City Government

OP-ED: Don’t Stop Window Smashing by Targeting Peaceful Demonstrators

Published

11 years ago

June 9, 2015

By Rebecca Kaplan

In recent years, we have suffered from the cyclical epidemic of responding to problems by aiming at the wrong targets.

Some people, expressing (or pretending to express) anger about police misconduct, have broken windows and vandalized Oakland businesses. Being angry about police misconduct is legitimate, but the target — local Oakland businesses — is the wrong place to put that anger.

Many people have responded by pointing out that “having your windows smashed is not as bad as being killed,” but that does not solve the problem that the people whose windows are being smashed are not the people who did the killing.

Smashing windows and causing economic hardship to Oakland businesses and workers does nothing to stop the nationwide crisis involving the shooting of unarmed Black men.

The vandalism undermines efforts to build real solutions, diverting effort and public attention away from the need to end these wrongful deaths, and causing the public to associate the movement with the destruction of property of those who have done nothing wrong.

But just as window smashing misses the target, so too has the Oakland city administrations’ response to it — repeatedly — over the years. Those who engage in vandalism have often gotten away with it, while peaceful demonstrators are surrounded and arrested.

The window smashing is illegal and destructive, and it is important to hold people who do it accountable. However, mass arrests of nonviolent protesters who had nothing to do with the window smashing is missing the target — just like the window smashing itself.

This is not a question of having enforcement versus no enforcement; it’s a question of enforcement against the people who committed the harm versus enforcement targeted against those who did not commit the harm.

Because police resources are stretched thin, focusing efforts on strategies that don’t improve public safety means that other important work isn’t happening — such as catching illegal gun dealers, armed robbers, and the window-smashers.

Regardless of whether someone believes it is appropriate to devote substantial police resources to move demonstrators from streets to sidewalks, (and whether or not it turns out to be legal, which we do not yet know), surely we can all realize that it does not target the vandals who got away with their acts of destruction.

The people being cited and arrested are not believed to have engaged in vandalism — and meanwhile, those who committed the vandalism are not being held accountable.

To effectively respond to and redress the vandalism, we should directly target, and hold accountable the people who have engaged in acts of vandalism.

Therefore, I am asking that Oakland specifically:

Make a real effort to identify and hold accountable those who have engaged in vandalism.

For those who did not get caught, continue efforts after-the-fact to identify and find them. Collect and review video and photo footage and work to find the identity of the vandals.

Ask the public for help in identifying people in photos. Initiate significant litigation against those who engaged in vandalism and destruction to seek payment for the harm they caused, including compensating the businesses for their impact, and requiring a commitment that they refrain from such acts in the future.

Help the businesses that were harmed, including with tenant improvement and façade improvement funds.

Make city funds available, in a timely way, to support needed repairs, including allowing funds to be used for strengthening measures to make businesses less vulnerable in the future. (Such as helping install metal roll-down doors and unbreakable windows).

Those who vandalize Oakland businesses not only create blight in our community, but they also endanger the jobs of working people who rely on their jobs at these businesses to feed their families and put roofs over their heads. Those who vandalize Oakland businesses are not only creating harm to our business owners, but also are putting the economic security of working people and our broader community at risk.

Rebecca Kaplan is vice mayor of Oakland. This column was originally published in the East Bay Express.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Waters Calls for Increased Transparency in HUD’s Reverse Mortgage Program

Don't Miss

Former School Board Member Alice Spearman, 63

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.”