Business

NAACP Settles Lawsuit to Remove False Quote About Prop 26

“We’re glad the cardroom casino operators did the right thing and removed the deceptive and inappropriate quote from their “No on 26” ballot arguments,” said Rick Callender, president of the California-Hawaii State Conference of the NAACP. “Despite the California-Hawaii NAACP’s strong support for Prop 26, opponents tried to deceive voters into thinking the opposite. Thankfully, voters will not be provided this false and misleading quote in the official voter guide sent to every voter.”

Published

4 years ago

September 11, 2022

Oakland Post

The NAACP supports Prop 26, which would require sports betting be conducted in-person at casinos.

By Edward Henderson, California Black Media

A lawsuit filed by the California-Hawaii NAACP Conference on August 2 to remove an election ballot opposition statement to Proposition 26 attributed to a Los Angeles NAACP branch member has been settled.

The statement will be stricken from ballot materials.

The civil rights organization found the statement “false and/or misleading” because it supports Prop 26. Also, according to NAACP bylaws, a local branch is prohibited from taking positions opposite that of the state group.

The statement against Proposition 26 found on the Secretary of State’s website reads as follows:

“We oppose Prop 26 to protect young people from developing lifelong gambling addictions that often lead to ruined finances, relationships, even homelessness and crime.” Minnie Hadley-Hempstead, Retired teacher and President Emeritus of the Los Angeles NAACP Branch

The lawsuit named Secretary of State Dr. Shirley Weber as the defendant because removing the quote from ballot materials, requires a court ruling.

A declaration statement made by Hadley-Hempstead for the lawsuit describes how she was misled by the No on Prop 26 Campaign.

The lawsuit also points out that the position ‘President Emeritus’ does not exist within the NAACP, and the only branch that can clear use of the trademarked term NAACP in support of or opposition to any legislation is the state branch of the organization. It also claims the use of the term ‘We’ creates the belief that the NAACP supports a NO vote, which it did not.

Prop 26, the in-person Tribal Sports Wagering Act, would authorize in-person sports wagering at existing tribal casinos. All bets must be placed in-person at a tribal casino with safeguards in place to prevent underage and illegal gambling.

Proponents of the proposition believe it will help create jobs and economic opportunities that support Indian self-reliance, while benefiting all Californians, generating new revenues for public schools, wildfire prevention and other state priorities.

Opponents of the proposition believe it will force local cardrooms out of business and, in turn, cause the state to lose tax revenue.

A statement from the “No on 26” campaign, respectfully adheres to the wishes of Hadley-Hempstead while standing behind the ballot initiative.

“Californians from across the state have been clear with their objections to Prop 26 which includes a poison pill that will unfairly harm communities of color. We appreciate and respect Ms. Hadley-Hempstead and will honor her wishes to remove her previously approved quote from the ballot statement,” it read.

Also named in the NAACP lawsuit, was Jay King, president of the California Black Chamber of Commerce. He told California Black Media that opposition to Prop 26 is justified saying, “With the tribes, they want to oversee what cardrooms do and want to legislate cardrooms. We have a body to do that already. I stand on the opposite side of the NAACP statewide and that’s OK.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

A Labor of Love, Daughter Gifts Kidney to Her Father

Don't Miss

Parking Restriction Proposed for Bayside Park

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Business

Trader Vic’s Returns to Its Oakland Roots

Trader Vic’s, the internationally recognized brand and birthplace of the original Mai Tai, has officially returned to its roots in Oakland. Originally founded in 1934 on San Pablo Avenue before moving to Emeryville, the hospitality giant has launched Trader Vic’s Outpost at Oakland International Airport’s Terminal 2. The new full-service location offers travelers breakfast, lunch, dinner, and cocktails in a 108-seat space designed to celebrate the city’s status as a top national food destination. Visit the website to read more.

Published

6 days ago

October 19, 2026

Post News Group

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee cuts the ribbon at the official opening of Trader Vic’s Outpost and Plum Market at Oakland International Airport. She is assisted by U.S. Rep. Lateefah Simon as Port of Oakland Board President Stephanie Dominguez Walton, left, and representatives from Trader Vic's, Plum Market, look on. Photo courtesy of the mayor’s office.

By Special to The Post

Oakland has always been a city of innovators, entrepreneurs, visionaries, and world-class hospitality. Trader Vic’s—the birthplace of the original Mai Tai – first opened in Oakland back in 1934 on San Pablo Avenue, long before becoming an internationally recognized global brand.

More than 50 years after it moved to Emeryville, Trader Vic’s is returning to its roots. Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee touts the return as another victory for Oakland.

“My administration is deeply committed to backing businesses like Trader Vic’s and Plum Market—partners who invest in our city, uplift our local workforce, and support thousands of local jobs,” Lee said.

The latest Trader Vic’s – called Trader Vic’s Outpost – is located at the Oakland International Airport in Terminal 2 near Gate 25 and had a soft opening in August.

With 108 dining seats, 28 bar seats and a counter for standing-room customers, travelers from around the world can have a full-service restaurant and bar experience or take-out for those with planes to catch.

Open from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., breakfast, lunch, dinner, cocktails will be served.

Trader Vic’s returning to its roots confirms Condé Nast’s decision to name Oakland the #1 Food City in America two years in a row, and just earlier this month, ranked Oakland #6 on their list of Best Cities in the U.S.!

“The opening at OAK is incredibly meaningful for us,” said Rhett Rosen, CEO of Trader Vic’s Hospitality Group, according to the company website. “Trader Vic’s was born in the Bay Area, and this new location gives us the chance to welcome travelers with a taste of that original spirit before they take off. It brings together everything people love about Trader Vic’s — great cocktails, flavorful food, warm hospitality and a little sense of escape — in a place that connects Oakland to the world.”

Trader Vic’s is an Oakland institution and one of the region’s most recognizable hospitality brands, said Port of Oakland Director of Aviation Craig Simon on the web site.

“Travelers are increasingly seeking dining options that are memorable, locally rooted, and uniquely representative of the communities they are visiting. Trader Vic’s delivers all of that while providing a high-quality food and beverage experience for our guests. We are proud to welcome this hometown favorite to Terminal 2,”

The original Trader Vic’s in Oakland:

In 1934, with an investment of $500, Bergeron opened his initially small restaurant at 65th Avenue and San Pablo, serving comfort foods for lunch and dinner and beers and whiskeys. As his clientele grew, so did his restaurant, expanding space and menu options. After visiting this establishment, famed San Francisco Chronicle columnist Herb Caen proclaimed that the “best restaurant in San Francisco is in Oakland.”

There were as many as 25 franchises worldwide, including the U.S. Trader Vic’s is now headquartered in Martinez.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Business

Oakland Coal Terminal Backed by Trump Would Be Bigger, Dirtier Than Promised, Says Report

A recent feasibility study commissioned by potential investors says an Oakland coal terminal backed by President Donald Trump could export 13 million tons a year — three times the amount estimated in an earlier environmental review. Surprisingly, the report also contradicts devel

Published

6 days ago

October 19, 2026

Post News Group

East Bay residents have been fighting alongside No Coal in Oakland for more than a decade. Photo courtesy of No Coal in Oakland.

By Post Staff

Surprisingly, the report also contradicts developers’ and project advocates’ repeated pledges that the coal would be stored in a covered terminal. Instead, the millions of tons of coal shipped annually from inland states to the West Gateway terminal in Oakland would be stored in “two open-air bunkers,” with about 150,000 tons of coal per stockpile, before being sent overseas, according to the recent report cited by the L.A. Times. (https://ruic.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Port-Study-RUIC-Bulk-Commodity-Ocean-Terminals-Study.pdf)

Residents and clean air advocates have long expressed concerns that coal dust would worsen pollution in West Oakland and throughout the East Bay.

The proposed site of the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal (OBOT) is located at the former Army base near the Port of Oakland, which developer Phil Tagami has been trying for years to turn into a shipping terminal despite determined community opposition.

Trump announced a $75-million investment in the project in June, about a third of its estimated cost. The new terminal would be the largest coal export site on the West Coast, transporting coal to Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam and Malaysia, according to the Trump administration.

Opponents say a new terminal would undermine years of progress cleaning up the air in West Oakland, which has a history of disproportionate pollution and high asthma rates due to its proximity to the port and other industry.

According to No Coal in Oakland organizer Ted Franklin, who has been active for 11 years in the fight to stop the coal terminal, the report indicates that investors may be looking for a cheaper way to build the terminal.

“We were shocked but not surprised” by the report, Franklin said. “Basically, it seems that the plan now is to store open piles of coal, which is a less expensive project than creating a completely enclosed facility.”

The threats that the project poses are real, but it faces a lot of economic and legal hurdles, he said.

Coal production is in permanent decline worldwide, he said, wondering who was going to “invest money in an industry that has no future.”

Further, the project has not yet attracted big investors. “There’s no bank, no financing, no financial institution backing this,” he continued.

A major legal hurdle facing the project is the passage of Assemblymember Mia Bonta’s bill, AB 40, the Community-First Coal Review Act, signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Sept. 30.

The law requires developers of large-volume bulk coal facilities to complete a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) before they can operate.

The law was specifically designed to block or delay the coal terminal project.

The report to potential developers was produced by consulting groups Norda Stelo and Wood Mackenzie in July and released this month. It was commissioned by the Rural Utah Infrastructure Coalition, made up of eight Utah counties that are considering investing about $43 million into the terminal to receive Utah coal.

The consultants produced their findings after visiting Oakland, examining engineering documents and holding discussions with Savage Cos., a Utah-based transport and logistics company selected to operate the facility

Research has shown that coal terminal operations can be dangerous to public health. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach moved away from open-air coal and petroleum coke storage three decades ago.

The report says that the site could process 12 million metric tons, or 13.2 million tons, of coal each year, three times more than the terminal’s approved environmental impact report from 2002 and its 2012 addendum. Neither document mentions coal specifically, but rather bulk commodities.

The coal arriving in Oakland could also be dirtier then had been previously stated, according to the report. Project officials previously said the terminal would handle only high-grade western bituminous coal from Utah, but the recent report says it will also handle Powder River Basin coal from Wyoming and Montana, known to be much dustier.

Nor does the report mention plans to cover the rail cars to prevent pollution, though project officials previously promised they would only utilize coal transported in covered rail cars.

“It appears the developers want to build something much bigger and more polluting than anything they previously revealed, either in court or to the West Oakland community,” said Colin O’Brien, deputy managing attorney at the nonprofit Earthjustice, speaking to the L.A. Times.

The report indicates that the project may be much more expensive and take longer to complete than anticipated. The Energy Department estimates the terminal will cost about $231 million, but the report places the price at between $430 million and $625 million.

The terminal will take 53 months to complete according to the report, significantly longer than Trump’s promise of exports beginning in 2028.

Ted Franklin’s column, “Utah Study Blesses Investment in Oakland Coal Terminal but Leaves Key Questions Unanswered” is available at https://nocoalinoakland.info/utah-study-blesses-investment-in-oakland/