Connect with us

Politics

In a Bind, Republicans Offer Vote on Homeland Security Bill

Published

on

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. pauses during a news conference on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, to urge Republicans to support a "clean bill" to fund the Homeland Security Department as that agencies budget expires later this week. The DHS budget is at a standstill over provisions attached to a Homeland Security spending bill aimed at blocking President Barack Obama's executive actions on immigration. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. pauses during a news conference on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, to urge Republicans to support a “clean bill” to fund the Homeland Security Department as that agencies budget expires later this week. The DHS budget is at a standstill over provisions attached to a Homeland Security spending bill aimed at blocking President Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

DAVID ESPO, Associated Press
ERICA WERNER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A partial agency shutdown looming, Senate Republicans offered Tuesday to permit a vote on Homeland Security funding legislation stripped of immigration provisions backed by conservatives but strongly opposed by President Barack Obama and fellow Democrats.

“We could have that vote very quickly,” Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said as his party struggled to escape a political predicament of their own making involving an agency with major anti-terrorism responsibilities.

McConnell said he did not know how the Republican-controlled House would respond if a stand-alone spending bill passed the Senate. Underscoring the realities of divided government, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada initially said he wouldn’t agree to the proposal unless it had the backing of House Speaker John Boehner, in a sign it would be likely to clear the House.

With House Republicans scheduled to meet privately Wednesday to discuss the issue, Boehner’s office issued a statement that neither accepted nor rejected the proposal McConnell outlined to end weeks of gridlock.

“The speaker has been clear: The House has acted, and now Senate Democrats need to stop hiding. Will they continue to block funding for the Department of Homeland Security or not?” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.

Some House conservatives criticized the proposal, but one lawmaker allied with the leadership predicted it might win approval. Noting that a federal judge in Texas has issued an order blocking implementation of Obama’s plan to shield millions of immigrants from deportation, Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma said the court had “effectively stopped the president’s executive action,” at least for now. “So I don’t think we’d run the risk of shutting down Homeland Security,” he added.

Even in the Senate, though, McConnell’s plan had its GOP critics.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a tea party favorite and potential 2016 presidential contender, called it a mistake. “Congress is obliged to use every constitutional check and balance we have to rein in President Obama’s lawlessness,” he said in a statement.

Senate Republican officials said McConnell’s offer of a vote on a stand-alone funding bill also envisions a vote on a separate measure to repeal a directive from Obama last fall that shields about 4 million immigrants from deportation even though they live in the United States illegally. That measure would almost certainly fail in the Senate at the hands of Democrats.

At the same time, the proposal would eliminate an attempt by the House to repeal an earlier presidential order that allows tens of thousands of immigrants to remain in the country if they were brought here illegally as youngsters by their parents. Officials said Boehner’s office had been informed of McConnell’s plans before they were made public.

The maneuvering occurred as the president’s party raised the specter of terrorism and the Republicans countered that it was the Democrats who were preventing an orderly renewal of funding for the Homeland Security Department.

At a news conference a few hours before McConnell spoke, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., urged Republicans to “fund our security and not to send a message to al-Shabab that we’re going to shut down Homeland Security.”

Klobuchar’s state is home to the Mall of America, an enormous facility that was singled out as a potential terror target in a video released by al-Shabab, an Islamic militant group linked to the al-Qaida terrorist network. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has urged anyone considering a trip to the shopping mall to be particularly careful.

For their part, Republicans sought to pin the blame on Democrats, pointing out they blocked Senate action four times on the combined funding-immigration bill.

They also accused Reid of shifting his demands after first seeking a vote on a stand-alone spending bill, then refraining from accepting McConnell’s offer.

In response, Democrats seemed to backtrack, suggesting they may well sign on to McConnell’s offer whether or not Boehner does.

But even Republicans said privately that they needed to put an end to a controversy that was likely to turn out badly for them.

The current stand-off dates to last fall, when Boehner told fellow Republicans they should allow the funding of Homeland Security without conditions until after the elections. By then, he said, Republicans would have more leverage to force a rollback in the president’s immigration policy.

Republicans won control of the Senate, but they lack the 60 votes needed to overcome Democratic blocking actions. As a result, they have been unable to force a vote on House-passed DHS funding legislation that includes the repeal of the immigration policies Obama put into effect in 2012 and last fall.

Among some Republicans, there was recognition that McConnell was offering as graceful a way out as possible.

“I just don’t know how we do it any other way,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

___

Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Steven Ohlemacher and Chuck Babington contributed to this report.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Activism

Supreme Court Voting Rights Ruling Reverberates From the South to California

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling weakening the Voting Rights Act is reshaping political battles, particularly in the South. While California’s protections may offer a buffer, the decision raises national concerns about Black political representation and redistricting.

Published

on

Researchers pointed out that the number amounts to 1 in every 50 adults, with 3 out of 4 disenfranchised living in their communities, having completed their sentences or remaining supervised while on probation or parole. (Photo: iStockphoto)
iStock.

By Brandon Patterson

A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling weakening a key section of the federal Voting Rights Act is already reshaping political battles in parts of the South while raising broader questions about the future of Black political representation nationwide.

In Louisiana v. Callais, the Court’s conservative majority limited the use of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the provision historically used to challenge electoral maps that dilute minority voting strength. Writing in dissent, Justice Elena Kagan warned that the ruling marked the “now-complete demolition of the Voting Rights Act.”

The immediate effects of the ruling are expected to be felt most sharply in Southern states, where litigation over majority-Black districts has shaped congressional maps for decades. Republican-led states including Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas have already moved to defend or revisit maps following the decision, according to reporting by Reuters and Politico.

California’s political landscape is different. The state uses an independent citizen’s commission to draw district lines and also has its own California Voting Rights Act, which in some cases provides broader protections than federal law. Because of those safeguards, the Supreme Court’s decision is not expected to immediately alter Black political representation in California.

Still, legal scholars and voting rights advocates say the ruling could shape future national debates over how race is considered in redistricting and voting rights enforcement.

“It changes the legal atmosphere around voting rights nationally,” UCLA law professor Rick Hasen told Axios. “Even states with stronger protections are paying attention to where the Court is headed.”

The decision also arrives amid renewed political fights over redistricting. In California, voters approved Proposition 50 in November 2025, a measure backed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that expanded the state’s ability to redraw congressional maps in response to mid-decade redistricting efforts in other states.

Supporters argued the measure was necessary to counter increasingly aggressive Republican-led redistricting nationally, while critics warned it could weaken California’s independent redistricting tradition.

For Black Californians, the ruling lands at a time when political representation remains significant even as demographic shifts have changed historically Black neighborhoods in cities like Oakland, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee criticized the Court’s decision in comments to The Oaklandside, calling the Voting Rights Act one of the nation’s foundational civil rights protections.

“This decision weakens one of the most important civil rights tools our communities have had,” Lee said. “We know voting rights were never given freely. People fought and died for them.”

Rep. Lateefah Simon warned against complacency.

“This is part of a larger effort to erase the gains of the civil rights movement,” Simon told Oaklandside. “Black political power matters, and representation matters.”

The Voting Rights Act, passed in 1965 during the height of the Civil Rights Movement, helped expand Black political representation nationwide, including in California, where coalition politics among Black, Latino and Asian American voters helped elect candidates of color at the local, state and federal levels.

For many observers, the latest ruling serves less as an immediate threat to California districts and more as a reminder that voting rights protections long viewed as settled remain politically and legally contested.

Continue Reading

Amsterdam News

School District Extends Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler’s Contract for a Second Year

The Oakland Board of Education has extended Superintendent Denise Saddler’s contract through June 2027, promoting her from interim to permanent superintendent with a salary of $367,765.45 per year.

Published

on

Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photo.
Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland Board of Education voted this week to extend Superintendent Denise Saddler’s contract for another year, from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027.

Under the new agreement, Saddler’s job title will become “superintendent”; she will no longer be called “interim.”

Along with the new title, she will receive full superintendent benefits and salary at $367,765.45 per year, according to the employment agreement.

The vote to approve the new contract passed 5-2 at Wednesday night’s board meeting.

Saddler’s original interim contract was for one year. The school board was planning to select a permanent superintendent by the fall but earlier this year decided to delay the search.

The new contract reflects the Board of Education’s “determination that continuity in executive leadership is in the best interests of the district as Oakland Unified continues implementation of its fiscal stabilization strategies, academic priorities, labor relations initiatives, and operational improvements,” the employment agreement reads.

In November, the board approved a $150,000 contract with a consulting firm to carry out that search, but Board President Jennifer Brouhard told KQED last month that the process never got off the ground.

“No work was done, no money has been paid for the work (to) the search firm for the superintendent search,” Brouhard said. “Hopefully, we’ll be resuming that in the early part of the fall.”

Dr. Saddler was born and raised in Oakland, attended local schools, and has dedicated more than 45 years of her career to serving Oakland students and families.

She began her career in 1979 as a teacher of students with disabilities. Over the years, she has served as a teacher, principal, district leader, and teachers’ union president.

While working in OUSD, she has served as principal at Chabot Elementary, area auperintendent, and executive leader for Community Engagement and Educational Transitions. She has also supported schools as a principal coach and substitute principal and taught at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Education.

Dr. Saddler holds a Doctorate in Educational Leadership from Mills College and master’s degrees in special education and in Staff Development and Administration.

Continue Reading

Activism

Mayor Barbara Lee Joins National Public Safety Leaders to Advance Proven Violence Reduction Strategies

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee attends a two-day meeting with other mayors and public safety leaders to discuss violence reduction strategies; Oakland has seen a 39% drop in homicides.

Published

on

Oakland was one of four cities participating in a public safety convening.  Courtesy image.
Oakland was one of four cities participating in a public safety convening.  Courtesy image.

By Post Staff

Mayor Barbara Lee this week joined Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker and public safety leaders from Oakland for a two-day meeting focused on advancing cutting-edge public safety strategies, including focused deterrence and violence reduction.

The meeting brought together civic and public safety leaders from Oakland and Indianapolis to locations in Baltimore and Philadelphia to share lessons learned and identify innovative approaches to crime prevention, intervention, and enforcement.

The participating cities are widely recognized for pioneering community-centered public safety models that prioritize prevention, accountability, and sustained investment in neighborhood-based solutions

Oakland’s delegation included Department of Violence Prevention (DVP) Chief Holly Joshi, Oakland Police Department Assistant Chief Casey Johnson, and Ceasefire Director Annette Jointer.

Oakland’s participation underscores its continued leadership in advancing evidence-based violence reduction strategies and building a public safety system that integrates law enforcement with community intervention and prevention programs.

Oakland continues to see historic reductions in violence, reflecting coordinated efforts across the Department of Violence Prevention, Oakland Police Department, Ceasefire, and community-based partners, including:

  • Violent crime down 22%
  • Homicides down 39%
  • Lowest homicide total in nearly 60 years

These gains reflect sustained investment in focused deterrence strategies, real-time intervention, and expanded community violence interruption programs.

“Public safety is not achieved by any one agency alone—it requires coordination, trust, and a shared commitment to prevention and accountability,” said Lee. “We are proud to stand alongside cities like Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Indianapolis that are proving what works. We are seeing real progress in reducing violence in our communities, and we remain committed to building on that momentum through strategies that center prevention, intervention, and strong partnerships with residents.”

“Oakland’s progress shows what is possible when cities invest in focused deterrence and wraparound supports that reach people most at risk,” said Joshi. “Our work is grounded in building trust, responding quickly to emerging conflicts, and connecting individuals to services that interrupt cycles of violence. This convening was an opportunity to strengthen that work through shared learning with peers who are advancing similar strategies nationwide.”

Said Johnson, “Effective public safety requires a balanced approach that combines accountability with deep collaboration across agencies and communities.”

“We are seeing meaningful reductions in violent crime because of strong partnerships between law enforcement, DVP, Ceasefire, and community organizations,” said Johnson. “Engaging with peer cities allows us to refine and improve the strategies that are making Oakland safer.”

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Politics

In a Bind, Republicans Offer Vote on Homeland Security Bill

Published

on

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. pauses during a news conference on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, to urge Republicans to support a "clean bill" to fund the Homeland Security Department as that agencies budget expires later this week. The DHS budget is at a standstill over provisions attached to a Homeland Security spending bill aimed at blocking President Barack Obama's executive actions on immigration. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. pauses during a news conference on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, to urge Republicans to support a “clean bill” to fund the Homeland Security Department as that agencies budget expires later this week. The DHS budget is at a standstill over provisions attached to a Homeland Security spending bill aimed at blocking President Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

DAVID ESPO, Associated Press
ERICA WERNER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A partial agency shutdown looming, Senate Republicans offered Tuesday to permit a vote on Homeland Security funding legislation stripped of immigration provisions backed by conservatives but strongly opposed by President Barack Obama and fellow Democrats.

“We could have that vote very quickly,” Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said as his party struggled to escape a political predicament of their own making involving an agency with major anti-terrorism responsibilities.

McConnell said he did not know how the Republican-controlled House would respond if a stand-alone spending bill passed the Senate. Underscoring the realities of divided government, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada initially said he wouldn’t agree to the proposal unless it had the backing of House Speaker John Boehner, in a sign it would be likely to clear the House.

With House Republicans scheduled to meet privately Wednesday to discuss the issue, Boehner’s office issued a statement that neither accepted nor rejected the proposal McConnell outlined to end weeks of gridlock.

“The speaker has been clear: The House has acted, and now Senate Democrats need to stop hiding. Will they continue to block funding for the Department of Homeland Security or not?” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.

Some House conservatives criticized the proposal, but one lawmaker allied with the leadership predicted it might win approval. Noting that a federal judge in Texas has issued an order blocking implementation of Obama’s plan to shield millions of immigrants from deportation, Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma said the court had “effectively stopped the president’s executive action,” at least for now. “So I don’t think we’d run the risk of shutting down Homeland Security,” he added.

Even in the Senate, though, McConnell’s plan had its GOP critics.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a tea party favorite and potential 2016 presidential contender, called it a mistake. “Congress is obliged to use every constitutional check and balance we have to rein in President Obama’s lawlessness,” he said in a statement.

Senate Republican officials said McConnell’s offer of a vote on a stand-alone funding bill also envisions a vote on a separate measure to repeal a directive from Obama last fall that shields about 4 million immigrants from deportation even though they live in the United States illegally. That measure would almost certainly fail in the Senate at the hands of Democrats.

At the same time, the proposal would eliminate an attempt by the House to repeal an earlier presidential order that allows tens of thousands of immigrants to remain in the country if they were brought here illegally as youngsters by their parents. Officials said Boehner’s office had been informed of McConnell’s plans before they were made public.

The maneuvering occurred as the president’s party raised the specter of terrorism and the Republicans countered that it was the Democrats who were preventing an orderly renewal of funding for the Homeland Security Department.

At a news conference a few hours before McConnell spoke, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., urged Republicans to “fund our security and not to send a message to al-Shabab that we’re going to shut down Homeland Security.”

Klobuchar’s state is home to the Mall of America, an enormous facility that was singled out as a potential terror target in a video released by al-Shabab, an Islamic militant group linked to the al-Qaida terrorist network. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has urged anyone considering a trip to the shopping mall to be particularly careful.

For their part, Republicans sought to pin the blame on Democrats, pointing out they blocked Senate action four times on the combined funding-immigration bill.

They also accused Reid of shifting his demands after first seeking a vote on a stand-alone spending bill, then refraining from accepting McConnell’s offer.

In response, Democrats seemed to backtrack, suggesting they may well sign on to McConnell’s offer whether or not Boehner does.

But even Republicans said privately that they needed to put an end to a controversy that was likely to turn out badly for them.

The current stand-off dates to last fall, when Boehner told fellow Republicans they should allow the funding of Homeland Security without conditions until after the elections. By then, he said, Republicans would have more leverage to force a rollback in the president’s immigration policy.

Republicans won control of the Senate, but they lack the 60 votes needed to overcome Democratic blocking actions. As a result, they have been unable to force a vote on House-passed DHS funding legislation that includes the repeal of the immigration policies Obama put into effect in 2012 and last fall.

Among some Republicans, there was recognition that McConnell was offering as graceful a way out as possible.

“I just don’t know how we do it any other way,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

___

Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Steven Ohlemacher and Chuck Babington contributed to this report.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Activism

Supreme Court Voting Rights Ruling Reverberates From the South to California

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling weakening the Voting Rights Act is reshaping political battles, particularly in the South. While California’s protections may offer a buffer, the decision raises national concerns about Black political representation and redistricting.

Published

on

Researchers pointed out that the number amounts to 1 in every 50 adults, with 3 out of 4 disenfranchised living in their communities, having completed their sentences or remaining supervised while on probation or parole. (Photo: iStockphoto)
iStock.

By Brandon Patterson

A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling weakening a key section of the federal Voting Rights Act is already reshaping political battles in parts of the South while raising broader questions about the future of Black political representation nationwide.

In Louisiana v. Callais, the Court’s conservative majority limited the use of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the provision historically used to challenge electoral maps that dilute minority voting strength. Writing in dissent, Justice Elena Kagan warned that the ruling marked the “now-complete demolition of the Voting Rights Act.”

The immediate effects of the ruling are expected to be felt most sharply in Southern states, where litigation over majority-Black districts has shaped congressional maps for decades. Republican-led states including Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas have already moved to defend or revisit maps following the decision, according to reporting by Reuters and Politico.

California’s political landscape is different. The state uses an independent citizen’s commission to draw district lines and also has its own California Voting Rights Act, which in some cases provides broader protections than federal law. Because of those safeguards, the Supreme Court’s decision is not expected to immediately alter Black political representation in California.

Still, legal scholars and voting rights advocates say the ruling could shape future national debates over how race is considered in redistricting and voting rights enforcement.

“It changes the legal atmosphere around voting rights nationally,” UCLA law professor Rick Hasen told Axios. “Even states with stronger protections are paying attention to where the Court is headed.”

The decision also arrives amid renewed political fights over redistricting. In California, voters approved Proposition 50 in November 2025, a measure backed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that expanded the state’s ability to redraw congressional maps in response to mid-decade redistricting efforts in other states.

Supporters argued the measure was necessary to counter increasingly aggressive Republican-led redistricting nationally, while critics warned it could weaken California’s independent redistricting tradition.

For Black Californians, the ruling lands at a time when political representation remains significant even as demographic shifts have changed historically Black neighborhoods in cities like Oakland, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee criticized the Court’s decision in comments to The Oaklandside, calling the Voting Rights Act one of the nation’s foundational civil rights protections.

“This decision weakens one of the most important civil rights tools our communities have had,” Lee said. “We know voting rights were never given freely. People fought and died for them.”

Rep. Lateefah Simon warned against complacency.

“This is part of a larger effort to erase the gains of the civil rights movement,” Simon told Oaklandside. “Black political power matters, and representation matters.”

The Voting Rights Act, passed in 1965 during the height of the Civil Rights Movement, helped expand Black political representation nationwide, including in California, where coalition politics among Black, Latino and Asian American voters helped elect candidates of color at the local, state and federal levels.

For many observers, the latest ruling serves less as an immediate threat to California districts and more as a reminder that voting rights protections long viewed as settled remain politically and legally contested.

Continue Reading

Amsterdam News

School District Extends Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler’s Contract for a Second Year

The Oakland Board of Education has extended Superintendent Denise Saddler’s contract through June 2027, promoting her from interim to permanent superintendent with a salary of $367,765.45 per year.

Published

on

Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photo.
Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland Board of Education voted this week to extend Superintendent Denise Saddler’s contract for another year, from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027.

Under the new agreement, Saddler’s job title will become “superintendent”; she will no longer be called “interim.”

Along with the new title, she will receive full superintendent benefits and salary at $367,765.45 per year, according to the employment agreement.

The vote to approve the new contract passed 5-2 at Wednesday night’s board meeting.

Saddler’s original interim contract was for one year. The school board was planning to select a permanent superintendent by the fall but earlier this year decided to delay the search.

The new contract reflects the Board of Education’s “determination that continuity in executive leadership is in the best interests of the district as Oakland Unified continues implementation of its fiscal stabilization strategies, academic priorities, labor relations initiatives, and operational improvements,” the employment agreement reads.

In November, the board approved a $150,000 contract with a consulting firm to carry out that search, but Board President Jennifer Brouhard told KQED last month that the process never got off the ground.

“No work was done, no money has been paid for the work (to) the search firm for the superintendent search,” Brouhard said. “Hopefully, we’ll be resuming that in the early part of the fall.”

Dr. Saddler was born and raised in Oakland, attended local schools, and has dedicated more than 45 years of her career to serving Oakland students and families.

She began her career in 1979 as a teacher of students with disabilities. Over the years, she has served as a teacher, principal, district leader, and teachers’ union president.

While working in OUSD, she has served as principal at Chabot Elementary, area auperintendent, and executive leader for Community Engagement and Educational Transitions. She has also supported schools as a principal coach and substitute principal and taught at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Education.

Dr. Saddler holds a Doctorate in Educational Leadership from Mills College and master’s degrees in special education and in Staff Development and Administration.

Continue Reading

Activism

Mayor Barbara Lee Joins National Public Safety Leaders to Advance Proven Violence Reduction Strategies

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee attends a two-day meeting with other mayors and public safety leaders to discuss violence reduction strategies; Oakland has seen a 39% drop in homicides.

Published

on

Oakland was one of four cities participating in a public safety convening.  Courtesy image.
Oakland was one of four cities participating in a public safety convening.  Courtesy image.

By Post Staff

Mayor Barbara Lee this week joined Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker and public safety leaders from Oakland for a two-day meeting focused on advancing cutting-edge public safety strategies, including focused deterrence and violence reduction.

The meeting brought together civic and public safety leaders from Oakland and Indianapolis to locations in Baltimore and Philadelphia to share lessons learned and identify innovative approaches to crime prevention, intervention, and enforcement.

The participating cities are widely recognized for pioneering community-centered public safety models that prioritize prevention, accountability, and sustained investment in neighborhood-based solutions

Oakland’s delegation included Department of Violence Prevention (DVP) Chief Holly Joshi, Oakland Police Department Assistant Chief Casey Johnson, and Ceasefire Director Annette Jointer.

Oakland’s participation underscores its continued leadership in advancing evidence-based violence reduction strategies and building a public safety system that integrates law enforcement with community intervention and prevention programs.

Oakland continues to see historic reductions in violence, reflecting coordinated efforts across the Department of Violence Prevention, Oakland Police Department, Ceasefire, and community-based partners, including:

  • Violent crime down 22%
  • Homicides down 39%
  • Lowest homicide total in nearly 60 years

These gains reflect sustained investment in focused deterrence strategies, real-time intervention, and expanded community violence interruption programs.

“Public safety is not achieved by any one agency alone—it requires coordination, trust, and a shared commitment to prevention and accountability,” said Lee. “We are proud to stand alongside cities like Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Indianapolis that are proving what works. We are seeing real progress in reducing violence in our communities, and we remain committed to building on that momentum through strategies that center prevention, intervention, and strong partnerships with residents.”

“Oakland’s progress shows what is possible when cities invest in focused deterrence and wraparound supports that reach people most at risk,” said Joshi. “Our work is grounded in building trust, responding quickly to emerging conflicts, and connecting individuals to services that interrupt cycles of violence. This convening was an opportunity to strengthen that work through shared learning with peers who are advancing similar strategies nationwide.”

Said Johnson, “Effective public safety requires a balanced approach that combines accountability with deep collaboration across agencies and communities.”

“We are seeing meaningful reductions in violent crime because of strong partnerships between law enforcement, DVP, Ceasefire, and community organizations,” said Johnson. “Engaging with peer cities allows us to refine and improve the strategies that are making Oakland safer.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.