City Government

Leaders Respond to Building Trades Threats to Fund Desley Brooks’ Opposition PAC

Published

8 years ago

September 15, 2018

Councilwoman Desley Brooks has refused to take a position on whether or not the city should adopt a policy which is called a “Project Labor Agreement” until she is given assurances that the PLA will benefit Oakland’s Black community.

In response, the construction unions have threatened to create an Independent Expenditure Committee to fund a negative campaign to help candidates running against her, unless Brooks will agree to vote for this policy.

Why is this a problem? First, coercing the vote of an elected official with threats of money to an unnamed, unaccountable Independent Expenditure Committee feels shady.

And second, we, the authors, are convinced that this city-wide Project Labor Agreement is a bad idea.

We are progressive in Oakland and we tend to support union actions automatically. This is often a good instinct. The Longshore Workers union, teachers’ union, nurses’ union, city worker unions, auto union and many others have created both economic and racial progress with their struggles.

But nobody should get a pass on racial justice.

And many of the construction unions have never gotten over their racial history. African-Americans get only 9 percent of the work on city-funded construction projects, although Black people make up a quarter of Oakland’s population.

The trades are asking for a “Project Labor Agreement,” which means their members will get almost all the work on these city-funded projects, and few of their members are Black.

The trades have consistently refused to release the numbers of people in their unions by ethnicity. So, they are asking the public to turn over our tax dollars to a select set of employees without regard for whether Black people make up a fair share of those employees.

And a walk around Oakland to look at most construction sites makes it clear that they do not. By all the information we can gather, most of the construction unions, especially those with better pay, have few Black members, because of a set of barriers which include various tests, the location of required apprentice training programs far away from Oakland, and others.

A major problem is that African-Americans in Oakland do not currently have the political power to create solutions for their communities. But the issue is much bigger than Black people.

It’s about equity and the moral compass of our city and society as a whole. The City of Oakland’s Equity indicators report confirms that bias and privilege have tangible outcomes build on a history of racism.

Councilmember Desley Brooks is the lone voice that is demanding more, and she is being persecuted for it – a scenario that also has familiar and historic roots.

With the dwindling Black population, the rising cost of living and the widening wealth gap, it is critical that African-Americans have good living wage jobs. We need many champions pushing to make that a reality NOW, not a distant hope or promise for a future that may never come.

We encourage the construction unions to desist from coercing an elected official to do something do something she may have concluded is morally wrong – voting against the employment needs of the African-American community

And we encourage those unions to break down the barriers to Black participation in their unions, so that eventually they will be willing to report openly on the ethnic composition of their membership, and the taxes of Black families will pay for projects on which they are also allowed to work.

Signed (organizations for identification only),

Carroll Fife, Executive Committee, Oakland Branch NAACP;
Kitty Kelly Epstein, PhD, professor of education and urban studies;
Darleen Brooks;
Henry Hitz; executive director emeritus, Oakland Parents Together:
Robyn Hodges

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Oakland 12th Grader Gema Quetzal Cardenas Appointed to State Board of Education

Don't Miss

Thurmond and Tuck to Discuss State of Black Student Achievement

Oakland Post

Click to comment

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.”