Board of Supervisors passes a resolution introduced by Board President Nate Miley and District 2 Supervisor Elisa Márquez to formally recognize and apologize for the harm caused to residents and descendants of Russell City 

By Erika Brink

On Tuesday, June 27, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors formally apologized for the County’s role in the seizure and destruction of the unincorporated area known as Russell City, now located within the City of Hayward.

During the 1950s and 1960s, roughly 1,400 residents were displaced when the largely African American and Latino farming community was annexed into Hayward to build an industrial park.

The 12-block neighborhood known as Russell City was home to more than 230 families and numerous businesses. At the time, ongoing neglect from the County of Alameda led to a lack of sewage and water services, dedicated fire service, and other basic public infrastructure.

Conditions created by the lack of these basic municipal services were used by County and City of Hayward officials to justify the creation of a redevelopment plan that required the destruction of Russell City to make way for the City to annex and permit the development of an industrial business park with dedicated municipal services denied to the residents of Russell City.

Trending

Oakland Post: Week of September 6 – 12, 2023

In adopting the resolution on Tuesday, several Supervisors apologized directly to former residents and descendants in attendance. Board President Miley and Supervisor Márquez read the full resolution into the record.

Supervisor Márquez shared, “I’ve heard a lot from Hayward residents and descendants of Russell City about the importance of the City of Hayward and now the County of Alameda acknowledging the impact and harm caused to Russell City residents by the actions of the governing bodies of the City and County at that time.

“The collaboration between the families and descendants of Russell City with ‘Still I Rise Films’ shares residents’ stories and experiences. This is an inspiring and crucial step towards our communities coming together to heal and recognize our shared history. I want to express heartfelt gratitude to each and every Russell City family and descendant for sharing this powerful history.”

Miley pointed out that the 1963 Board was pictured in the Board chambers along with the prior Board of Supervisors. He said, “The Board of Supervisors approved a Reparations Committee for the Board and I feel this resolution today is part of our efforts around reparations because reparations aren’t all about compensation.

“There are other ways of trying to indicate reparations and I know many years ago the Board apologized for slavery, apologized for the Rodney King [beating] and now we have this matter before us today that is very important as well.”

With the adoption of the resolution Alameda County also committed to continuing the conversation with residents at the Board’s Ad Hoc Committee and Reparations Commission over the next year.

To view and participate in future Board of Supervisors or Ad Hoc Committee and Reparations Commission meetings visit https://bos.acgov.org/broadcast/ for meeting notices and agendas.

By Ken Epstein

An investigation conducted by the Alameda County Civil Grand Jury has revealed that employees in the office of former District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, including prosecutors, may have violated state and county laws and regulations by using work emails and county-owned equipment to raise money and campaign for their boss in the 2018 election, according to the recent annual Grand Jury’s report.

“When the District Attorney’s Office management learned that there was improper behavior among District Attorney staff, they took no immediate corrective action, and staff faced no consequences related to that behavior,” according to the report, which was released on June 23.

The grand jury’s investigation, which reviewed hundreds of documents and interviewed more than 30 people, concluded that about 25 staff in the district attorney’s office campaigned during work hours, using county-owned computers and the county-operated email system to raise money for O’Malley’s 2018 reelection campaign.

“(Violations) included requests from district attorney staff to donate to O’Malley’s campaign, as well as attending campaign events, distributing of campaign flyers, and participating in photographs that district attorney staff believed were used to help her candidacy,” the report said.

In addition, the emails were coordinated with police unions in other cities and counties to request their attendance at campaign events and to discuss campaign strategy.

Trending

Op-Ed: Biden Needs a Reparations Commission for 2024

According to the grand jury report, county ordinances, policies and state laws governing campaign activities include:

• Government Code §8314, which forbids using public resources for unauthorized use, saying it is unlawful to use public resources for political campaign activities.
• California Government Code §3205, which says employees of a government agency shall not solicit political contributions from an employee of the same or another government agency.
• California Penal Code §424, which makes illegal misappropriation of public funds by public officials or any other individual who has been entrusted with public funds.
• Alameda County Administrative Code Chapter 3.40.020, which provides that the county’s communications system shall only be used in the conduct of county business and that no county officer shall use or permit the use of the system for other than county business.

O’Malley won reelection in 2018, defeating civil rights attorney Pamela Price. O’Malley retired at the end of her term in 2022, and Price won election as district attorney against an opponent backed by the former D.A.

Among other policies, Price’s progressive campaign pledged to shake up the staff in the district attorney’s office, end racial disparities in prosecutions, stop mass incarceration, and end prosecution of minors as adults.

According to its website, the civil grand jury works “as an arm of the Superior Court, (and) is comprised of 19 citizens authorized to investigate local government to ensure that public agencies are working in the best interests of the public… (giving) the grand jury a unique role in securing local government accountability and in examining allegations of misconduct.”

Based on its interviews, the grand jury offered two reasons that may have motivated inappropriate staff behavior:

The 2018 election was the first in many years where an incumbent district attorney faced a challenger: “The Grand Jury learned that staff of the Office of the District Attorney had very strong concerns about the outcome of the election,” the report said.

Further, staff was deeply worried that Price would shake up the D.A.’s staff. “The fear that the election of a new district attorney, who had hinted at staff layoffs or terminations, was so overwhelming that staff failed to recognize their disregard of policies regarding campaign-related behavior as potentially illegal,” according to the report.

In its interviews the grand jury found that “while some staff recognized that these emails violated policies forbidding use of the county email system for political purposes, many engaged with colleagues and others in the campaign for district attorney …. No one appears to have spoken up to remind others of policies prohibiting use of county equipment and time on activities related to a political campaign.”

In a statement released this week, District Attorney Price wrote, “The Grand Jury exposed behavior that is unacceptable and especially inexcusable for lawyers. Our new administration will not make those same mistakes or violate the laws and policies ignored by the previous administration. We will not sacrifice our integrity or the public trust for political gain.

“In the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office of today, you can no longer prosecute the law and violate the law at the same time,” she said.

Price said that because she was involved in the original complaint, the DA’s office was recused from the grand jury investigation.

The Oakland Post attempted to contact O’Malley for a response to the allegations but by the newspaper’s deadline had received no reply.

In addition to the original complaint filed with the grand jury in September 2021, a complaint was also filed with the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), and the California Attorney General.   On May 10, 2023, the FPPC complaint was resolved as “No Violation Found.”

While the grand jury conducted a similar investigation of the 2022 election, it found “only a handful of inappropriate campaign-related emails.”

The grand jury’s recommendations included “rigorous education” of all county employees “about policies related to State and County rules regarding their behavior during political campaigns.”

In addition, the grand jury also said county employees and the public “need to know that complaints will be investigated, that consequences of policy infringement will be administered promptly and fairly, and that a complainant will know that their complaint has been addressed.”

Response to Report by Alameda County Grand Jury: “Misuse of County Information Technology Systems During the 2018 Election Cycle”

The Grand Jury Report is important and needs to be seen in proper context to be fully appreciated as the problem-solving document it should be – not the political hammer some would like it to be.

In every election cycle since 2009, the District Attorney’s office issued clear policies reminding staff of prohibitions against personal or political uses of the county IT system.  Because of an oversight, the policy was not distributed in the 2018 election cycle but verbal reminders were widespread.  As a result, fewer than 1% of employees were found to have run afoul of the law.

Looking at the numbers, of 363 employees of the District Attorney’s office, approximately just 25 inadvertently, inappropriately and minimally used the County IT system for campaign related communications.  During that same time period, more than 77,000 emails were sent or received by the District Attorney’s office, and a statistically immeasurable number were campaign activity. No amount of improper IT use can ever be condoned, but the numbers show actual abuse was very infrequent. The Grand Jury report makes clear that when the District Attorney learned of even this small breach, every employee was required to participate in a training, which was well-documented.  It is unclear why the Grand Jury did not receive the documentation.

The recommendations of the Grand Jury — particularly universal training and documentation — will ensure no errors and/or misuse of county property going forward.  That’s where this discussion should end.

By Ken Epstein

Several current police commissioners and police accountability activists held a rally this week calling for removal or resignation of two members of the Oakland’s appointed Police Commission, accusing them of attacking fellow commissioners and members of the public, and creating chaos that has kept the commission from fulfilling its duties to the community.

“We are calling for a new leadership on the Police Commission.…In the last year, we have seen disunity, disrespectful proceedings, and a lack of attention to pressing police oversight matters,” said Mariano Contreras of the Oakland Latino Taskforce and the Coalition for Police Accountability.

According to speakers at the rally Tuesday at noon on the steps of Oakland City Hall, Commission Chair Tyfahra Milele and Commissioner Brenda Harbin-Forte should be removed because they have created dysfunction on the commission that for months stalled the search for a new police chief.

Speakers  also charged that the commission was unable to weigh in on a crucial issue, the firing of Oakland Police Department Chief LeRonne Armstrong, because Milele failed to subpoena records related to  the handling and mishandling of an internal OPD case against Sgt. Michael Chung, which was connected to the chief’s firing.

Speakers said they are calling for the removal of the commissioners after internal attempts to settle the conflicts were ignored or attacked.

Trending

Sport Mode

Milele was appointed to the commission by the official selection panel, and Harbin-Forte was appointed by former Mayor Libby Schaaf. Milele’s term expires on October 16, while Harbin-Forte’s expired several months ago; she is serving until Mayor Sheng Thao names a replacement.

Contreras, who chaired the rally, said that rather than investigating the case that resulted in the firing of the police chief, the two commissioners have spent their time “looking for dirt” on community members, Oakland City Council members and the commission’s inspector general.

Police Commissioner Marsha Peterson, an attorney and Oakland native, said, “What we are up against (is) a lack of leadership,” adding that she has not been able to have conversations with Milele that don’t result in “threats, complaints, and chaos.”

At deadline, the Oakland Post has not received comments from Milele. However, in a press statement on June 7, Milele denounced the KTVU Channel 2 coverage of complaints against her and characterized the disputes as “an attempted power grab by a small band of political extremists with a personal agenda.”

“The extremist attack by an unelected, unaccountable, small group of politically ambitious zealots counters the will of the Oakland electorate and makes flagrantly false allegations,” she wrote.

In an email, Harbin-Forte told the Post:

“Yesterday’s pathetic rally totally vindicated Chair Tyfahra Milele and me.  The Coalition for Police Accountability and Commissioners Regina Jackson and Marsha Peterson invited more than 2,000 people to their party and ended up with more picture-takers than participants.”

She added: “Regina and Marsha suffered an embarrassing loss in January when Regina’s candidate, Marsha, who was then vice chair, ran to become chair of the commission. We not only overwhelmingly voted in Dr. Milele for a second term, but we also voted out Marsha as vice chair.”

Defending those criticized by Milele, Vice Mayor of Emeryville Courtney Welch, a former Oakland resident, said she stood in solidarity with “great leaders … who have been on the receiving end of vicious attacks, retaliation and character assassination” and that “it has to stop.”

Among those under attack, said Welch, have been Regina Jackson, currently a police commissioner and three-time past police commission chair; Police Commissioner Peterson; District 6 Oakland Councilmember Kevin Jenkins; and Cathy Leonard, a longtime police accountability activist, Oakland native, and president of the Coalition for Police Accountability.

The Coalition for Police Accountability was instrumental in putting Measure LL on the ballot, which created the police commission in 2016 with the support of 83% of voters.

In her remarks Leonard said, “We are raising a critical issue with the police commission,” only deciding to ask for the removal of the two commissioners after numerous attempts to meet with them failed to resolve the issues.

“We want the commission to work as a commission of all of the commissioners, not a police commission of two people,” she said.  “(But) it’s been attack after attack after attack.”

Jackson has served for six years on the Police Commission – its longest serving member – and for 30 years as a community leader. She said of Harbin-Forte, a retired judge, “We have seen ridiculous harassment and bullying, not just of community members, not just of city employees … but also of fellow commissioners.”

Jackson said Harbin-Forte has attacked those who are willing to stand up to her. “She called for three resignations in 72 hours: Councilmember Kevin Jenkins, myself, and Commissioner Marsha Peterson.”

She said she has requested five times but still has not seen an accounting of how the commission is spending its money.  “We have received no budget updates,” she said.

Jackson ended the rally with a chant, joined by other rally participants: “Remove, remove, remove!”