Civilian Oakland Police Commissioner Ginale Harris has become the topic of much scrutiny recently. The scrutiny follows after former Oakland Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick was fired by the Police Commission and Mayor Libby Schaaf without cause after a closed-door meeting. Following the firing, Kirkpatrick went to the media and leveled a host of allegations – including that she was fired for refusing to do personal favors for Commissioners.

Civilian Oakland Police Commissioner Ginale Harris

These favors include a denied request to waive Harris’ towing fees after her car was towed. However, it is not the only troubling allegation involving Harris. We explored a series of other incidents already covered by the media, and also found our own. Taken together, Harris’ actions raise serious questions about her suitability to serve on the Police Commission.

Even more concerning is the broader Police Commission and their continued defense of Harris, which raises questions about the Commission’s accountability, impartiality, and legitimacy in overseeing the police department. These questions arise at a time of a proposed ballot measure that would make the Commission less accountable and more powerful, and when a large number of OPD officers are planning on leaving the agency due to low morale stemming from the above concerns. Ultimately, this will have a negative impact on public safety.

Background

Oakland Police Commission

In 2016, after news of a sex scandal broke at OPD, 83% of Oakland voters approved Measure LL. Co-authored by Councilmembers Dan Kalb and Noel Gallo, the measure established an all-civilian Police Commission.

Oakland’s Commission is the most powerful of its kind in the country. It has the ability to fire the police chief, discipline officers in certain situations, propose changes to police department policies, and reject the department’s proposals for policies. Most other Police Commissions typically serve in an advisory role without the power to impose discipline or fire a chief.

Still of co-author Councilmember Dan Kalb from a Measure LL promotional video

The Commission consists of seven commissioners and two alternates. Commissioners are not elected. Rather, the Mayor appoints three commissioners and one alternate commissioner. A Selection Panel appoints the remaining four commissioners and one alternate. The Mayor and the eight-person City Council each appoint one person to the nine-person Selection Panel. The Mayor’s three appointments serve, in part, as a form of checks-and-balances on the City Council’s influence on the Police Commission.

Police Commissioner Qualifications

To apply to become a Commissioner, you have to be an Oakland resident and at least 18 years old. The following are excluded from applying:

Current or former OPD officers

Any current police officer

Current or former employees, officials, or representatives of any employee association representing police officers

Current City employees

The Commission has the authority to fire the police chief with five affirmative votes if they have cause for termination. If the Mayor acts jointly with the Commission, they can fire the chief without cause. The Police Commission may also remove a Commissioner through a majority vote under certain circumstances.

Former Oakland Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick

Photo: SF Chronicle

Oakland Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick’s Firing

In 2016, Mayor Libby Schaaf hired Anne Kirkpatrick, who was then at Chicago PD, to take over the Oakland Police Department following its sex scandal.

After serving for about three years, Kirkpatrick was fired by the Police Commission and Mayor Libby Schaaf without cause following a closed-door meeting on February 20th, 2020.

Chief Kirkpatrick was beloved by the rank-and-file at OPD, had the public support of Mayor Schaaf, and had overseen the department’s efforts to achieve the lowest homicide rate in 20 years. She was also backed by many in the Oakland population – after the firing, Councilmember Noel Gallo stated that his constituents were unhappy with the decision.

Kirkpatrick Speaks Out

Several days after her termination, Kirkpatrick gave interviews with multiple news stations. She suggested that the federal monitor overseeing OPD was unjustly finding the department out of compliance for personal financial gain, and accused the Police Commission of firing her over personal issues, including from her refusal to waive Harris’ towing fees.

City Memo Listing Allegations Against Commissioner Ginale Harris

On the same day that Kirkpatrick went public with her allegations, media outlets published an internal City memo outlining a list of allegations against Commissioner Harris. These include the towing fees incident, threatening an OPD civilian employee’s job while demanding more focus on Harris’s neighborhood, and pressuring staff members of the Commission’s investigative agency to release officer personnel information to her.

They also include an allegation from Anthony Finnell, former Interim Director of the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA), the Commission’s investigative arm. He alleged that Harris told him he wasn’t acting “black enough” and called him insubordinate for not releasing confidential files to her.

Interestingly, and with parallel to Chief Kirkpatrick’s firing, Finnell was fired by the Police Commission later that year after a closed-door session.

Anthony Finnell

The Memo

Internal city memo of allegations levied against Oakland Police Commissioner Ginale Harris

The substance – and number – of allegations are rather shocking for a public official. This is especially so for a member of an unelected body with significant power whose purpose is to hold a police department accountable and prevent or address misconduct.

Commissioner Ginale Harris’ Disturbing Behavior in a Public Capacity

At the time the memo was released, the items listed were just allegations and some had voiced doubt about their validity. However, we found multiple instances of Harris displaying disturbing and possibly unethical behavior on public platforms including in her official capacity as Police Commissioner. We think they reflect poorly on Harris’ character, and indicate that the above allegations are likely to be true.

Commissioner Ginale Harris at a Police Commission meeting

Ginale Harris’ “Black Man” Comment to Alameda County Public Defender Brendon Woods

At the March 28, 2019 Police Commission meeting, the Commission was discussing a policy on the Oakland Police Department’s approach to interacting with people on probation or parole. Commissioner Prather had mentioned the Alameda County Public Defender’s Office and Chief Public Defender Brendon Woods’ input into the process.

After Prather’s mention of Woods, Commissioner Harris made this comment:

…I appreciate all the time and effort that other people put into the policy, including the public defender’s office. However, it doesn’t affect him. It doesn’t affect people who look like him. It affects people that look like me.” Ginale Harris

Alameda County Public Defender Brendon Woods

Brendon Woods, who is Black, later comes and speaks. He addresses Harris and says:

“Now, I’m not sure if you’re aware … I guess, Commissioner Harris, that you weren’t aware that I was an African American male. I mean, you were not. Now you are. And so I – [Harris cuts him off]” Brendon Woods

Harris makes this shocking comment:

“Are you asking me a question? Because you have the skin color of a black man, okay. But that don’t mean you live like a black man!” Ginale Harris

Video of the “Black Man” Comment

You can read the transcript here (page 28). Here’s the video of the comment:

No Apology from Ginale Harris, and No Accountability for the “Black Man” Comment

At the meeting, Harris did not apologize for the comment. No other Police Commissioner stepped in, apologized specifically for Harris’ specific comments, or condemned her. Only one Commissioner, Edwin Prather, apologized at all. He broadly apologized to Brendon Woods for how he was treated by the Commission, but fell short of specifically calling Harris out or holding her accountable. Commissioners Regina Jackson, Thomas Lloyd Smith, Tara Anderson, and Jose Dorado were also present and said nothing.

Besides Commissioner Prather’s comment, we haven’t found any record of any Police Commissioner or other public official specifically condemning Harris’ comment and treatment of Brendon Woods.

Ginale Harris did, however, respond to a Twitter post covering Prather’s apology:

During the meeting and immediately after Harris’ comment to Woods, Woods remained calm and respectfully explained his lived experiences as a black man. He told her how his experience in poverty influenced his choice of work – how he had been arrested, has an uncle who served 27 years in prison, has a cousin who was brutalized by police, and had another cousin that died from drug addiction and mental health issues. Outside of the meeting, he also attempted to reach out to Harris on Twitter. Here’s her response:

Ginale Harris’ response to Brendon Woods on Twitter

Ginale Harris’ Concerning Twitter Follow-Up to the “Black Man” Comment

Another Twitter user appeared incredulous at Harris’ comments, and asked how a person with a black man’s skin can not “live like a black man”. Again, here’s another concerning response by Harris:

It appears, given the context and the very unique movie name, that this is a reference to the 2012 Quentin Tarantino film, Django Unchained. The film stars Jamie Foxx and takes place in the late-1850’s. In the film, Foxx’s character, Django, escapes from a life of slavery and seeks to free his enslaved wife from her cruel owner, played by Leonardo DiCaprio. Django and his associate, a character played by Christophe Waltz, develop a plan to free Django’s wife from the slave-owner’s plantation through a ruse.

Samuel L. Jackson’s character, a house-slave named Stephen owned by DiCaprio’s character, catches wind of the plan and alerts the slave-owner. This character and dynamic appears to be what Harris is referring to.

Promotional still for Django Unchained (2012), where Samuel L. Jackson’s house slave character interacts with his owner and plantation-owner, played by Leonardo DiCaprio

Ginale Harris – A Pattern of Concerning and Possibly Racist Rhetoric?

We browsed through Harris’ public Twitter profile, and found other instances of very racially-charged, and possibly racist, rhetoric. Here are some examples (Harris’ comments are at the bottom of the Tweets):





Ginale Harris’ comments are, respectively, in response to videos about a group of Whites wearing blackface and touching a Black woman’s natural hair. Harris’ replies about “them” coming from “caves in the mountains” appears to be a reference to Whites based on rhetoric and the belief system of the Nation of Islam. The Nation of Islam is designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group for its views of Black superiority over Whites and for its “deeply racist, antisemitic and anti-gay rhetoric…” We haven’t found any other likely explanation or apparent reference for her comments.

Her “cave” comments appear to refer to the Nation of Islam belief that Whites were created from Blacks after 600 years of selective breeding under brutal conditions. Due to the conditions in which Whites were created, Whites had an inherently evil and uncivilized nature, and lived a primitive and barbaric life in caves for centuries.

Harris’ reference to “Moore’s” apparently refers to the belief by the Moorish Science Temple of America that Blacks are ancestors of the Moors from the Middle Ages. Followers of this organization broke from it and formed the Nation of Islam.

Harris’ use of highly-charged rhetoric and possible borrowed language from a hate group is extremely concerning for a public official, and especially so for one as part of a body that can potentially discipline others for the same behavior.

Ginale Harris’ “Disgraceful” Comment to City Employee

Harris’ comment to Brendon Woods isn’t the only example of her concerning demeanor and treatment of others at a Police Commission meeting.

At an October 10th, 2019 meeting, the commission reviewed data relating to OPD’s efforts to hire people of color. OPD’s Director of Bureau of Services, Virginia Gleason, presented research and data regarding the department’s efforts. During Gleason’s presentation to the Commission, Harris interjected and cut Gleason off several times.

The agenda item went on as Harris and Commissioner Chair Regina Jackson asked Gleason questions regarding certain data and efforts. Gleason repeatedly stated that the answers to their questions are in her presentation. She appeared to begin to get frustrated about not being able give her presentation uninterrupted. During this, Harris suggested that Gleason had not provided data and answers for requests that the Commission had made months ago. Gleason pushed back against Harris and offered to read emails into the record to apparently refute those claims, but Harris prevented her from doing so.

Virginia Gleason

Later. as Gleason spoke of OPD’s data-driven and analytics-based efforts towards hiring people of color, Commissioner Regina Jackson responded and apparently discounted the value of the use of such data. During the presentation, pie charts apparently containing data to which Gleason referred were projected onto a screen. Jackson made this comment:

“So I’d be happy to do a focus group for you with black and brown young people who will tell you why they do or don’t want to join the Oakland Police Department, and that will be far better than all these round, colorful things. [emphasis added]” Police Commissioner Chair Regina Jackson

Gleason responded, ” I find that beyond offensive and misrepresentative of what I’m trying to talk about”. Within about a minute of that comment, Ginale Harris made the following remarks to and about Gleason:

“She should be ashamed of herself. Shame on you.“ “This representation, what you’re doing right now is disgraceful. It’s shameful and you should be ashamed of yourself.“ Ginale Harris

Hearing this, Chief Kirkpatrick stepped in and firmly told Harris that she cannot speak to OPD staff in that manner. Harris replied with the following:

“Okay, well she doesn’t get to talk to me like that! Okay? I’m the Vice Chair of this commission and she, or you, do not get to talk to me like that!” Ginale Harris

Such treatment of a City employee by a public official at a public meeting is concerning. Harris’ response to Kirkpatrick is also disturbing. It suggests a level of disregard for appropriate conduct as a public official and, again, supports Chief Kirkpatrick’s later assertions that she was fired, in part, due to personal issues with the Police Commission.

Watch the above exchanges and more in the following video. Please note that the video is edited for length and to highlight certain sections. You may also watch the video of the full agenda item here.

As with the Brendon Woods incident, none of the other Commissioners stepped in to stop or condemn Harris, or apologize to Gleason. We were unable to find any other record suggesting that they did so at a later time. Commissioners Regina Jackson, Jose Dorado, Thomas Lloyd Smith, Tara Anderson, Edwin Prather, and former Commissioner Mubarak Ahmad were all present.

Allegations of More Troubling Behavior – Outside of the Commission

Harris has also been accused of controversial behavior in a less public setting.

On December 1st, 2019, the SF Chronicle covered a November 14, 2019 incident in San Francisco involving Ginale Harris. We received a copy of the report documenting the incident from SFPD.

According to the report, a school employee provided this account: Harris arrived at her child’s elementary school in San Francisco to pick up her child during a 30-minute time period during which the school prohibits pickups. This closure period is documented in a handbook given to all parents at orientation and is also posted on the school’s website. After being told that she would have to wait about 20 minutes to pick her child up due to the policy, Harris forced her way into the school and got within inches of a school employee’s face.

Harris called the employee, a White female, a “devil” and “slave owner”. This is consistent with her pattern of using racially charged rhetoric we’ve seen above. Harris yelled and banged on glass within the lobby with her fists before school staff provided Harris with her son.

Portion of the SFPD November 14, 2019 incident report involving Ginale Harris

You can view the full report here:

Ginale Harris and a Pattern of Badge-Flashing?

In the same report, the officer stated that Harris identified herself as an Oakland Police Commissioner and presented her badge. The report does not state the context for how this occurs or whether it was in response to the officer’s questions or if Harris volunteered that information.

Did Harris identify herself as a Police Commissioner and flash her badge in an attempt to gain some benefit that she thought she otherwise would not have? We won’t know for certain without the officers’ body camera footage – which we have requested from SFPD. They stated that they are still working on processing and releasing the footage.

Reports of Presenting her Badge at Oakland Police Department Employees

However, we do know that Harris has a pattern of incidents that involve allegations of her presenting her badge to police employees under inappropriate circumstances. The allegation regarding the tow fees incident that Kirkpatrick spoke of was about a year prior to the SF incident. We have also heard from Oakland police officers of an incident in early 2018 involving Harris showing her badge to patrol officers at a noise complaint call in East Oakland. We reached out to OPD for comment and more details regarding this incident, but they referred us to the City Council.

If these incidents are true and Harris has a habit of flashing a badge in an attempt to gain an advantage or benefit, then she is engaging in the type of behavior for which she is supposed to be holding police officers accountable.

The Police Commission’s Response to Scrutiny of Ginale Harris

The Oakland Police Department received an anonymous notification about the incident in San Francisco. Given that it was outside of OPD’s purview to investigate the incident, former Chief Kirkpatrick contacted City Administrator Sabrina Landreth’s office, who then contracted with an independent firm to conduct an investigation.

Fellow Police Commissioners defended Harris and minimized the severity of Harris’ alleged conduct as a public official and Police Commissioner. On December 3rd, 2019, two days after the SF Chronicle article was published, the City Council held a Special Public Safety Committee meeting. Police Commissioner Chair Regina Jackson spoke and defended Harris, likening her to a “whistleblower” and saying that her “style may not be cool for some people.” She also abstractly suggested that Harris’ “passion” is brought forward by her connection to the trauma that “our communities are continuously dealing with.”

Police Commissioner Regina Jackson’s defense of and support for Ginale Harris at the December 3rd, 2019 Special Public Safety Committee

Police Commissioner Jose Dorado’s Response

Commissioner Jose Dorado‘s comments at the same meeting are the most notable – and concerning:

“…There is nothing that will happen to Ginale. That I guarantee you. I’m not going to speak for the Commission, but I’ll tell you many, if not most of the Commissioners feel as I do. And that is, that we have her back, and we always will. And if anybody doubts that, bring it! And you’ll see.” Police Commissioner Jose Dorado

Watch Dorado’s comments here:

Police Commissioner Jose Dorado’s defense of and support for Ginale Harris at the December 3rd, 2019 Special Public Safety Committee

Dorado’s Comments, and its Damaging Effect on the Police Commission’s Legitimacy

It is very concerning to have a Police Commissioner, before allegations of misconduct against a fellow Commissioner have been investigated, to publicly and adamantly state that nothing will happen to Harris. This is especially so for a Commission that has the ability to potentially discipline officers, and for a Commission that has the ability to remove one of their own for misconduct. It suggests a degree of partiality and hypocrisy, and jeopardizes the legitimacy of the Police Commission.

This dismissive and confrontational approach to potential critics is troubling, and this language is consistent with the defensive behavior, hostility towards detractors, and lack of accountability that police departments themselves are often accused of.

Given the established pattern of both confirmed and alleged misdeeds by Harris, the Commission’s fierce defense of her reflects poorly on the legitimacy of the group and their ability to self-regulate. We also believe that this record of behavior lends credence to Chief Kirkpatrick’s claims of being fired due in part to personal issues between her and the Police Commission.

Police Commissioners Jose Dorado, Ginale Harris, Thomas Lloyd Smith, Edwin Prather, and former Commissioner Mike Nisperos (Left to Right)

The City’s Follow-Up

The Public Ethics Commission’s Investigation

Following the San Francisco incident, Oakland’s Public Ethics Commission initiated an investigation into the incident to see if there were any violations over areas that they have purview over. On February 18, 2020, the Ethics Commission dismissed the complaint, citing that even if the allegations were true, they are outside of the Ethics Commission’s enforcement jurisdiction.

The letter stated that there was no evidence that Harris used her Commissioner badge to induce or coerce staff to let her into the school. The letter also stated that the Ethics Commission spoke to the Director of the school, who said that Harris did not present her badge to school personnel.

Section of the March 2nd, 2020 Public Ethics Commission’s Agenda showing Ginale Harris’ section

However, if you recall reading the police report, the school employee never stated to police that Harris flashed her badge – she stated that Harris forced her way into the school. It was the officer – who wrote the report – that stated that Harris presented her badge to him.

The Ethics Commission’s letter makes no reference to this, and does not state if any attempts were made to interview the officer and determine whether the “badging” was done in an attempt to induce or coerce some benefit or advantage.

It is curious that the letter states that Harris didn’t “badge” school employees when that was never alleged to begin with, while making no mention that Harris “badged” the officer, as clearly stated in the report.

Some defenders of Harris have inaccurately cited this letter as proof that the allegations were unfounded and did not occur. This is not the case. We’ll know more about the alleged “badging” of the SFPD officer when SFPD releases the body camera footage.

You can view the full letter here on Page 59.

Another Public Ethics Commission Complaint

Outside of the San Francisco incident, we found another Ethics Commission investigation into Harris.

On January 17, 2019, a complainant made several allegations against Harris. They stated that Harris had disclosed confidential information, brought an intern to the offices of the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA), and held a closed-door meeting where Harris may have discussed confidential cases.

The complainant also alleged that Harris, when questioned about the closed-door meeting, had a “snippy, threatening tone” with the complainant. Regarding the closed-door meeting, the letter stated that the Ethics Commission spoke to one of the CPRA investigators at the meeting, who stated that they did not discuss confidential cases. The complainant was unable to provide enough evidence for the other allegations, although this does not rule out the possibility that it did occur.

The investigation was ultimately closed out because the alleged conduct did not violate the Government Ethics Act or any laws that are within the Public Ethics Committee’s jurisdiction.

Excerpt from the April 18, 2019 Public Ethics Commission’s Ginale Harris letter

The letter was sent by the Ethics Commission’s Enforcement Chief, Kellie Johnson, who had also sent the letter regarding the San Francisco incident. You can view the full letter here beginning on page 69.

Although the allegations could not be proven due to a lack of evidence, where there’s smoke, there’s usually fire. And from what we’ve seen, there’s a lot of smoke.

The allegations for this incident are similar to two of the allegations listed in the city memo – Finnell’s allegation in January 2018 that Harris called him insubordinate for not providing her with confidential files, and the February 2018 allegation where CPRA staff stated that Harris pressured them into releasing police officer personnel files.

Who Can Hold the Police Commission Accountable?

What we’ve seen regarding Harris’ pattern of troubling behavior begs the question: who polices the Police Commission?

Police Commissioners are not elected and are not beholden to the people or community the way elected officials are. So what systems, other than the Ethics Commission, exist to hold a Police Commissioner accountable?

Oakland City Council chambers

Per the City Charter, the City Council may remove a Commissioner with cause after an affirmative vote by six of the eight members. The Police Commission may also, through a majority vote, remove a Commissioner for gross misconduct in office, substantial neglect of duty, inability to discharge the powers and duties of office, committing an act of moral turpitude, and more.

No Accountability – and a Proposal for Even Less

As we’ve seen, much of the conduct of Police Commissioners can fall outside of the scope of the enforcement jurisdiction of the Public Ethics Commission.

We’ve seen Harris make offensive remarks in her role as a public official at Police Commission meetings. We’ve seen other Police Commissioners silently stand by and not hold Harris accountable for those remarks. We’ve seen Harris use highly-charged and possibly racist rhetoric using her public Twitter account.

We’ve seen at least one commissioner aggressively defend Harris before an investigation into an allegation against her was completed, while adamantly stating that nothing would happen to Harris. He also stated that most other Commissioners shared his sentiment. This is while he, through a majority in the Police Commission, has the ability to remove a fellow Commissioner for misconduct.

Oakland Police Commissioner Jose Dorado

And we’ve seen a host of other allegations against Harris that, when viewed together, show a pattern of troubling behavior.

In an interview after her firing, former Chief Kirkpatrick said this about the Police Commission:

“I would not accept the behaviors that I have seen out by the Police commission out of a police officer…If we would not accept that out of a police officer, why would we not try to address that with the police commission?” Former Oakland Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick

We know, based on their inaction and behavior, that it is unlikely that Police Commissioners would vote to remove Harris.

Although the Police Commissioners are volunteers, they wield significant power – more than any other civilian oversight body in the country. They should be held to a high standard, and should not be emulating the exact type of organizational behavior that their existence serves to prevent.

More Credibility for Kirkpatrick’s Claims

We’ve seen the incidents above that support former Chief Kirkpatrick’s claims that she was fired, in part, due to personal issues between her and the Police Commission. Since the firing, members of the community and at least one Councilmember, Noel Gallo, had pressured the Mayor and Police Commission for legitimate reasons for the firing. The Police Commission, in statements since then, cited OPD’s backsliding on mandated federal reforms under Kirkpatrick’s tenure as one of the key reasons.

Federal monitor Robert Warshaw oversees compliance with the reform efforts and reports the department’s progress to a federal judge. However, Warshaw is under significant recent fire from a coalition consisting of Councilmember Noel Gallo, former Chief Anne Kirkpatrick, former OPD Chief Sean Whent, former OPD Chief Howard Jordan, and former OPD federal Compliance Director Thomas Frazier. All have went public and stated their personal experiences with Warshaw and their beliefs that he intentionally finds ways to prevent OPD from achieving compliance with court-mandated reforms due to a personal financial incentive to do so.

Federal monitor Robert Warshaw

Given this account that discredits the validity of one of the key reasons cited by the Police Commission for Kirkpatrick’s firing, it supports the assertion that Kirkpatrick was fired by the Police Commission for reasons beyond an inability to adequately manage the police department. Given such a questionable firing decision, it again brings up questions about the Police Commission’s power, and whether there’s adequate systems in place to check against it and ensure impartiality and accountability.

Council President Rebecca Kaplan’s Attempts to Protect the Police Commission

Councilmember Noel Gallo, in a recent press conference with Anne Kirkpatrick following her firing, has stated that he and others intend to review the Police Commission’s structure and propose changes to it. The context of the press conference and his statement suggests that the review would scrutinize whether the Police Commission in its current form is effective and appropriate.

Council President Rebecca Kaplan, a long-time defender of the Police Commission, however, is seeking a ballot measure that would instead grant the Police Commission significantly more power while reducing accountability. Kaplan’s proposal includes the following:

Prevent City Administrators from investigating Police Commissioners

Remove the Mayor’s ability to appoint Police Commissioners

Give the Police Commission power to propose changes to any police policy, rather than a select handful of policy areas

Oakland City Council President Rebecca Kaplan

You’ve already seen how difficult it is to investigate and hold a Commissioner accountable through the Public Ethics Commission. You’ve seen that no Commissioner has condemned Harris for her actions. You’ve seen the defensive response by at least one Commissioner in response to scrutiny over Harris’ actions, and you’ve seen evidence that supports Chief Kirkpatrick’s claims that she was fired due to personal issues. You’ve seen that no Councilmember, except for Noel Gallo, has publicly even suggested questioning the Police Commission’s current structure or its behavior.

Given that the Police Commissioners are not elected, the Mayor’s appointees serve in part as a form of checks-and-balances on the City Council’s influence on the remaining four Commissioners. Kaplan’s proposal to remove the Mayor’s appointees would serve to make the Police Commission even more insular and less accountable.

Kaplan’s proposals would not only worsen the issues with the current Police Commission, but it would also negatively impact public safety.

The Real Impacts on Public Safety

Oakland has the most under-staffed large-city police department in the country despite being a city with one of the highest rates of violent crime. Morale at OPD is extremely low, and many officers are leaving or planning on leaving the department. This is, in part, due to the current Police Commission.

An OPD officer recently wrote a tell-all post on Reddit, where they stated that a significant reason for a planned exodus by officers, amidst already low morale, was the widespread belief that Chief Kirkpatrick was unfairly fired by the Police Commission. Another comment touched more on low morale and officers’ departure from OPD due in part to the Commission’s decision to fire five officers involved in a 2018 shooting. The officer stated that the rank-and-file view the Police Commission as “illegitimate” and that their decision to fire the involved officers, after multiple investigative bodies (including the Commission’s own investigative agency) had cleared them, was politically motivated.

In a place like Oakland, with such severe staffing and crime issues, an exodus of officers would have a large impact on public safety. This is especially so now as crime increased for the first time in several years across the board in 2019, and as crime continues to trend upwards in 2020 across most categories.

National Best Practices of Civilian Oversight

Civilian oversight of the police is crucial for ensuring police accountability and building trust with communities. Board members of the Police Executive Research Forum have stated the same. Former Chief Anne Kirkpatrick, even after her firing by Oakland’s Police Commission, made it clear that she supports civilian oversight.

However, as outlined in the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), there are various different models of police oversight. Most operate in an advisory capacity where they have access to certain operations and policies of a police department, have the ability to scrutinize operations and policies, and propose changes. These are effective.

At this time, we don’t know what would be the most appropriate model for Oakland. However, the current Police Commission model in Oakland must change. The last thing it needs is more power and less accountability.

Stay Informed

You can get involved and Stay Informed with Public Safety matters by viewing this page.

You can find out who your Councilmember is here and contact them here. You can see when Public Safety Committee meetings are here.

You can contact the Police Commissions here. You can see when Police Commission meetings are here.

Regardless of how you feel about the Police Commission, it’s important for the community to be informed about public safety matters in Oakland.