*"+, -"+."/0 1,!!
,' /-23
!"#!$%&"#!'$ ()
TIDY BITES OF OAKLAND POLITICS, ALWAYS THRILLING BUT NEVER TOO FILLING
Neldam’s Custard Danish Edition
The Issue: Should the City of Oakland use gang injunctions as
a means of fighting crime?
What it means: On February 18, 2010, City Attorney John Russo
announced the filing of a civil lawsuit seeking a gang injunction against
the North Side Oakland gang. The gang injunction is a court order that
declares a gang a public nuisance and prohibits its members from
conducting specific activities within a geographically defined area called
a “Safety Zone.” If granted by a judge, the injunction would declare
North Side Oakland a public nuisance and prohibit certain activities by
19 reputed gang members within the safety zone – approximately 100
blocks between I-580 Emeryville, Berkeley and Telegraph Avenue. A
violation of the injunction would be considered contempt of court
which is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and up to
a $1,000 fine.
A hearing has been set for May 27 before a judge who will hear the
merits of the proposed injunction.
Those in favor of gang injunctions say this: The North Side Oakland
gang has terrorized our community, intimidated witnesses and recruited
children to their criminal enterprise. Russo says the North Side
Oakland gang was involved in 18 serious incidents in 2009, including
seven murders. The gang injunction may be an effective tool in
combating gang violence by allowing the OPD to disrupt the gang’s
ability to plan and execute illegal activities. While nobody contends it is
a complete solution, this effort will be a good test for the new chief and
his renewed department. They will have the opportunity to show
restraint, fairness and respect for civil liberties while taking direct action
to reduce violence and save lives.
Those who oppose gang injunctions say this: The gang injunction
creates a potential for racial profiling and infringes on constitutional
rights such as freedom of association. The gang injunction concentrates
too much power in the hands of police, and threatens to push poor and
working class people of color out of North Oakland.
The counter from those in support is this: Gang injunctions were
upheld as constitutional by the California Supreme Court in 1997.
Oakland’s request for the gang injunction relies on solid evidence of
gang affiliation and criminal acts. The injunction petition was based on
more than a year and a half of work—including information collected
from criminal reports, inside sources, and conversations with commu-
nity members—performed by more than 100 police officers. Further-
more, any individual covered by the injunction has due process
rights–anyone who is covered by the injunction who is no longer
associated with the gang can go through an “opt-out” process and file a
petition to be removed.
Who is on record as supporting gang injunctions: The Oakland City
Attorney’s Office, the Oakland Police Department, Council member
Larry Reid.
Get news on Oakland's public safety & justice issues at http://oaklandlocal.com/topics/justice
Who is on record as opposing gang injunctions: The ACLU and the
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights have filed briefs with the court
opposing the injunction. PUEBLO also opposes the proposed injunc-
tion.
What are others familiar with the issue saying? In a recent Commentary
in The Recorder (free registration required), Tricia Hynes, an Oakland-
based attorney representing the law enforcement community wrote:
“Carefully crafted gang injunctions can decrease gang-related criminal
activity — at least in the short term. Studies and relevant literature show
injunctions may reduce the rates of certain crimes, reduce gang
visibility, ease resident intimidation and fear of gang confrontations,
increase residents' sense of control over their community, and provide
an excuse for some members to get out of the gang. The latter effects are
particularly critical to improving neighborhood dynamics and commu-
nity safety.”
Where can you learn more? A video of the press conference announcing
the injunction action is here, as is a map of the proposed Safety Zone.
The ACLU’s press release, with the reasons ACLU oppose the injunc-
tion, is here. The papers filed in the gang injunction case can be read on
line by going here, clicking “Case Summary” and entering case number
RG10498901.
What’s happening next? On Wednesday, April 28 from 6:30 -8:30PM,
The Oakland Neighborhood Watch Steering Committee will focus on
the gang injunction at City Hall, Hearing Room 4. Chief Batts and
Rocio Fierro from the City Attorney’s Office will address:
1. What the gang injunction is and how they have been
successfully used elsewhere
2. The areas and boundaries of Oakland to be impacted
by the injunction
3. Who will be impacted and how they will be impacted
4. The possibility of using injunctions elsewhere in Oakland
if this one is successful
5. Addressing the City’s position on the ACLU’s opposition
to the injunction.
[RSVP to Felicia Verdin, 238-3128.]
We will send out Tasty Pastries on public safety over the next two weeks,
and will then ask for your input online. Saturday, June 12, at 3:00 p.m.
we will be meeting at the Rockridge Branch Library at 5366 College
Avenue and deciding which positions best support our public safety
mission: to make Oakland one of the safest cities in California.
Meanwhile, thanks
for reading.
Here’s your tasty pastry:
a still-warm-from-the-
oven Neldam’s Custard
Danish.