City Government

Council May Address Racial Discrimination Highlighted in New Race and Gender Disparity Study

Emphasizing the importance of the work on the disparity study, Council President Nikki Fortunato Bas told the Oakland Post that the study will allow the City to figure out how to address the “systemic racial discrimination that exists” within the constraints of current laws limiting solutions to discrimination.

Published

5 years ago

January 22, 2021

Kiki

Loren Taylor

Nikki Fortunato Bas

Black people make up 25% of Oakland’s population. Women make up approximately 50%. That means that all of the statistics below should be 25% or above for Black businesses and 50% for women-owned businesses. Instead, this is what we see.

In construction prime contracts in the period from 2011 to 2016, African Americans earned a total of 2.07% of the contracts and a total of 1.13% of the money.
Women-owned businesses received 2.07% of the construction prime contracts and a total of 2.05% of the money.
African-American owned companies earned 1.43% of professional services prime contracts and 1.46% of the money.
Women-owned businesses received 10.36% of professional services prime contracts and 9.8% of the money.
For goods and commodities, African Americans received zero percent of the prime contracts and none of the money.
Women-owned business enterprises received 7.96% of the goods and commodities prime contracts and a total of 9.02% of the money.

As an administrative report to the City Council states, “The City of Oakland is a key player in the Oakland economy through its multi-million dollar purchasing and contracting activities, grants, and informal procurements” and plays a major role to reduce or enforce discrimination in the economic life of the city and its residents.

“The disparity study is incredibly important because it formally documents what many Oaklanders have known to be true – that Black-owned and women-owned businesses face significant structural and institutional barriers that keep them from accessing their “fair share” of City contracting opportunities,” said Councilmember Loren Taylor in an interview with the Oakland Post.

This study is also important because it creates concrete statistics so the city can go to court to defend race-conscious strategies to address these issues, he said.

Taylor continued:

“Discrimination by race and gender are embedded in the very fabric of how we operate as an institution, whether we acknowledge it or not. Government institutions in liberal Bay Area are not immune.”

He quoted Race and Equity Director Darlene Flynn, who says, “If your outcomes are racist, then the system that created those racist outcomes is racist as well.”

“Without a deliberate focus on eliminating race and gender inequity, we perpetuate the same disparities,” said Taylor,

While the discrimination may not be fully conscious or intentional, the effect is devastating.

“Black contractors missed out on tens of millions of dollars during the study period based on their relative availability to do the work,” said Taylor. “Those tens of millions of dollars equate to businesses that didn’t survive, jobs that didn’t get created, and Black and Latino communities that didn’t see the millions of additional dollars that would have otherwise cycled through Black and Brown communities.”

Taylor is proposing three ordinances that will be discussed and acted on by councilmembers in coming weeks.

Among the proposals are detailed changes so that minority trucking companies get city contracts, changing the rules so small businesses become more competitive with larger ones and making it harder for non-Oakland large businesses to call themselves “local businesses.”

She said she would like the City to hold a Zoom roundtable to involve a broad section of the Oakland community to raising the visibility of these issues and craft solutions.

The City hired Mason Tillman Associates in 2017 to complete the study for a total cost of $590,036.25. Required by the City Charter, this is the first study since 2008 examining all prime contracts between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2016. The consulting firm contacted all companies the city hired during this period to learn about the subcontracts they used to determine if they were awarded to minority-owned businesses. The 302-page study also examined the practices impacting who gets contracts and makes recommendations for the future.

For a copy of the disparity study go to Oakland Race and Equity Disparity Study

Kiki

Posts by Kiki | Website

Up Next

As Unhoused Community’s Eviction Approaches, City Council Discusses ‘Alternative Shelter’ Options

Don't Miss

Commentary: Biden’s Inauguration Marked by Swag and Magic of Black Folks

Kiki

1 Comment

Pingback: Community Support Needed to Ensure Progress Addressing City of Oakland Contracting Disparities | Post News Group

Activism

Marin City Public Housing Residents Demand a Voice in County’s Renovation Plans

Representation has been a continuous struggle for the Residents Council, she said in an interview with the Post News Group. In 2014, the tenants took the county to federal court over this issue, and prevailed, resulting in an MOU that was in effect from 2014 to 2024, said McLemore. “Now, they are not responding to our rightful requests to participate. They are not giving us a legal justification for their position.”

Published

4 days ago

May 10, 2026

Oakland Post

The largest housing complex in Marin County, Golden Gate Village residents are for predominantly Black and low-income. Courtesy image.

Tenants say the County of Marin is ignoring federal law requiring resident council participation

By Ken Epstein

Marin City public housing residents say the County is illegally depriving them of their rights to participate in renovation decisions that affect the future of their housing, raising deep concerns over whether the county ultimately will find a way to displace them.

According to regulations established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Marin City public housing residents have the right to organize, elect resident councils, and hold public housing agencies accountable for involving them in management decisions.

Without resident participation, the Board of Housing Commissioners, made up of the five Marin County Board of Supervisors and two resident comissioners, has approved a $226 million project. The plan calls for renovation of the 296 units in Golden Gate Village (GGV) and focuses on interior improvements. The project is scheduled to start in July.

Residents’ concerns have a long history, said Royce McLemore, president of the Golden Gate Village Residents Council and a 50-year resident of Marin City,

With no current MOU mandating training and participation of residents, the legal basis for all the redevelopment decisions made by the county since 2024 is questionable, said Terrie Green, executive director of Marin City Climate Resilience. “We are experiencing voicelessness. If residents had a voice, we wouldn’t be where we are today,” she said.

County decisions include a plan, in line with federal regulations, to convert GGV from public housing to a public-private enterprise that allows for private investment. The Marin Housing Authority has created a limited partnership that includes Burbank Housing – which will renovate the units and manage the property – and Wells Fargo Bank, the investor.

This change in federal policy regarding public housing, which includes a shift to a Section-8 voucher system, has resulted in gentrification across the country, particularly affecting African Americans in cities such as San Francisco.

Shifts in criteria of what is considered affordable could also end up pricing residents out of their living units. At present, low income in Marin County is officially considered $156,000. But the median household income in Marin City is significantly lower at $68,846.

Damian Morgan, a community advocate with Marin City Climate Resilience, questioned why the county is renovating apartments without fixing toxic infrastructure that is impacting the lives of people in GGV.

Morgan said tenants have filed a class action lawsuit because of unsafe conditions at Golden Gate Village.

Residents are also concerned that the County still does not have an adequate family plan for temporary displacement while their apartments are being renovated. Although the County has suggested other community apartments as alternatives, nothing concrete has developed except vacant public housing units that have the same toxic conditions, such as mold and mildew.

Green said it doesn’t make sense. “…Why are we moving people around into temporary housing that’s uninhabitable, when you should be dealing first with the infrastructure, the foundational work, replacing old and rusted water pipes and new sewers.”

Morgan questions the County’s motivation for neglecting infrastructure repairs. “They’re remodeling the units but leaving the decayed infrastructure in place. I feel like they’re just setting this up for it to fail.”

“What slowed it down a little is that GGV is a historic preservation district, but I think what they’re striving for is demolition by neglect,” he said. “The neglect has always been on their part.”

Architect Ora Hatheway said her concern is about cutting corners. “You have to deal with the land issues. You have to deal with grading and drainage, and that’s being brushed under the rug.”

In an interview with KGO TV, Marin County Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters responded to some of these concerns. She said residents are guaranteed the right to return to their homes.

“This is a concern that we take seriously,” she said. “Every resident will move back into their own unit, and we’ve given this to them in writing. Before they leave their unit, we will sign a document together that guarantees their right to return.”

In response to residents who feel left out of the planning process, she said community input has focused on those affected by the first phase of the project. “So other residents may not have heard quite as much or felt like they had as much contact. But if there are residents who have concerns, we’re happy to hear from them. You can contact my office or the housing authority directly,” she said.

While County leaders may be giving some updates to some tenants, they are not sitting at the table with the Residents Council nor giving residents a voice in decision-making, said McLemore.

Without a voice in decisions, tenants are worried that Black people may be forced out of public housing, resulting in gentrification, she said in an interview with ABC 7. It’s still paternalistic, she said. “It’s still that ‘We know what’s best for you.’’’

Several years ago, the Residents Council proposed a land trust plan that would give tenants homeownership rights. Though the plan had broad support throughout the county, it was rejected by the Board of Supervisors

In the final analysis, Green said, for Marin City tenants the fight is not just for decent housing but to maintain their community with dignity under conditions of mutual respect.

“We’re talking about people who came here to work in the shipyards during World War II to bring about peace and safety to this country,” she said. “Look at the discrimination we’ve faced down through the years. Look at the life-span issue of Marin City folks – almost 20 years less than the rest of the County.”

“We want educational equity so our children will have decent schools. We need a land trust, property ownership, so we can have wealth creation. Marin City needs the same quality of life as other communities in Marin County.”