City Council

Nov 122013
 

This letter was published by the San Leandro Times on Nov. 7, 2013

Editor:

Chief of Police Sandra Spagnoli is out of control. Endangering the lives of children by canceling the crossing guards at the Safe Streets Halloween event is only her latest stunt. Previous examples include using department resources to unlawfully lobby the City Council, falsely arresting people for sex crimes and eliminating Internal Affairs.

The Chief also has the habit of providing the City Council with false information, what City Manager Chris Zapata labels “mis-speaking.”  The Chief, for example, told the Council that the SLPD needed to search the backyards of chicken owners’ homes without a warrant because they get an average of one complaint a week about chickens.  A public records search showed just a single complaint filed in the last two years.

The Chief also “mis-spoke” about the number of license plate scanners the Department has (5, not 3), the dangers of over-pollination (none outside strawberry greenhouses), the effects of medical marijuana dispensaries on crime (none) and the effectiveness of surveillance cameras in reducing and solving crimes (very low to none). Just last week, she blamed the increase in crime in San Leandro to prisoners being released early due to realignment; trouble is, law enforcement data shows there have been no such early releases.

“Mis-speaking” to the City Council and lobbying during work hours show a lack of respect for the Mayor and Council members and for the democratic process itself. It’s up to City Manager Zapata to hold her accountable and assure she behaves legally and ethically in her job. The fact that he has failed to do so suggests he lacks the leadership skills necessary for his own position.

The City Council should keep this in mind as they evaluate Zapata’s performance in the upcoming months.

Margarita LacabeSan Leandro

Update: On this week San Leandro Times, POA President Isaac Benabou not-quite-responds to my letter by praising his boss, Chief Sandra Spagnoli, and accusing me of “misleading” readers.  Alas, he does not substantiate his allegation and the only factual assertion he makes in disagreement with my letter, that surveillance cameras “greatly assist” in preventing and solving crimes is wrong.  I call on Mr. Benabou to explain his allegations or otherwise apologize.  Here is his letter: 

Editor:

This is a reply to last week’s letter to the editor “Accuses Police Chief of Being ‘Out of Control’,” Letters, Nov. 7.”

I am writing this letter to the editor as the voice for the San Leandro Police Officer’s Association. This is my first correspondence to the San Leandro Times as the POA President.

Each week I make a point to read every letter sent to the editor with specific interest in articles that pertain to the Police Department. From time to time there are misleading letters written and published and often by the same author.

In last week’s letter to the editor, the writer expressed her disapproval our of City’s Police Chief and City Manager. There are more to her dislikes for these officials than were mentioned in her letter and my professionalism acts as a barrier to my emotions.

There comes a time when enough is enough! As a 20-year employee of this agency, I’ve never seen so many positive changes and improvements than I have seen in the past three years. A Professional Standards Unit, Chief’s Advisory Board and the creation and implementation of United for Safety is just the beginning.

We have embraced technology by joining facebook, twitter, Nixel, and creating an easy-to-use SLPD Smartphone application, all in an attempt to be more transparent with the community. Yes, technology includes surveillance cameras and license plate readers which both greatly assist in solving and preventing crime.

These are just a few programs implemented over the past three years, all accomplished under the current Police Administration led by Chief Sandra Spagnoli.

So, to the fair and impartial readers out there, please take with a grain of salt the comments and accusations expressed in last week’s letter and know that every hard working member of my organization is committed to the safety and service of the citizens of San Leandro.

— Isaac BenabouPresident

 

 

 

Sep 292013
 
Mike Katz-Lacabe

Mike Katz-Lacabe

Today my husband, Mike Katz-Lacabe, was a guest of Brian Copeland on his KGO radio show. They discussed the controversy around raising the flag of the People’s Republic of China in San Leandro as well as the use of license plate cameras.  It’s only 20 minutes, so listen up!

BTW, Brian Copeland said that neither Councilmember Benny Lee, the architect of the flag proposal, nor any other supporters of the flag were willing to go to the show and stand up for their views.

Aug 172013
 

Should San Leandro Council Members be next?

As you know, a couple of weeks ago the Oakland City Council voted to create a “Domain Awareness Center” to pull together the feeds of surveillance and license plate scanners throughout town, so as to be able to track the movements of anyone who goes to Oakland. In other words, they agreed to be the eyes of the NSA on the ground.

Now, Oakland activists are tacitly challenging other Oaklanders to give City Council members a taste of their own medicine. They’ve started by publishing the addresses of the Councilmembers. This is public information, after all.

Not yet on the site but also public information (if obtained through licit means): their phone numbers, their e-mail addresses, photographs of themselves, their homes, their cars, their license plate numbers.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if these were published and people started taking pictures of their cars and where were parked when they chanced upon them. Surely the Council members would welcome having their every move be recorded and made public.   I mean, surely they don’t expect more privacy than what they’re willing to grant anyone else living or driving through Oakland.

But why should we just focus on Oakland? Sure, the San Leandro City Council did not pass a resolution authorizing a similar policy, but they haven’t done anything to stop the Police from determining that every person who drives a car in San Leandro is a potential terrorist and sharing information about their movements with the Feds.

So, shall we start publishing the personal information of our own City Council members? I have asked them and await answer to this question:

Should your privacy be given any more consideration than ours? I mean, if we don’t watch you all the time, record your movements and share them with others over the internet, how can we possibly know you are behaving yourselves? Surely, if we as citizens cannot be trusted, neither can you. Right?

Jun 302013
 

politicianThe 2014 elections are just around the corner, and I can’t believe how dismal the candidate field is in San Leandro.  Actually, “dismal” is putting it lightly.

Mayor
Mayor Stephen Cassidy will be seeking re-election. His pitch of  “I’m not as incompetent as Tony Santos” narrowly won him the seat in 2010, but he now will have to run on a record that is only marginally better than his predecessor’s.  He did balance the budget – but only because voters passed Measure Z -, and he ended up getting the police union to agree to pay into their pensions, but only in exchange for raises.    His biggest accomplishment so far was giving the green light to the Lit San Leandro project, but he handicapped it by making zoning code changes incompatible with the “live-work-play” concept he now realizes the city needs to spouse.  Even then, there is nothing scarier to anyone seeking to invest in a town than a capricious regulatory system.  Still, Lit San Leandro has potential and if it can hook in a couple of big companies into town, his chances at re-election look good.

Councilmember Diana Souza, who is being termed out in 2014, and former councilmember Surlene Grant are giddily waiting on the sidelines preparing to jump in if something handicaps Cassidy – or, more likely, if he decides he doesn’t want to go through the rigors of a second campaign in which he will have to defend himself and his record.  While neither Souza nor Grant is particularly well positioned for defeating him by herself, rank choice voting opens up the possibility that they will both run, team up, and attack Cassidy from two different angles.

Neither Souza nor Grant, however, seem likely to be much of an improvement over Cassidy.  Neither can point to many accomplishments while in office, and neither has a history of leadership while in the Council.  I was not very active in politics while Grant was in office, so I cannot totally dismiss her yet – but Souza has proven herself unable to do anything but follow directions in the 7 years she’s been in office.

I am hoping that someone else will jump into the race, but I don’t know who it could be.   Councilmember Jim Prola seems unlikely to do it at this point and nobody else in the City Council has much to offer.  The School Board is mostly made up by new members without the experience to take on the reigns of the City.  The only exception is my husband, Mike Katz-Lacabe, but he has pulled papers to run for City Council District 1.  Former School Board President Morgan Mack-Rose was just narrowly defeated on her bid for the District 2 City Council seat, so she is likely to be out of the political picture for a while.    It’s possible, however, that someone will rise up from the community – though I haven’t seen much noise from anyone who might become a serious candidate.  Dan Dillman, of course, may decide to run again and this time do it seriously.  Depending on how badly Cassidy falters in the upcoming year, he might actually have a shot.

If no one else pans out, however, I might actually consider running myself.  I’ve never had political ambitions of my own, and this would really be a last-ditch solution; I hope it does not come to that.  But I do believe that this city needs to have someone at its helm that takes the responsibilities of the Mayor and its duties towards the community seriously.  Our Police Department needs to be audited and brought under civilian control – it is unconscionable that we have narcotic officers selling drugs of dubious origins, officers with a record of brutality killing unarmed civilians without any repercussions, false child porn charges filed against established members of our community, persecution of gay men and a Chief that lies to the community and the Council and tries to manipulate the political process, without any consequences whatsoever and, of course, turning San Leandro into a surveillance state.  This needs to be a campaign issue.  There are, unfortunately, many others.

Districts 1 , 3 & 5

San Leandro has a hybrid type of district elections.  Council members must live in a particular area of town, but they are voted on by residents of the whole city.

Michael Gregory is terming out from District 1 .  So far the only person I have heard that might be running for that seat is my own husband, Mike Katz-Lacabe.  He pulled papers last November.

Diana Souza is terming out from District 3 herself, so that will also be an open seat.  Board of Zoning Adjustments member Lee Thomas has already indicated that he will run for that seat.  I tried to meet with Thomas to get an idea of his political philosophy, only to find out that he doesn’t have any.  I give him credit for his honesty in refusing to engage on policy discussions before he has spent the time to learn about the issues and figure out what he thinks (though he might have considered putting off running, until he becomes acquainted with these little matters).  But if someone is unwilling to answer the question: “on a scale from one to ten, how progressive are you? “, then I can only conclude that he either has no political views at all or that he is unwilling to stand up for them.  In either case, that’s not what I want in a City Council member.  I much rather have someone who is conservative, but who is clear and honest about his political philosophy, than someone who will decide on issues as the wind blows or his pockets are filled.

This means that I am actively looking for someone to run for that seat.  In my view, the requirements for office are intelligence, integrity and a real commitment to the public good and the democratic process.  A tall order, any day.

Finally, Pauline Cutter seems likely to seek re-election for District 5, and I haven’t heard of anyone poised to challenge her.

School Board

Just like with the City Council, School Board members run for a district but are elected at large. The School Board has 7 members, only 2 of whom faced a contested election – the other 5 just walked into the office.  Katz-Lacabe has been trying to reduce the number of members from 7 to 5, to make it more likely that those serving are actually elected, but he has gotten little traction.

Three seats will be up for election in 2014.  Lance James, who represents the north-eastern area of town will be running for re-election.  Ron Carey, who represents the area south of Davis St., east of 880 up to the first railroad tracks, has said he’s not running.  He had been appointed to that seat.  If Mike Katz-Lacabe runs for City Council, then his School Board seat (adjacent on the east side to Carey’s, extending up to East 14th.) will be open.  So far I haven’t heard of anyone interested in running for either.

If you know more political gossip, if you’re interested in running for office and want to announce here or seek my help, or if you just want to gossip, please comment here or in Facebook.

Jun 112013
 

stonewall-blackcat
The City of San Leandro and the San Leandro Police Department were just hit with a class-action lawsuit for false arrests and  issuing malicious press releases in their botched sting operations meant to catch men soliciting non-commercial homosexual sex in public areas.    Last year, when the Police Department issued a press release announcing one such sting operation, I wrote to Mayor Stephen Cassidy expressing my concerns with what appeared to be illegal and discriminatory behavior in the part of the Police.  When Mayor Cassidy expressed his approval of the SLPD’s methods, I spoke up at a City Council meeting.

One thing is clear: both Cassidy and the City Council well were aware that the SLPD’s actions were not only illegal, but they exposed the City to legal liability.

Official e-mail correspondence between me (Marga Lacabe) and Mayor Cassidy, all from 6/24/12

My first e-mail

Dear Mayor,

As you know, last week two older men were arrested near the bathrooms at Marina park for “loitering in or about a public restroom for the purpose of engaging or soliciting lewd or lascivious acts.”  This was done as part of an undercover sting operation, and the two arrests were unconnected to one another.  The operation took place during a school day/hours.  The SLPD promptly issued a press release including the name and pictures of the two men who were arrested, one of whom was 76 years old.

I’ve been reading about the phenomenon of “bathroom sex” and talking to older members of the LGBT community about it. One of my sources summarized the phenomenon like this:

“[Bathroom sex is] very much a phenomenon of the closet, which in turn is a phenomenon of oppression and stigmatization. The guys who cruise the rest rooms are guys who don’t dare be seen (or are scared to be seen) at normal gay social gatherings.  And presumably they’re too marginalized to hook up via internet — the old, the poor, the uneducated. It surprises me that there’s still much rest room action going on.  Back in the 70’s, when I lived in backward, ultrahomophobic [midwestern state], it was virtually the only available contact for gay men.  In 2012, in the bay Area — really sad the practice still persists, and particularly sad that it’s the best these poor guys can do..”

It is just as sad that Police departments have used the anti-loitering laws (even in their very weakened state) as a tool to harass and shame men who are in the closet.   The fact that our Police Department rushed to publish their pictures shows that that was exactly their intent.  But this type of behavior should not go unchallenged.

For years, you have been outspoken about your support of gay marriage.  I would hope that you would be just as outspoken about your condemnation of the oppression of gay men by our police department.

You may also note that this is a lawsuit waiting to happen.  While the penal code criminalizes loitering around a bathroom with the intent to engage in lewd conduct, the meaning of this has been narrowed dramatically by the courts.  Basically, in order for the charges to stick, you need to have a sex act between the defendant and someone else which involves sexual touching, and it must be observed by someone other than a police officer.  The lawyer who argued some of the key cases on this issue has written a quick guide for defense attorneys that explains how the law plays out: http://www.brucenickerson.com/primer.html  It’s worth a read.  It would also be worth it to read the police report and see exactly what took place and find out whether charges were filed.  If it turns out that the police is entrapping gay men just to put their pictures on the internet, that can cost the city some.  Nickerson is in San Carlos, which I think is not too far away.

I appreciate you taking this case seriously, and doing whatever is necessary to stomp out any homophobia at the SLPD.  I will also appreciate if you pass a policy that requires the SLPD to inform the public of the legal disposition of any case in which they’ve issued a press release that is still available at the city’s website.  These men were arrested over a week ago, if they have been charged that information should be posted.

Thank you,

Marga

Cassidy’s response

Ms. Lacabe,

Thank you for your message and expressing your concerns on this important matter.   I will inquire further into the question of the SLPD informing the public of the disposition of any case in which the department issues a press release.  However, I see a number of practical constraints, including that the disposition of a case can be months and sometimes years from the arrest, and the prosecution is handled by the District Attorney.

No city wants their public restrooms – particularly ones in public parks frequented by children  – to be used as a meeting place for engaging or soliciting sex or lewd acts, which is way there is a provision in the state penal code prohibiting such activity.  Arresting individuals who have allegedly committed such an offense, and publicizing their arrests, is a means of seeking to deter others from using our public restrooms for similar illegal acts.  I appreciate that the nature of this alleged offense – and its publicity with the release of photos –  can be deeply stigmatizing and lead to vilification of those arrested.   However, no basis exists to support the conclusion that the arrests and press release were part of an attempt to harass or oppress persons based on their sexual orientation.

Stephen Cassidy
Mayor
City of San Leandro
835 East 14th Street
San Leandro, Ca 94577

My response

Mr. Mayor,

I appreciate your candidness as to the fact that the City is publicizing the photos of the accused men in order to “deter others from using our public restrooms for similar illegal acts”.   Under the law, of course, the men are to be presumed innocent which makes your statement particularly troubling.

You state that the harassment of men seeking to meet other men at a public park was not based on sexual orientation, I wonder if you have any evidence that it was not?  Can you tell me if there has been a sting operation in San Leandro in recent memory aimed to enticing men to have sexual relations with female cops or women to have sexual relations with male cops, so as to then expose them?  I’m, of course, referring to circumstances of non-commercial sex.

Finally, I would encourage you to read the book Queer (In)Justice: The Criminalization of LGBT People in the United States which deals exactly with these issues.  Chapter 3 (which you can access at http://www.scribd.com/doc/49120847/Queer-In-justice-The-Criminalization-of-LGBT-People-in-the-United-States-excerpt) deals specifically with the tactic of “policing public sex” as a way to oppress this most marginalized social group.

I can only hope that you will change your mind and will put an end to these bigoted practices in San Leandro.  San Leandro has already too ugly a history about dealing with all kinds of minorities for you to want to continue with that pattern.

Sincerely,

Margarita Lacabe

Cassidy’s Final Response

Ms Lacabe – I referred to the arrestees as persons who allegedly committed the offense. As a lawyer who served as a deputy public defender, I am fully aware an arrestee is innocent until proven guilty.

And my final response

Mr. Cassidy,

In your statement you expressed support for a policy of releasing the name and photographs of men who have been arrested for loitering so as to warn others that this is what it will happen to them if they do something the police deems illegal.  You recognize that the men must be presumed innocent, and thus may not have done anything illegal, but you still believe it’s proper to “out them” to their communities and the worlds to accomplish your policy goal.  That is an immoral policy that I would have hoped you’d be above.

The fact that you were a former deputy public defender, and therefore know full well how little evidence the police needs in order to arrest a person for a crime, makes your position particularly troublesome.

Take care,

Marga

Public Comment before the San Leandro City Council – July 8, 2012 (these were my prepared remarks, I might have changed them slightly while presenting them).

My name is Margarita Lacabe. I’m a San Leandro resident and an international human rights activist.

Today I’ve come to talk to you about a human rights issue.

About two weeks ago, the San Leandro Police Department arrested two men during a “sting operation” at Marina Park.  According to the press release the Police issued, the men were arrested for “loitering in or about a public restroom for the purpose of engaging or soliciting lewd or lascivious acts.”

The Police Department has refused to release the police reports on the arrests so we don’t really know what the men in this case actually are accused of doing. We do know that California law does not prohibit either solicitation or sex in a public place, unless those involved could reasonably believe someone could observe the sexual conduct and would be offended by it.

The Supreme Court ruled on the “loitering” section of the Penal Code back in 1988, but this has not stopped Police Departments statewide from carrying on raids like the one in San Leandro. The purpose of those raids – invariably carried out against men looking for homosexual sex, never heterosexual – is not to enforce the law but to use it as a tool of harassment against one of the most marginalized and oppressed populations still around: closeted gay men.

“Bathroom sex” is a creature of the closet. It arose because until recently gay men could not be public about their sexual orientations or preferences. Men who came out risked being ostracized, lose jobs and careers, be beaten up, even imprisoned. Things have improved but too many men carry the scars of all those years and are still in the closet. Even here, in the gay-friendly Bay Area. According to the research I’ve read, many of the men who still visit “tea rooms” as the bathrooms are known, are men who are still in the closet.

Now, I don’t know if this is true of the two men who were arrested, but I will note that they were both older men and one was 76!

The San Leandro Police did not just arrest these men, it also issued a press release with their names and photographs. Mayor Cassidy indicated over e-mail that he believes outing octogerians is justified by the greater goal of stopping whatever “illegal behavior” supposedly took place. I don’t agree.

The legal issues surrounding this arrest will be played out in court. I’m confident the men have access to a competent attorney and that justice will prevail.

But the ethical issues remain: people have a right to privacy, even beyond that protected by law. And that includes men and women in the closet, whether they hang out public bathrooms, the Police Station or City Hall.

I don’t have a formal request at this time, but I hope that this is an issue that you will keep in mind.  This is 2012, we should not be outing people in San Leandro!