City Government
RNs Picket to Save Doctors Medical Center
Following a decision by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to table a sales tax that would have helped save embattled Doctors Medical Center (DMC) in San Pablo, the hospital’s registered nurses held a picket Tuesday.
They are demanding the county assume operation of the medical center and retain it as a full service hospital.
Anything less than a full service hospital would abandon residents of West Contra Costa County and expose hundreds of thousands of area residents to the threat of no emergency and hospital care in their community, according to the RNs.
“As a nurse I have served the West Contra Costa community for 40 years,” said Charlene Arrington, ICU RN at Doctors Medical Center. “DMC provides essential hospital care for which Contra Costa County is culpable and responsible to provide to all residents.
< p>“Anything less would be discriminatory. The county must act to maintain DMC to serve the community now and in the future.”
The picket line was held July 1, 3:30 p.m. to 5 p.m., at Doctors Medical Center, 2000 Vale Rd. in San Pablo.
The California Nurses Association/National Nurses United says the hospital serves many indigent patients, and a closure would have a disparate and disproportionate impact on the health of African Americans and senior citizens in violation of their civil rights.
As the only provider of advanced cardiac care for heart attack victims in West County, closure of the hospital would leave the area with only 15 of the county’s 242 emergency room beds – and in sharp contrast with East County with higher income residents and more hospital care.
“I hate to say this, but I know that if this was going on in Orinda, this wouldn’t be happening,” Richmond Vice Mayor Jovanka Beckles recently told the Contra Costa Times. “A solution would be found.”
Some have proposed that the hospital be downsized with limited service, such as a standalone emergency room. But that would be in direct contravention of state law that requires a facility with emergency services to at least also include other hospital services needed to accompany an ER, especially an operating room and intensive care services.
To run a limited hospital with an ER in name only would require specific enabling state legislation, “but that would do a great disservice to those residents of West Contra Costa County who need a full hospital, not a shell of a hospital, especially in a medically underserved region where there have been repeated oil refinery accidents,” said CNA co-president Deborah Burger, RN.
Even without a sales tax increase, the county has the resources to operate DMC, said CNA noting a recent report of a 6.5 percent uptick in county finances, and the added need for patient care as a result of enrollments under the Affordable Care Act as additional indications that the county should intervene to keep the hospital open.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of December 31, 2025 – January 6, 2026
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 31, 2025 – January 6, 2026
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
Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025
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 County
Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition
In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”
By Post Staff
The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.
In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”
In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.
The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.
“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.
According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.
Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.
However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.
Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.
Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.
“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”
Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.
“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”
Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.
A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.
So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.
-
Bay Area4 weeks agoPost Salon to Discuss Proposal to Bring Costco to Oakland Community meeting to be held at City Hall, Thursday, Dec. 18
-
Activism4 weeks agoMayor Lee, City Leaders Announce $334 Million Bond Sale for Affordable Housing, Roads, Park Renovations, Libraries and Senior Centers
-
Activism4 weeks agoOakland Post: Week of December 10 – 16, 2025
-
Activism4 weeks agoOakland School Board Grapples with Potential $100 Million Shortfall Next Year
-
Activism4 weeks ago2025 in Review: Seven Questions for Black Women’s Think Tank Founder Kellie Todd Griffin
-
Arts and Culture4 weeks agoFayeth Gardens Holds 3rd Annual Kwanzaa Celebration at Hayward City Hall on Dec. 28
-
Advice4 weeks agoCOMMENTARY: If You Don’t Want Your ‘Black Card’ Revoked, Watch What You Bring to Holiday Dinners
-
Activism4 weeks agoAnn Lowe: The Quiet Genius of American Couture





