Bay Area
Kaplan Proposes Law to Protect Police Commissioners From Official ‘Intimidation and Harassment’
Reacting to reports that the City Administration secretly spent $50,000 to hire an outside contractor to investigate a member of the Oakland Police Commission, City President Rebecca Kaplan is proposing an ordinance that reaffirms that the City Charter gives investigative author-ity solely to the Police Commission and the City Council.
The proposed ordinance “reiterates the importance of an independent police commission and that neither the City Administrator nor the Chief of Police are authorized to engage in any action against commissioners, nor are they authorized to assume the powers granted to the Council, the Ethics Commission or the Police Commission.”
This conflict between the authority of the council and the administraor authority has been brewing for a while, focusing on repeated moves by the Chief of Police Anne Kirkpatrick and the City Administrator Sabrina Landreth against Oakland Police Commission Vice Chair Ginale Harris.
“Several meetings ago, I requested a copy of the contract between the City Administration and the outside project investigator who apparently was hired to investigate a police commissioner without notice to council, without a vote of council,” said Kaplan, speaking at Tuesday’s Public Safety Committee meeting.
This administrative action “was felt by police commission members as intimidating and harassment of them,” said Kaplan.
She never received the copy of the contract from the City Administrator but was eventually given a copy this week by a blogger, known as Hyphenated-Republic (hyphenatedrepublic.com), who had obtained it through a Public Records Act request to the city.
The contract confirms that the administrator in November 2018 hired a company to investigate “a specifically named member of the police commission,” Kaplan said.
“I believe that what was done was illegal,” she said.
“The charter of the City of Oakland states that it is the City Council that has the power to remove a commissioner for misconduct,” said Kaplan. “I don’t see any authority anywhere for the city administrator to independently decide to undertake an investigation.”
In a memo accompanying the proposed ordinance, Kaplan noted that Measure LL, which estab-lished the police commission, specifically quoted the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement about the key importance of creating a commission with “independence from the executive branch of government.”
According to the City Charter, as quoted in the memo, “The City Council may remove members of the commission for cause as provided in Section 601 of the charter, or members of the commission may be removed by a majority vote of the commission, only for conviction of a felony, conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude, a material act of dishonesty, fraud, or other act of moral turpitude, substantial neglect of duty (and) gross misconduct in office.”
A more recent incident involving an attempt to remove Harris took place in November 2019 when OPD Chief Anne Kirkpatrick complained about Harris to Police Commission Chair Regina Jackson by phone and email. In the email dated Nov. 19, Kirkpatrick mentioned an “anony-mous” call to internal Affairs concerning a verbal dispute between Harris and an administrator at her child’s school in San Francisco.
“While Harris’ style is more ‘sharp’ than some, her observations have often been proven to be accurate This sort of treatment feels like bullying,” said Jackson in an email to the Oakland Post.
“The Police Commission was voter approved by 83 percent of the citizens of Oakland,” Jackson continued. “We are volunteers seeking to understand and improve structures and policies in order to support OPD in being more emotionally intelligent and transparent in their accountability to communities they serve. We take our jobs seriously and have been resisted since we started.”
This latest incident, which led to coverage by the Bay Area media, predated the City Administrator’s hiring of the investigator by one year and involved different allegations.
The city administration also has filed two or three Public Ethics Commission complaints against Harris, and she was exonerated in all these cases, according to Commissioner Henry Gage.
“The question of who investigates the commission is an important one,” Gage said. “We don’t want someone who is too close to the police department to turn around and investigate the commission.”
“The administration should be on the side of increased police oversight,” he said.
The criticisms of Harris “seem very trivial,” said civil rights attorney Dan Siegel, who is repre-senting Harris.
“The city administration does not have the authority under the charter to be investigating members of the police commission,” said Siegel. “It does not seem like the City Administrator is justified in dealing with this like she is an employee.”
Representatives of the City Attorney and the City Administrator who attended the committee meeting said they didn’t have the information to be able to comment on the issue.
This conflict over the police commission reflects a broader problem: the city administration ignores, subverts or buries City Council decisions that the administration does not like, according to Rashidah Grinage of the Coalition for Police Accountability.
“Basically, Oakland is replicating Washington, D.C.,” said Grinage. “We have an administration that basically thumbs its nose at the City Council and decides what decisions it wants to implement.”
“Once something passes the City Council, it goes into a black hole. It is really quite astonishing,” she said.
The decision on Kaplan’s proposed ordinance was postponed to the Tuesday, Feb. 11 Public Safety Committee meeting, to give the City Attorney a chance to look at the proposal.
Kaplan Proposes Law to Protect Police Commissioners
From Official ‘Intimidation and Harassment’
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of November 20 – 26, 2024
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of November 20 – 26, 2024
To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
Activism
An Inside Look into How San Francisco Analyzes Homeless Encampments
Dozens of unhoused people are camped at Sixth and Jesse streets in San Francisco’s South of Market neighborhood. Tents made of tarps and blankets, piles of debris, and people lounging alongside the allies and walls of businesses are seen from all angles. These are some of the city’s hotspots. City crews have cleared encampments there over 30 times in the past year, but unhoused people always return.
By Magaly Muñoz
Dozens of unhoused people are camped at Sixth and Jesse streets in San Francisco’s South of Market neighborhood. Tents made of tarps and blankets, piles of debris, and people lounging alongside the allies and walls of businesses are seen from all angles.
These are some of the city’s hotspots. City crews have cleared encampments there over 30 times in the past year, but unhoused people always return.
But it’s normal to have tents set up again within less than 24 hours after an encampment sweep, David Nakanishi, Healthy Streets Operation Center Manager at the Department of Emergency Management, says. Sometimes there’s less people than before but often there is also no change.
“Most of the people that were in the encampments that want to go inside, we’ve gotten the majority of those [into shelter],” Nakanishi says. “Many of the people we encounter now, are those who have various reasons to not accept shelter, and some are already in shelter/housing”.
Since the ruling of Grants Pass by the US Supreme Court earlier this summer, which allows cities the authority to ban people from camping or sleeping on the streets, San Francisco has been at the head of the conversation to crack down on encampments.
Where neighboring cities in the Bay Area are clearing encampments a few days a week, San Francisco is sweeping 10 times a week, two per weekday.
Considering the controversy that plagues the city around its harsh policies, the Post decided to tag along on a ride with Nakanishi to show us how he decides what encampments make it on the city’s sweep list.
Nakanishi, having over 20 years of experience in homelessness management, drives around the busiest parts of the city almost daily. He’s tasked with arranging a weekly sweeping operation schedule for city teams to engage with unhoused folks to help get them off the streets.
So what exactly is he looking out for when deciding what encampments get swept?
It depends, he says.
Locations like schools, recreational centers, senior centers, or businesses are places he tends to want to address quickly, especially schools. These are the places where the complaints are highest and access to facilities is important for residents.
He says he also takes into account 311 calls and reports made to him by city staff. On the date of publication, over 100 calls and reports were made about encampments around the city, according to San Francisco data.
Nakanishi made a few 311 reports himself on the ride along, pulling over to take photos and describe the encampments into his 311 app. He says it helps him remember where to possibly sweep next or allows smaller teams in the city to engage quicker with individuals on the streets.
Nakanishi also looks at the state of the encampments. Are there a lot of bulky items, such as furniture, or makeshift structures built out of tarps and plywood, blocking areas of traffic? Is trash beginning to pile up and spill into the streets or sidewalks? Sites that meet this criteria tend to be contenders for encampment sweeps, Nakanishi says.
Street by street, he points out individuals he’s interacted with, describing their conditions, habits, and reasons for denying assistance from the city.
One man on 2nd St and Mission, who rolls around a blue recycling bin and often yells at passing pedestrians, has refused shelter several times, Nakanishi says.
People deny shelter for all kinds of reasons, he says. There’s too many rules to follow, people feel unsafe in congregate or shared shelters, or their behavioral and mental health problems make it hard to get them into proper services.
Nakanishi references another man on South Van Ness under the freeway, who city outreach have attempted to get into shelter, but his screaming outbursts make it difficult to place him without disturbing other people in the same space. Nakanishi says it might be an issue of the man needing resources like medication to alleviate his distress that causes the screaming, but the city behavioral team is in the process of outreaching him to figure that out.
In October, city outreach teams engaged with 495 unhoused people. 377 of those engaged refused shelter and only 118 accepted placements, according to city data. That number of monthly referrals is consistent throughout the entirety of 2024 so far.
Nakanishi has long advocated for the well-being of unhoused people, he explains. In 2004, he was working with the Department of Public Health and told then-Mayor Gavin Newsom that there needed to be more housing for families. Nakinishi was told it was easier to deal with individuals first and the city “will get there eventually.” 20 years later, family housing is still not as extensive as it could be, and the waiting list to get placements for families is a mile long with over 500 names.
In 2020, he was a Senior Behavioral Health Clinician at a hotel in the city during the pandemic. He says in 2021 he collaborated with DPH to provide vaccines to those staying in the makeshift hotel shelters once those became available.
Despite the constant media attention that city outreach is inhumanely treating homeless people, so much so that it has led to lawsuits against San Francisco from advocates, Nakanishi says not a lot of people are seeing the true conditions of some encampments.
He describes soiled clothing and tents, drenched in urine, and oftentimes rodents or bug infestations in places where people are sleeping. He’s asked homeless advocates- often those who are the most critical about the city’s work- who have shown up to observe the sweeps if those are conditions the city should allow people to be subjected to, but not many have answers for him, Nakanishi says.
The city’s “bag and tag” policy allows city workers to throw away items that are “soiled by infectious materials” such as bodily fluids and waste.
Sweep operations are conducted at 8am and 1pm Monday through Friday. People at the encampments are given 72 hour notice to vacate, but some don’t leave the area until the day of the sweep.
City outreach workers come out the day before and day of to offer resources and shelter to those interested. The Department of Public Works discards any trash that is left over from the sweep and washes down the area.
Nakanishi told the Post that the only time the city takes tents or personal possessions from residents is when folks become physically violent towards workers and police take the items as evidence. Other items taken are bagged and tagged in accordance with city policy.
Stories from local newspapers such as the San Francisco Standard and the Chronicle show instances of SFPD handcuffing residents while their items are thrown in the trash or disposing of personal possessions without reason.
Advocates have long been pushing for a more competent and compassionate process if the city is going to choose to continue sweeping unhouse people.
No matter the lawsuits and constant criticisms from allies, the encampment sweeps are not slowing down, even with the cold weather quickly approaching the coastal city.
Nakanishi says there aren’t a lot of large encampments left in San Francisco so now they do runs of streets in order to stretch out the sweeps as much as possible.
It’s calculated strategies and years of first hand knowledge that make this job work, “It takes dedication to the work, caring for the people and the community, and persistence, patience and sometimes good luck to make the positive changes for the people on the street,” Nakanishi says.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of November 13 – 19, 2024
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of November 13 – 19, 2024
To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
-
Alameda County4 weeks ago
Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price Announces $7.5 Million Settlement Agreement with Walmart
-
Activism3 weeks ago
‘Jim Crow Was and Remains Real in Alameda County (and) It Is What We Are Challenging and Trying to Fix Every Day,’ Says D.A. Pamela Price
-
Bay Area4 weeks ago
In the City Attorney Race, Ryan Richardson Is Better for Oakland
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of October 30 – November 5, 2024
-
Alameda County3 weeks ago
D.A. Price Charges Coliseum Flea Market Vendors in Organized Retail Theft Case
-
Activism3 weeks ago
‘Criminal Justice Reform Is the Signature Civil Rights Issue of Our Time,’ says D.A. Pamela Price
-
Activism3 weeks ago
“Two things can be true at once.” An Afro-Latina Voter Weighs in on Identity and Politics
-
Activism2 weeks ago
LIVE! — TOWN HALL ON RACISM AND ITS IMPACT — THURS. 11.14.24 5PM PST