Second Lawsuit To Be Filed March 18

Here's the press release I just sent out. More to follow soon.

After having prevailed in her initial lawsuit against the City of Oakland last summer, on March 18, 2010 Oakland resident and attorney Marleen Sacks will file a second lawsuit against the City for failing to properly implement Measure Y, a 2004 measure that generates approximately $20 million annually for public safety.

Measure Y was supposed to fund 63 additional officers over and above the 739 officer authorized strength that existed in 2004, when the Measure first passed. In order to collect the tax, Measure Y requires that the City, at a minimum, budget sufficient funds to maintain that 739 authorized strength (not including the 63 Measure Y officers). The City has failed to appropriate the required funds. Therefore, according to this most recent suit, collection of the tax for the 09/10 fiscal year is illegal. Specifically, Ms. Sacks alleges that because the City has failed to budget for or conduct any police academies since the end of 2008, attrition of approximately four officers per month has resulted in police staffing dropping to approximately 770 officers total, down from a brief high of over 830 officers. The decision to cancel the previous academy, and not schedule any new academies, was apparently based on budget considerations. However, failing to budget for academies means that the City failed to appropriate the necessary funding required by Measure Y, and therefore, according to this suit, collection of the tax was illegal.

The lawsuit alleges numerous other violations of Measure Y and related illegalities, including the City’s failure to assign dedicated “problem solving officers” to each beat, awarding grants to violence prevention programs in violation of competitive bidding requirements, awarding grants not authorized by Measure Y, and failure to comply with the California Public Records Act.

According to Ms. Sacks, the decision to file a second lawsuit was not easy. She had hoped that the City would be willing to engage in meaningful settlement discussions, and that the City would be interested in honoring the commitments of Measure Y. However, after numerous months, it is evident that settlement is not currently a viable option. The City already owes the Measure Y fund approximately $15 million for illegal expenditures at issue in the previous suit. While the City has appealed that ruling, Ms. Sacks has filed a cross-appeal, and the total amount at issue from her 2008 suit is estimated at around $60-$80 million. At issue in this current suit is the $20 million to be collected during 2010, which Ms. Sacks alleges should be repaid to the taxpayers, or enjoined from being collected in the future, and several million dollars in violence prevention funds that were illegally spent or distributed.

On the City’s own Measure Y website, the City claims that “the City will maintain a baseline of 739 police officers in addition to the 63 new officers.” During Ms. Sacks’ previous litigation, the City claimed that it was not actually required to employ 739 officers; rather, it was required only to “appropriate” sufficient funding for those officers. However, given the City’s abject failure to schedule any academies to replace officers as they resign or retire, the City has clearly failed to do not even that, making collection of the tax illegal.



“The City’s refusal to conduct necessary academies is particularly offensive given the continuing level of crime in Oakland. We have a new police chief who has publicly decried the lack of adequate staffing, and yet, the City has refused to give him the means to address that problem. It is shocking to me that after the City lost my first Measure Y lawsuit, the City would so blatantly violate Measure Y in this manner. I have brought my concerns to City officials on numerous occasions, and made it clear to them that if the issues were not resolved, that I would sue again. The City has betrayed the trust of the taxpayers, over and over again, and continues to refuse to honor the commitments of Measure Y. In light of the continued abuses, I felt I had no option but to file another lawsuit.”