Thanks to the Oakland teachers for supporting the movement to Stop the Injunctions! Check out the resolution and additional information below.
Here’s the actual OEA action:
NBI # 1 (02-07-2011): I move that the Oakland Education Association condemns the use of the civil gang injunctions in Oakland. Furthermore, the OEA urges its members to attend the February 22, 2011 meeting of the Oakland City Council Public Safety Committee, to be held at City Hall, beginning at 5:30 p.m., to express the position of Oakland teachers. Finally, the OEA urges its members to support the “Week of Action” of the Stop the Injunction Coalition for the week of February 28 through March 4, 2011, including the Coalition’s plans to conduct solidarity actions with teachers on the statewide day of action to defend public education on Wednesday, March 2, 2011. (Arnold/Neat) MOTION PASSES.
And here were the facts presented to the Rep Council prior to action:
WHEREAS the civil gang injunctions filed by the Oakland City Attorney have not been authorized by the Oakland City Council;
WHEREAS the defendants to a civil gang injunction do not have the right to state-appointed counsel, but face criminal jeopardy as a result of being named in the injunction and subject to a court order;
WHEREAS the evidence compiled by the Oakland Police Department demonstrates that police are conducting constant surveillance of teenage students as part of their efforts to abate gang violence;
WHEREAS the Oakland Police Department has admitted in response to a records request that an individual may be classified as a “gang member” based upon fulfillment of any two of nine factors, including (1) presence in a “gang zone” and (2) wearing “gang clothing,” which in the case of the proposed Fruitvale injunction means that any person wearing red within the Fruitvale district can be legally classified as a gang member;
WHEREAS no research demonstrates that implementation of a civil gang injunction has the effect of reducing crime;
WHEREAS implementation of a civil gang injunction in West Sacramento has cost the Sacramento County District Attorney over $2,000,000 in attorney resources and related costs;
WHEREAS the Oakland City Attorney has already issued contracts paying outside attorneys thousands of dollars every month to work on the proposed civil injunctions;
WHEREAS the City of Oakland is in an economic crisis and the City should only expend resources on proven and successful strategies for decreasing crime and empowering our residents to be productive community members; and
WHEREAS the expenditure of public resources on gang injunctions—like the expenditure of public resources on prisons—has displaced essential funds necessary for public education and other essential social services;