Oakland

Opinion: What Brown v. Brooks Means For Black Folk

Published

8 years ago

February 15, 2018

By J. Douglas Allen-Taylor

On the morning in the fall of 2015 when I heard about the argument and physical confrontation between former Black Panther chairperson Elaine Brown and Oakland City Councilmember Desley Brooks—two prominent Oakland African American women leaders—down near Jack London Square, I could only shake my head and say to myself that regardless of which one of the women got the blame and who was actually at fault, this was going to end up being bad for Black Folk in Oakland and the Bay Area as a whole. Nothing that has happened since then has
changed my opinion.

Let’s try to sort out as much as we can, in order to explain why I feel that way.

Two years ago, Ms. Brown was seeking public assistance for her Oakland and World Enterprises non-profit organization—including land from the City of Oakland—in creating an affordable housing complex in West Oakland dedicated to formerly-incarcerated persons. On October 30th of that year, by all accounts, Ms. Brown and Ms. Brooks got into a argument at Everett & Jones Restaurant near the Oakland waterfront after Ms. Brooks indicated that she would oppose the proposed land deal with Ms. Brown’s organization. The argument turned heated, and ended with Ms. Brooks pushing Ms. Brown, causing the former Panther leader to fall and sustain injuries. Ms. Brown says the pushing was unprovoked. Ms. Brown says she was defending herself from an attack by Ms. Brooks. Ms. Brown eventually sued both Ms. Brooks and the City of Oakland in civil court, winning a more than $4 million verdict that is mostly charged to the city.

Other than who was at fault in the shoving incident, all of these facts are uncontested by either side in the dispute.

As for who was at fault, who was right and who was wrong, I’m not going to get into that. The first reason is that I would only be guessing. The second—and most important—reason is that while the right and wrong of it are extremely important to the two women involved in the Everett & Jones confrontation, it’s what has happened and is happening surrounding that confrontation that are more important to the interests of Black Folk in the area.

Let’s start with Ms. Brooks.

The District 6 Councilmember has amassed a lot of enemies over the years, both political and personal, and one of the immediate effects of the Brown/Brooks confrontation is that these opponents wasted little time in using the civil jury verdict against the city and Ms. Brooks to attempt to strip the long-time East Oakland City Councilmember of most, if not all, of her political power.

For example, in a January 31st joint San Jose Mercury News/East Bay Times editorial, the newspapers editors said that “if Brooks refuses to do the right thing by resigning and then stands for re-election later this year,” then voters in her district 6 should should vote to remove the Councilmember from office in the November November (“Replace Oakland City Council Bully Desley Brooks” Mercury News/East Bay Times January 31, 2018).

But Ms. Brown and her proposed housing project did not come out untouched by local media and official agencies in the wake of her confrontation with Ms. Brooks.

“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 East Bay Express reported in an article about Ms. Brown’s project in June of last year (“City of Oakland Poised to Give Public Land to Nonprofit that Improperly Received $710,000 in County Funds” East Bay Express June 20, 2017).

“The nonprofit, the Oakland and the World Enterprises,” the Express article continued, “was set up by former Black Panther Elaine Brown to build affordable housing and operate an urban farm in West Oakland. … [A]ccording 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.”

It’s not certain that local media would not have weighed in with criticism of the Brown affordable housing project funding even if the confrontation with Ms. Brown and Ms. Brooks had not taken place. But it can’t be doubted that the confrontation helped to put that housing project funding directly in the media spotlight.

At least for now, in any event, the Alameda County Grand Jury report did not appear to be having any immediate adverse effect on Ms. Brooks’ land deal with the City of Oakland or with other public money involving her West Oakland affordable housing project.

Meanwhile, however, the major blows were landing heaviest against Ms. Brooks.

While the News/Times editors said in their January “Replace Bully Brooks” editorial that Ms. Brooks’ “assault of former Black Panther leader Elaine Brown in a restaurant altercation that will cost Oakland taxpayers $3 million is the final straw,” they asserted that “for 15 years, the city has endured [Ms. Brooks’] self-centered behavior. … After all,” the editors continued, “this isn’t the first time the four-term councilwoman has abused her power.”

And what were Ms. Brooks’ “abuse[s] of power” were the editors alleging that should cause District 6 voters to turn her out of office? The Mercury News/East Bay Times editors were happy to provide them.

“For example,” they noted, “in 2013, the city auditor found that Brooks interfered with the construction of two city recreation centers, meddled in the contracting for demolition of an Oakland Army Base building and threatened a city employee’s work assignment.”

I’m sorry to have to backtrack a little again, but to understand—and rebut—what the News/Times editors were talking about here, we’re going to have to give a little history lesson to try to uncomplicate a four-year-old controversy as briefly and as simply as possible.

In the spring of 2013, citing the fact that while “the City of Oakland’s Charter has included a bold provision to ensure the appropriate separation of duties and functions and to shield City staff from City Councilmembers’ political interference and demands for special treatment,” then-Oakland City Auditor Courtney Ruby conducted a city audit supposedly to see if Oakland City Councilmembers were violating that “bold provision” by interfering with city staff in conducting city business.

“After interviewing more than 40 employees, reviewing 27 hotline reports, and examining thousands of Councilmembers’ and Council Aides’ emails and select phone records,” the City Auditor’s office eventually concluded, “this audit was able to substantiate 14 instances of Councilmembers or their Aides violating the City Charter, Section 218, Non-Interference in Administrative Affairs.” (Non‐Interference in Administrative Affairs Performance Audit FY 2009‐10 – FY 2011‐12)

Despite the fact that the City Audior had noted that “for many years there have been signs that problems exist with Councilmember interference” with city staff functions, the audit itself could only find violations involving two City Councilmembers: Larry Reid and Desley Brooks, with the heaviest criticisms falling on the office of Ms. Brooks. Mr. Reid and Ms. Brooks were the only African-Americans sitting on the Oakland City Council during the time period the city audit was examining. You can take that as coincidence or not. Your choice. Rightfully sensing in advance that this might cause the results of the audit to come into some question, the opening memo of the audit explained that “This audit was not designed to account for all occurrences of interference nor did it catch all instances of interference during the audit’s scope. Instead, it was aimed at confirming reported instances of interference that had occurred…”

The explanation did not help. The concentration by the audit on the only two African-American Councilmembers in a City Council notorious for cutting administrative corners led many observers at the time to charge that the city audit was either racially biased or a political hit-piece designed to try to turn Ms. Brooks’ District 6 voters against her when she ran for re-election in 2014.

If you’re interested in reading more about the details of the city audit’s findings against Ms. Brooks and Mr. Reid, one of which provides my own reporting on the substance of one of the findings (“Fight for Army Base Jobs Linked to Audit Issues” Oakland Post April 5, 2013 [http://content.postnewsgroup.com/2013/04/fight-army-base-jobs-linked-audit-issues/]), and the other which provides Ms. Brooks’ answer to one of the other findings (“Auditor: 2 on Oakland council broke law” San Francisco Chronicle June 5, 2014).

What is more important is what actually came out of the findings in the 2013 Oakland City Auditor’s Non-Interference Audit. The quick answer is: nothing.

The audit itself noted that ‘[t]his audit does not make any legal determinations; such matters will be properly referred to the appropriate law enforcement authorities. However, the City Charter is clear on the seriousness of Councilmember interference, stating that ‘violation of the provisions of this section by a member of the Council shall be a misdemeanor, conviction of which shall immediately forfeit the office of the convicted member.’ Conviction can only be determined in a court of law. What, if any, consequences related to these violations have yet to be determined by the appropriate parties.”

If any legal charges were ever brought against either Ms. Brooks or Mr. Reid regarding the incidents cited in the city’s 2013 Non-Interference Audit, I’m not aware of them.

Shortly after the city audit was issued, the Oakland City Council attempted to censure Ms. Brooks—though not Mr. Reid—over the findings. Nothing came of that attempt, either.

In July of 2013, what was then The Oakland Tribune (they have since abandoned the Oakland name and now call themselves the East Bay Times) published an editorial asking for that censure.

“The problem has reached crisis stage in Oakland where some, most notably Councilwoman Desley Brooks, have stepped way over the line,” the Tribune editors wrote. “After stinging criticism from the city administrator, city auditor and grand jury about Brooks’ meddling, it’s time for the council to act. Council President Pat Kernighan has called for censuring Brooks.

The action, to be considered at a special meeting July 25, would be symbolic because there would be no fine or other penalty. But it would send a long-overdue message. It’s time to assure city residents that council members will stop acting on their own to advance their personal agendas, bolster their pet projects or benefit their political backers. It’s time to assure city employees that individual council members cannot overrule their professional judgment. The long-standing ‘culture of interference,’ identified in City Auditor Courtney Ruby’s investigation, must end.” (“Oakland Tribune editorial: Oakland council should censure Desley Brooks for overstepping authority” Oakland Tribune July 18, 2013)

The Tribune editors also dismissed out of hand that the audit had only brought findings against the city’s two African-American Councilmembers.

“Some have claimed the auditor’s report is racially biased because it singles out Brooks and Reid, who are both African-American,” the Tribune editors continued. “We find that allegation offensive. Playing the race card here is inappropriate. An ‘everyone else does it’ defense claim is unacceptable.”

The Oakland City Council took up the issue of censuring Ms. Brooks in July of 2013. After sometimes-heated deliberations the motion was defeating, with not a single Councilmember voting for censure and even then-Council President Patricia Kernighan (who was the member who had brought forth the censure motion) abstaining.

A year and a half later, with the audit findings still recent history, voters in Oakland City Council District 6 re-elected Ms. Brooks as their Councilmember over three named opponents.

To recap, both local law enforcement officials, the Oakland City Council, and Oakland City Council District 6 voters all looked at the findings against Ms. Brooks in the 2013 Non-Interference city audit and found in it no cause for action against Ms. Brooks. The editors of the San Jose Mercury News/East Bay Times continue to think otherwise and, as we have seen, have resurrected them as part of their campaign to get Ms. Brooks out of office by resignation or defeat at the ballot box that was given new life by the findings by the Brown v. Brooks civil jury.

That was by no means the only actions coming out of that jury finding, none of which are good for Black Folk in Oakland and the Bay Area as a whole. But we’ll have to wait until we can gather together again to continue this discussion. Until then…

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Related Topics:desley brooks District 6 Elaine Brown Oakland Opinion poltiics

Up Next

Peralta Colleges Offer Best African American and Ethnic Studies Courses in the Country

Don't Miss

‘Blaxican’ History Lecture Exposes African Culture in Mexico

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Discrimination in City Contracts

The report was made public by Councilmember Carroll Fife, who brought it this week to the Council’s Life Enrichment Committee, which she chairs. Councilmembers, angry at the conditions revealed, unanimously approved the informational report, which is scheduled to go to an upcoming council meeting for discussion and action. The current study covers five years, 2016-2021, roughly overlapping the two tenures of Libby Schaaf, who served as mayor from January 2015 to January 2023.

Published

3 days ago

February 13, 2026

Oakland Post

Dr. Eleanor Ramsey (top, left) founder, and CEO of Mason Tillman Associates, which conducted the study revealing contract disparities, was invited by District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife (top center) to a Council committee meeting attended by Oakland entrepreneur Cathy Adams (top right) and (bottom row, left to right) Brenda Harbin-Forte, Carol Wyatt, and councilmembers Charlene Wang and Ken Houston. Courtesy photos.

Disparity Study Exposes Oakland’s Lack of Race and Equity Inclusion

Part 1

By Ken Epstein

A long-awaited disparity study funded by the City of Oakland shows dramatic evidence that city government is practicing a deeply embedded pattern of systemic discrimination in the spending of public money on outside contracts that excludes minority- and woman-owned businesses, especially African Americans.

Instead, a majority of public money goes to a disproportionate handful of white male-owned companies that are based outside of Oakland, according to the 369-page report produced for the city by Mason Tillman Associates, an Oakland-based firm that performs statistical, legal and economic analyses of contracting and hiring.

The current study covers five years, 2016-2021, roughly overlapping the two tenures of Libby Schaaf, who served as mayor from January 2015 to January 2023.

The amount of dollars at stake in these contracts was significant in the four areas that were studied, a total of $486.7 million including $214.6 million on construction, $28.6 million on architecture, and engineering, $78.9 million on professional services, and $164.6 million on goods and services.

While the city’s policies are good, “the practices are not consistent with policy,” said Dr. Eleanor Ramsey, founder and CEO of Mason Tillman Associates.

There have been four disparity studies during the last 20 years, all showing a pattern of discrimination against women and minorities, especially African Americans, she said. “You have good procurement policy but poor enforcement.”

“Most minority- and women-owned businesses did not receive their fair share of city-funded contracts,” she continued. “Over 50% of the city’s prime contract dollars were awarded to white-owned male businesses that controlled most subcontracting awards. And nearly 65% of the city’s prime contracts were awarded to non-Oakland businesses.”

As a result, she said, “there is a direct loss of revenue to Oakland businesses and to business tax in the city… There is also an indirect loss of sales and property taxes (and) increased commercial office vacancies and empty retail space.”

Much of the discrimination occurs in the methods used by individual city departments when issuing outside contracts. Many departments have found “creative” ways to circumvent policies, including issuing “emergency” contracts for emergencies that do not exist and providing waivers to requirements to contract with women- and minority-owned businesses, Ramsey said.

Many of the smaller contracts – 59% of total contracts issued – never go to the City Council for approval.

Some people argue that the contracts go to a few big companies because small businesses either do not exist or cannot do the work. But the reality is that a majority of city contracts are small, under $100,000, and there are many Black-, woman- and minority-owned companies available in Oakland, said Ramsey.

“Until we address the disparities that we are seeing, not just in this report but with our own eyes, we will be consistently challenged to create safety, to create equity, and to create the city that we all deserve,” said Fife.

A special issue highlighted in the disparity report was the way city departments handled spending of federal money issued in grants through a state agency, Caltrans. Under federal guidelines, 17.06%. of the dollars should go to Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs).

“The fact is that only 2.16% of all the dollars awarded on contracts (went to) DBEs,” Ramsey said.

Speaking at the committee meeting, City Councilmember Ken Houston said, “It’s not fair, it’s not right. If we had implemented (city policies) 24 years ago, we wouldn’t be sitting here (now) waiving (policies).”

“What about us? We want vacations. We want to have savings for our children. We’re dying out here,” he said.

Councilmember Charlene Wang said that she noticed when reading the report that “two types of business owners that are consistently experiencing the most appalling discrimination” are African Americans and minority females.

“It’s gotten worse” over the past 20 years, she said. “It’s notable that businesses have survived despite the fact that they have not been able to do business with their own city.”

Also speaking at the meeting, Brenda Harbin-Forte, a retired Alameda County Superior Court judge, and chair of the Legal Redress Committee for the Oakland NAACP, said, “I am so glad this disparity study finally was made public. These findings … are not just troubling, they are appalling, that we have let these things go on in our city.”

“We need action, we need activity,” she said. “We need for the City Council and others to recognize that you must immediately do something to rectify the situation that has been allowed to go on. The report says that the city was an active or inactive or unintentional or whatever participant in what has been going on in the city. We need fairness.”

Cathy Adams, president of the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce, said, “The report in my opinion was very clear. It gave directions, and I feel that we should accept the consultant Dr. Ramsey’s recommendations.

“We understand what the disparities are; it’s going to be upon the city, our councilmembers, and our department heads to just get in alignment,” she said.

Said West Oakland activist Carol Wyatt, “For a diverse city to produce these results is a disgrace. The study shows that roughly 83% of the city contracting dollars went to non-minority white male-owned firms under so-called race neutral policies

These conditions are not “a reflection of a lack of qualified local firms,” she continued. “Oakland does not have a workforce shortage; it has a training, local hire, and capacity-building problem.”

“That failure must be examined and corrected,” she said. “The length of time the study sat without action, only further heightens the need for accountability.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Post Newspaper Invites NNPA to Join Nationwide Probate Reform Initiative

The Post’s Probate Reform Group meets the first Thursday of every month via Zoom and invites the public to attend. The Post is making the initiative national and will submit information from its monthly meeting to the NNPA to educate, advocate, and inform its readers.

Published

5 days ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Tanya Dennis

The National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) represents the Black press with over 200 newspapers nationwide.

Last night the Post announced that it is actively recruiting the Black press to inform the public that there is a probate “five-alarm fire” occurring in Black communities and invited every Black newspaper starting from the Birmingham Times in Alabama to the Milwaukee Times Weekly in Wisconsin, to join the Post in our “Year of Action” for probate reform.

Reporter Tanya Dennis says, “The adage that ‘When America catches a cold, Black folks catch the flu” is too true in practice; that’s why we’re engaging the Black Press to not only warn, but educate the Black community regarding the criminal actions we see in probate court: Thousands are losing generational wealth to strangers. It’s a travesty that happens daily.”

Venus Gist, a co-host of the reform group, states, “ Unfortunately, people are their own worst enemy when it comes to speaking with loved ones regarding their demise. It’s an uncomfortable subject that most avoid, but they do so at their peril. The courts rely on dissention between family members, so I encourage not only a will and trust [be created] but also videotape the reading of your documents so you can show you’re of sound mind.”

In better times, drafting a will was enough; then a trust was an added requirement to ‘iron-clad’ documents and to assure easy transference of wealth.

No longer.

As the courts became underfunded in the last 20 years, predatory behavior emerged to the extent that criminality is now occurring at alarming rates with no oversight, with courts isolating the conserved, and, I’ve heard, many times killing conservatees for profit. Plundering the assets of estates until beneficiaries are penniless is also common.”

Post Newspaper Publisher Paul Cobb says, “The simple solution is to avoid probate at all costs. If beneficiaries can’t agree, hire a private mediator and attorney to work things out. The moment you walk into court, you are vulnerable to the whims of the court. Your will and trust mean nothing.”

Zakiya Jendayi, a co-host of the Probate Reform Group and a victim herself, says, “In my case, the will and trust were clear that I am the beneficiary of the estate, but the opposing attorney said I used undue influence to make myself beneficiary. He said that without proof, and the judge upheld the attorney’s baseless assertion. In court, the will and trust is easily discounted.”

The Black press reaches out to 47 million Black Americans with one voice. The power of the press has never been so important as it is now in this national movement to save Black generational wealth from predatory attorneys, guardians and judges.

The next probate reform meeting is on March 5, from 7 – 9 p.m. PST. Zoom Details:
Meeting ID: 825 0367 1750
Passcode: 475480

All are welcome.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Community Celebrates Turner Group Construction Company as Collins Drive Becomes Turner Group Drive

The event drew family, friends, and longtime supporters of Turner Group Construction, along with a host of dignitaries. The mood was joyful and warm, filled with hugs, handshakes and belated New Year’s greetings. Guests enjoyed hors d’oeuvres and a festive display of gourmet cupcakes as they conversed about the street sign reveal.

Published

5 days ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

The Turner Construction group members.

By Carla Thomas

It was a family affair on Friday, Jan. 23, at the corner of Hegenberger Road and Collins Drive in East Oakland as community members, local leaders, and elected officials gathered to celebrate the renaming of Collins Drive to Turner Group Drive. The renaming saluted the Turner Group’s 45-plus years of economic development and community investment.

Special guests included former Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson, veteran broadcaster Valerie Coleman-Morris, Chevron Senior Public Affairs Representative Andrea Bailey, community leaders Cephus “Uncle Bobby” Johnson and Beatrice “Aunt Bea” Johnson of the Oscar Grant Foundation, and Oakland City Councilmembers Ken Houston, Carroll Fife, and Kevin Jenkins. Members of WEBCORE, the Nor Cal Carpenters Union, the National Association of Minority Contractors (NAMC), Swinerton and Alten construction companies, activists Elaine Brown and David Newton, and many others joined the celebration.

Inside the event tent, an emotional Oakland City Councilmember Ken Houston spoke of his deep connection to the Turner family.

“I grew up on the same street with the Turners,” he said. “When my father passed away, their parents and siblings embraced me like family. This is our city, and it’s an honor to name this street Turner Group Drive because of the love and effort this company and family have given. Many dreams came out of this building. I wouldn’t be where I am today without the Turners.”

Councilmember Kevin Jenkins, whose father once taught the Turner brothers, added, “Len Turner is an amazing person. He’ll help anyone.”

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee praised the company’s legacy, noting its creation of the Construction Resource Center, which trains and mentors the next generation of builders and developers through partnerships across the region. “This is a great day for Oakland and a profound acknowledgment of the Turner Group’s contribution to our community,” she said.

Fife echoed that sentiment: “This is a day for celebrating Black excellence. The Turner Group has poured into people and the community, showing us what’s possible.”

Among the many family members in attendance was the Turners’ 92-year-old patriarch, whose presence underscored the strength of the family’s legacy.

A touching highlight of the event came when Coleman-Morris was honored for her lasting mentorship of LaTanya Hawkins, now program manager of the Construction Resource Center. In 1979, Hawkins, then a fourth-grader, wrote Coleman-Morris a letter seeking advice. Coleman responded with words of encouragement that inspired Hawkins to pursue her dreams. The two stayed in touch for decades. On stage, they embraced as Coleman reflected on “the power of small acts of kindness to change a life.”

Coleman-Morris also shared reflections on leadership and community spirit, saying, “If we change the way we look at things, the things we see will change.” She then recited the Serenity Prayer, reminding the crowd, “We are a powerful community, we just need to believe it.”

Company leaders Len and Lance Turner closed the ceremony with words of gratitude and humor. Len thanked his mother, wife, family, legal team, and longtime supporters including Carson, Geoffrey Pete, and the late Dorothy King of Everett & Jones Barbecue. He also acknowledged the challenges the company had overcome, saying, “Without all of this support, I wouldn’t be here today.”

Through Turner Group Construction and the Construction Resource Center, the Turners have created new opportunities for underrepresented groups in the construction industry and continue to inspire the next generation of builders.