance, LLC)
City Council District: 3
Address: 1451 7th St.

Liberation Park Residences

118 Affordable Units including 30 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $28 million
Developer: Eden Housing and Black Cultural Zone
City Council District: 6
Address: 7101 Foothill Blvd.

34th & San Pablo

59 Affordable Units including 30 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $7 million
Developer: 34SP Development LP (EBALDC)
City Council District: 3
Address: 3419-3431 San Pablo Ave.

The Eliza

96 Affordable Units, including 20 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $20 million
Developer: Mercy Housing California
City Council District: 3
Address: 2125 Telegraph Ave.

3135 San Pablo

72 Affordable Units including 36 dedicated for Homeless/Special Needs
Award: $10.5 million
Developer: SAHA and St. Mary’s Center
City Council District: 3
Address: 3515 San Pablo Ave.

The source of this story is media reltations office of District 2 City Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Oakland Acquisition Company’s Acquisition of County’s Interest in Coliseum Property on the Verge of Completion

The Board of Supervisors is committed to closing the deal expeditiously, and County staff have worked tirelessly to move the deal forward on mutually agreeable terms. The parties are down to the final details and, with the cooperation of OAC and Coliseum Way Partners, LLC, the Board will take a public vote at an upcoming meeting to seal this transaction.

Published

11 months ago

January 11, 2025

Oakland Post

Alameda County Board of Supervisors Chairman David Haubert. Official photo.

Special to The Post

The County of Alameda announced this week that a deal allowing the Oakland Acquisition Company, LLC, (“OAC”) to acquire the County’s 50% undivided interest in the Oakland- Alameda County Coliseum complex is in the final stages of completion.

Oakland has already finalized a purchase and sale agreement with OAC for its interest in the property. OAC’s acquisition of the County’s property interest will achieve two longstanding goals of the County:

The Oakland-Alameda Coliseum complex will finally be under the control of a sole owner with capacity to make unilateral decisions regarding the property; and
The County will be out of the sports and entertainment business, free to focus and rededicate resources to its core safety net

In an October 2024 press release from the City of Oakland, the former Oakland mayor described the sale of its 50% interest in the property as an “historic achievement” stating that the transaction will “continue to pay dividends for generations to come.”

The Board of Supervisors is pleased to facilitate single-entity ownership of this property uniquely centered in a corridor of East Oakland that has amazing potential.

“The County is committed to bringing its negotiations with OAC to a close,” said Board President David Haubert.