Politics

O’Malley Gets Scrutiny over Police Record as Baltimore Mayor

Published

11 years ago

May 4, 2015

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, center, meets with residents Tuesday, April 28, 2015, in Baltimore. Baltimore was a city on edge Tuesday as hundreds of National Guardsmen patrolled the streets against unrest for the first time since 1968, hoping to prevent another outbreak of rioting. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, center, meets with residents Tuesday, April 28, 2015, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Ken Thomas and Brian Witte, ASSOCIATED PRESS

BALTIMORE (AP) — Martin O’Malley often casts Baltimore as the comeback city that overcame the ravages of drugs and violence when he was mayor.

Now, weeks before the former Maryland governor expects to enter the 2016 presidential race and challenge Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries, Baltimore’s turnaround has been marred by the unrest after the police-custody death of Freddie Gray. The turmoil has placed new scrutiny on O’Malley’s “zero tolerance” law enforcement policies as mayor from 1999 to 2006.

The record shows that murders and violent crime overall declined in O’Malley’s years as mayor. But in that time, a grand jury concluded that too many arrests were being made in black neighborhoods without merit. And the city settled a lawsuit from people who said they were wrongly arrested for minor offenses. Altogether, these are the sort of concerns driving some of the anger in Baltimore today.

David Rocah, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Maryland, said the O’Malley administration left a legacy of “hyperaggressive and militarized policing” that, in his view, contributed to the outrage behind the riots. “I think the idea that you can arrest your way to public safety has always been deeply misguided and counterproductive,” Rocah said.

But O’Malley says those judging him in hindsight should remember the crime and despair of the Baltimore he inherited as mayor.

“I don’t think that any of us want to go back to the days of 1999,” O’Malley said. “Our city is undoubtedly a safer place, and our city is becoming a better place, but our city still has a lot of progress to make.”

He spoke outside the Dawson Safe Haven Center, an after-school refuge for children that was once a home for a family of seven killed in a 2002 firebombing by a drug dealer. O’Malley called that episode “our Alamo.”

Even now, O’Malley clings to the story of Baltimore’s redemption, terming the unrest “a heartbreaking setback for an otherwise remarkable comeback.”

He said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that when he makes an announcement about his presidential intentions, he wouldn’t think of making it anywhere other than Baltimore.

O’Malley has tried to build a following in Iowa and New Hampshire as an alternative to Clinton, the dominant front-runner. O’Malley has backed tougher regulations on Wall Street, opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and addressed student debt — issues that resonate with liberals.

Still relatively unknown, even among Democrats, O’Malley frequently points to his time as mayor as a key part of his biography.

A 2013 video by his team, shown at a New Hampshire Democratic dinner where he appeared, described Baltimore in the late 1990s as a “cauldron of crime, drugs and profound despair” and credited O’Malley with “an assault on hopelessness. He didn’t make a campaign promise to make the city safer, he made a pledge. And he kept it.”

In the 1990s, more than 300 people were murdered each year in Baltimore. O’Malley advocated “stop-and-frisk” practices, cracked down on lower-level crimes such as public drunkenness and disorderly conduct, and brought in two police commanders from New York steeped in such policing. The number of homicides fell to 253 in 2002 and stayed below 300 during his two terms, while never dropping to his goal of 175.

But the approach did lead to many arrests.

In 2005, a Baltimore grand jury found excessive arrests in black neighborhoods and recommended retraining officers. Judge Joseph McCurdy Jr. had tasked the panel with determining “what can be done to address the lack of confidence that exists between many members of the public and law enforcement.”

The ACLU and the NAACP sued in 2006 on behalf of 14 plaintiffs who said they were wrongly arrested as part of a policy that emphasized arrests for minor offenses under O’Malley’s watch. The city agreed to the $870,000 settlement in 2010.

O’Malley’s successors moved away from zero-tolerance policing.

But he hasn’t shied away from his record.

When the recent protests erupted, he cut short a trip in England and Ireland, returned to Baltimore and walked the streets to talk to former constituents and community leaders. Some stopped to shake hands or take pictures with him while others told him about their bad experiences with the police. A few heckled him.

O’Malley told one person the police were also victims of violence. “I buried 10 police officers” as mayor, he said. “Half were black. Half were white.”

Asked about the zero-tolerance policy, O’Malley said, “What we had zero tolerance for was police misconduct. We worked at it every day.”

On Sunday, he said that “extreme poverty breeds conditions for extreme violence.”

His advisers note he created a civilian review board for police conduct, expanded drug treatment and saw a decline in excessive force complaints and police-involved shootings.

After two terms as mayor, he won two terms as governor with strong support in Baltimore.

“The people of Baltimore were given ample opportunities to express at the ballot box their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the direction that our city took to reduce violent crime, to reduce homicides, to make our city more livable,” O’Malley said.

Still, some think the riots erupted, in part, from years of frustration among residents who felt unfairly targeted.

“He had some responsibility,” said Marvin “Doc” Cheatham, a former president of the NAACP’s Baltimore city branch. “But you have to lay blame also with the majority of the City Council, because the majority of them were in office when he was in office.”

___

Thomas reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Matthew Barakat and Lisa Lerer contributed to this report.

Follow Ken Thomas on Twitter at https://twitter.com.kthomasdc and Brian Witte at https://twitter.com/apbrianwitte.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

###

Reporter II

Posts by Reporter II

Up Next

Obama Finds a Bolder Voice on Race Issues

Don't Miss

Black Lives Matter Advocated Elected to Lead Minneapolis NAACP

Reporter II

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of May 13 – 19, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of May 13 – 19, 2026

Published

57 minutes ago

May 15, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

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

5 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.”