tell you about chinese gangs. and know many gang members, active, and yet none are included and were created for racial profiling. they were used as means to get the officers on board, they began against not only people who were targeted but also everybody. young children. rebrought cases forward to be terrorized and put on a the gang injunction. and the idea that san francisco is more fair because they went to the court is untrue.

it's actually the opposite. as a public defender and i represented folks in criminal cases and not civil. these are civil gang injunction, i took one of the cases. and i learned that upon taking the case, a young man and identified the only infraction and in all seriousness is he had been seen attending two memorials of childhood friends shot down in the streets -- these are street memorials and rapped on a song about gangs. that was the only connection. no criminal history. no prior arrest. he came in and said, hey, can you help me? i don't do civil law, but i will try. the first thing i found out at court is i had to pay a $600 court filing fee to interlivonia in the action. -- to intervene in that action. i couldn't write a check from

our department, so that was from myself. we had to publish the intervener motion in the newspaper. that cost me another $200. after that experience, i was, like, there is no way we can represent at that time what would have been 50 or 60 people. we took one case and a private attorney took one case. why? because there is no right to a lawyer in these cases. the city attorney comes to court and they had to assigned three full-time lawyers and i don't know how many police officers worked on these injunctions. the police officers went around town and delivered boxes and packages and had the effect of terrorizing whole communities, particularly of young people. immediately this was a tremendous amount of confusion about what the gang injunctions

prohibited. and there was really no public hearing or explanation as to how this was happening. and most people because they were afraid didn't come forward. and even if they had come forward, and to hire the attorney injunctions. and i know at the time that the aclu worked with the city attorney's office with the procedures to informally ask the city attorney to be removed from the injunction. they connected the reviews. they agreed in writing to conduct the reviews every three years from the time that the first injunction was decided by the court. that's not happened. the aclu requested to the freedom of information act and

got 5,000 people and a lot of interns and i talked to a person from an aclu who told me there is no evidence that there was a review conducted. until now in 2018. and the city attorney said we did it every year, work with the police officers closely, and they did in 2009, 2013, and no evidence of that in the records. i am sure if you look at the city attorney's records of any major sifrl case, they -- of a civil case, t will have damn good records. that is what they do. there is no record of that in this 5,000 documents that they provided to the aclu. so i question that whether or not if they haven't done that review and why should we trust them with the power to ban

people to decide and who can go and who has to leave. and probably one of the most powerful things that the city attorney said worked and know they look at the felony convictions before and after and i pointed out in the last 10 years and reduction of 40% of fall in felonies. maybe it worked for all of san francisco because the same statistic is true of all of san francisco. and that is the only proof they have had? with the millions of dollars that they have in their budget? they didn't pay $10,000 to study this? any time we institute a new program in the public defender's office where the pretrial release unit t bill unit, we go to the goldman school and bring

in one of the top people to do an evaluation for free. takes about a year and they do it. the last 10 years the city attorney has not done one study to determine whether or not the gang injunctions wo? no, because why? because they have been asleep at the weel until now. i feel bad about that. i should have asked for this hearing five years ago. instead, we waited 10 years. and in 2018, we finally get a comprehensive so-called evaluation. who did we take off the list? well, they took mario woods off the list last week. it took the d.a. two and a half years to investigate the case and say the police officers committed to crime, and yet he is still on the gang injunction list until last week, wow. and i think the most powerful thing for you to hear actually is from one of the individuals who was affected by the gang injunction and still to this day

on the gang injunction. his name is jason jones and he is here. >> before we hear from you, mr. jones, would you mind if ski a couple of -- if i ask a couple of questions? >> miss mary said that when someone is arrested for violating the gang injunction, that case proceeds not through civil court but through criminal court. that is where your office would -- >> true. >> for violating the gang injunction. >> how many arrests have been made purely for violating the gang injunction in the past 10 years? do we have that data? >> i would say probably get anywhere from one does on the two dozen a year that we see. there are violations of 136 of the penal code which is violation of state, legal, and that's really why i nted to hear from an individual who has experienced it. what happens is that when you

are arrested, you are arrested repeatedly. we had one case or one individual who saw the case twice and had to go to court and go to trial on the gang inctio and those dozen or two cases that come to you, is the sole charge violating the gang injunction or usually an additional criminal charge that could be there on its own? >> usually violating the gang injunction. >> solely. >> just for being seen in the area doing something the gang injunction says you can't do. >> i am glad you provided that data there's a 40% decrease in felonies in general and taking that together with the amount of people deceased on the list, granted, the state has provided with an aggregate, so if people with dying and that is why they are not committing more felonies, it's just -- it is

very, very concerning to me the absence of data. as i said, this is a very serious, you know, taking away people's rights. and we need to know that it's necessary to protect the public safety and that is the only data presented to us is concerning to me. so you highlighted th pot by showing that there was a reduction to begin with 40% and that's really important data. that is all my questions. >> an i have one question for you, public defender, so i have heard that sometimes there is an enhancement. enhancement. when someone has been charged with the crime and on the gang injunction list and they are charged with an enhancement. explain that to me please. >> i think other california law, you can be charged with being a s crime of being in a

criminal gang. there is also an enhancement where if you are charged with a crime and it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that you acted in the interest of the gang and a bunch of elements that have to be met, then you can receive an additional prison sentence. >> is sometimes being on a gang injunction list evidence of actually this enhancement? just being on a gang injunction list. if you are arrested for a crime, but you are not doing it in conjunon wi a gan but you are on the gang injunction list, is this evidence to the courts that you are doing it with a gang because you are on this gang injunction list? >> absolutely. >> okay. we are ready to meet mr. jones. >> hello, mr. jones. welcome.

>> hello, everyone. i ain't god at this, but this gang injunction list that i am on is terrible. i am going to speak for myself. when i come outside, when i did come outside, they see me and oh, that's him, go get him. what did i do? i didn't even get a chance to do nothing yet. sometimes with weeknights in the safety zone, they call it. they call it the safety zone ar whatever. geneva street is not on the safety zone and i should be able to drive by without being harassed. i am not under probation, not

under arrest. and i give you instance. me and my daughters and my son. we going to the disney on ice. the gang task force see me and i don't pay them no mind. i am going to the show. they get out of the car, and get out of the car with the guns. i got babies with me and a group of other people walking. and the other people, whats a going on? what did he do? what did he do? i did nothing. i was so em bars raed that i didn't -- i was so embarrassed that i didn't take my kids to see the show. i didn't want to take my kids to see the show and oh, what did he do to the kids? i don't do nothing. so we went home. i couldn't have explained it to my wife. i told her we didn't get there on time. me supposed to be a protector, i just couldn't tell her that.

the attorney, she said that we could opt out or something, when we first got those, it was a pack of 2,000 ges. some of us was at the gas station, some of us at our grandma's house, wherever we was at, but that is a big packet. 12 police cars. what did i do? why the 12 cop cars give me a piece of paper to say i can't hang with the gang guys? and when they did, that and that was intimidating for one. i am a big guy or whatever, but i moan, she said we could opt it, but to be a member and all of us came to the court. we couldn't get in the court. they said we can't come in the

court. not for us. i am being sued, but i can't come in the course? and across the street -- >> so you were served with the papers saying you were going to be placed on the gang injunction, showed up to the court when they were going to hold the hearing and wouldn't let you in? >> none of the people that was being accused of the injunction, noneover us was able to come in the courtroom. and they sent us another paper a couple of weeks ago and we came again. it's not for us. why are we here? why are you guys here? why are you all coming? why did it get this piece of pap sner said to come down here. whatever transpired inside, i don't have the slightest clue. i am still an active person on this list. and what it does to us and like

something like a lot of my friend, they not going to come because they were afraid to stand in front of poem and talk and whatnot, but i been working since 2011, 2012, when i first got on there. and i was working at u.p.s. and the police said i had a high-speed chase. a week later they saw me and took me to jail. the bail was one amount. the d.a. guy said, nope, give him $50,000 because we charging him with a gang injunction. excuse me. sorry. so at that point the bail became $125,000. i didn't have it. like my family, they came together and came and got me. i got out. it was proven that i was not the driver. i did not commit no crime. but i still had the gang

injunction charge. why am i still stuck with the gang injunction charge if i was not -- if i did nothing wrong? it wasn't me. why am i stuck with the charge? two years went on and me fightings just the gang injunction charge. i finally said, i did it, whatever, and take the probation and the misdemeanor for the gang injunction. this supposed to have been a civil matter. and this is maybe like -- i don't want to say this maybe like a couple of weeks ago. i don't know if you all got kids, but sometimes they got field trips at the school. and sometimes you go and chaperon. and i signed up to be the chaperon. here is my kids. i want to help out where i can. and like before it wasn't -- people wasn't big on background checks. but today, i don't know what

it's going to be when i am 50 and still on the list. but today it's google. they typed my name in. oh, we don't want him coming up here taking the kids. so tey called me to the office and told me i couldn't go. and explain to me why i can't go. she said, well, we did a search. i said i am not a predator. i am not -- i am not one of them guys. well, we found that you a gangbanger. we don't want you around kids. for safety. wait a minute, i am not a gangbanger. you know what i mean? i can't go to the school without having the teachers maybe thinking, oh this, guy, you know what i mean? i got to send my wife or my other daughter to get the kids and i sit in the car. like i want to experience that joy when daddy go to school and she tired the and i just want to go in daddy's arms. i can't experience that because

they feel that i am a criminal because i am a gang member? i'm not a gang member. they just said i was. that's all -- it's one cop who was a police for a year. he gave expert testimony. how you an expert a year? you know what i mean? professors that's been teaching 34 years and they consider themselves experts. how can one man be on a job for one year and be an expert? yep, all of them gangbangers. >> you did try to opt out with the city attorney's office? >> i got where we couldn't go in the courtroom, couldn't go in the courtroom, and if pretty much was pointless. a lot of stuff being said. i was told the main reason why i didn't want to try no more is because one of the criterias was that the police officers, they got to say, oh, he is not a gangbanger no more.

way a minute. i got to rely on the police that put me on there? to say i am not a gang member no more? he not going do to that. if he do that, he lied to begin with, right? so i figured i'm going to be 50 years old and if this google and my daughter going to be -- if this google or whatever they decide to turn to, it's always changing, and she go in and see, oh, look at daddy. you didn't tell me this. and now for the rest of my life, it's -- i can't take it off the computer. we might get took off the list. we might not. i don't know. but we can't take that off the computer. and lastly, i have to leave my last job. i installed appliances. i was there for three years. i tried to move up and become a manager. he did a background check. to get the job, and he had to do another background check because i'm going to be a manager.

and he did it and he saw that. wait a minute. they say you guys are recruiting gang members. wait a min. i don't want you working here. and you know what i mean? and well, i don't feel comfortable being here now. you know what i mean? because of that? so it's terrible. i wish i would have came here and -- but they feel like -- i am a little bit older now, so i don't fear and i don't got no fear about retribution and none of that. the cop is going to hear that jason was in here talking. i don't care. that is why they scared to come, you know what i mean? >> thank you so much for coming. >> thank you very much.

thank you. >> i just wanted to add that there were other individuals that we have spoken to who are in the same zigs situation as mr. jones, but they were afraid to come forward and afraid to lose his jobs. as you heard, mr. jones lost his job twice. so the question is, i think what evidence is there that these gangs still exist in 2018? i think that is the question that chairwoman fewer was asking. even if an individual listed on an injunction is recently arrested, that doesn't mean he is acting on behalf of a gang. to remain on an injunction, the individual she a b active participation of the gang. the city attorney is indicated and submitted that the west edition gangs no longer exist. yet we haven't seen evidence presented that any of the other

six gangs on this injunction actually exist. other jurisdictions have eliminated the gang injunctions. oakland got rid of theirs in 2015. orange county eliminated theirs. a court last year blocked los angeles county's injunction from being implemented. and these gang injunctions are really a relic of the war on drugs. and which was actually a war on black and brown youth. like stop and frisk racial profiling, they are remnants of discredited policing strategist of the past. san francisco should be leading the country in eliminating these injunctions, not lagging behind orange county. >> thank you very much. thank you, again, mr. jones for coming forward. now i would like to call u a guest presenter, martin flore sd, who has provided expert testimony regarding criminal gang issues across california. thank you for being here today.

>> thank you. well, first, it is an honor to be here. i come from los angeles where gang injunctions were first implemented, so there is a lot to learn. i think the presentation from the city attorney is that san francisco is different. but it's not different for those who are imposed with a gang injunction. those individuals, those family members, those neighbors, te a'rl impacted by gang injunction. in my experience, i believe gang injunction is another tool to criminalize our community. when we look at the afghanistan injunction here in and in san francisco and in other communities, it is targeting the black and brown community, the impoverished community. instead of investing into the communities and providing young people with positive opportunities, we're criminalizing them. i'll give you an example. when i was a kid in east l.a., lapd would roll up and give us a dodger baseball card. you know what they do in san francisco and oakland and los angeles? they give you a field

identification card. now you're a part of the system. getting injunction is the exact same thing. the idea of limiting or dropping the numberss not a resolution. i think it hurts the issue more. these individuals will be higher targets to law enforcement. these individuals are on the list are probably -- probably have the same background as those who have been removed. they have moved on in their life. their last conviction was probably two, five, eight years ago. we don't have those number. when i see all the individuals are being moved from the list eight years later, 10 years later because they have not committed a crime, not associated. guess what? maybe they never were going to commit a crime. maybe they were wrongfully labelled in this gang injunction. a serious violation of their rights. as you heard from mr. jones, how sad is it that individuals like him have to go through the

struggle? hardworking individuals, parent, taking his kids somewhere to enjoy, not being able to partake in the school activities. this is not special to him. that is the individuals who are parents. one misconception about gangs is that gangs live in a bubble and they just commit crime, but that's false. there are members of gangs who have a short-term life as gang members. most of them do actually. there are some that may be long life criminals or gang member, but that is the exception. but what happens in our community is those exceptions are presented as a norm. so we tend to have that criminalization type of mentality amongst all the individuals. i am here to urge you to end injunctions in the city. to make a statement. make a statement to los angeles that this model that you guys developed in l.a. was no good.

we will not tolerate it at all. it doesn't make any sense. >> so mr. flores, we have heard today that gang injunctions help to protect communities that had a lot of gang activity, where people were victims of the gang activity and thei ow homes and were not safe. what do you say to that to eliminate the gang injunctions today? >> sure. let me talk about myself. i have also been a victim. i have been robbed at gun point in the tunnel half a block from my house. my little brother was killed in a drive-by shooting in 1994, so i am not new to this id of victims and things that happen in our community. i recognize that firsthand. but to me when we cast a wide net in our community and we label individuals and this most negative way, we're actually causing harm to the greater community. we are not addressing the issue of the families who lost their loved ones because 50 people

were cast a wide net as dang gang members. that did not bring justice. that would not bring justice to my family wrongfully labelling somebody else. i think it's a mistake to do that. i think some of the best ways to address the issue is to have the engagement. if law enforcement truly had a community-based policing where they were playing basketball at the gym with the young people in the neighborhood, that can address the issue. that is not costly. if they could do field trips, great examples in l.a. los angeles developed a summer night lights where in these communities where there was summer programming, the community came out to parks in richmond, which were in known gang territories and the communities that did not have summer programs, you had an increase in gang activity. we should invest in our opportunities and minimize the criminalization of the young people.

>> thank you. colleagues, any questions for mr. flores? >> thank you. appreciate it. >> thank you. if there is no questions, let's open this up for public comment. and actually, i think i have a full stack of cards here. but i also want to call up first -- [calling of speakers] >> hi. commissioners, representing district eight. we support the end of gang injuns. and they are separating parents from the children. currently the purpose is to tear families especially black and brown. this impacts all of us directly or incommunity for the specially

children that are growing in dysfunctional home, poverty, and that may possibly lead to more violence. and aeadrcia of r justice and today we urge you to end the gang injunction. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> where can i start? violence at the border being divided, kids taken from mothers and in our backyards, families of cohave been getting racially profile profiled that are forced out of the communities. there is a process that one can get off and with how many people

have gone, i got no answer. it is evident that they divide our communities and push people out of the city. when just living here is a nearly impossible task to do. and we must find strong alternatives to bring communities together. we have invest in the youth and creating a youth empowerment center and equitable opportunities for higher paying jobs and a chance to live in the city instead of pushing them out with the injunctions. and they must lead the charge as a city that brings families together and thrives for the american dream and not to divide us t likeump and sessions are doing at the border. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> i am johnny messler, the mayoral appointee on the san francisco youth commission. we know san francisco has been a leader of beneficial change in the nation. we stand up for justice that affects the entire nation, but the blind to see the rash racial injustice in our backyard. this puts down families and youth of color in the city.

the injunctions are an example of the racial disparities that the san francisco city officials say they are committed to erasing. city officials can change the policy today by urging the city attorney to end a policy that perpetuates disparities. thank you very much. >> now i would like to call the next group. [calling of speakers] >> good afternoon. i am alan, senior council with the aclu. the aclu has opposed gang injunctions since their inception in california, and i personally have been involved in all the san francisco gang injunction cases except for the last tone. the city attorney has painted a somewhat rosy view of how gang injunction operate, and i would like to present a less rosy view. in my view and aclu's view, gang but unequal system of justice.

it is a tool that's allowed -- it is a tool that isnded to fight crime, as miss maris candidly admitted, but it gives prosecutor prosecutors and police -- it frees prosecutors and police from a lot of the constitutional constraints that would be on them if they were prosecuting this as a crime. by going for a gang injunction, there is no need to prove a crime. there is no public defender as jeff mentioned or right to a jury trial. that is huge. because yes, i commend san francisco for getting -- for filing the papers that they produce to each individual they serve. the packets are about that big with declarations. to dump that on the feet which is often what happens of an individual named on a gang injunction and expect him to come to court to defend himself without a lawyer is impossible and it doesn't happen.

is that my time? >> 30 more second. >> and as jeff said, gang injunctions are connected to race even by their -- the wayer that defined. so i would like to say one thing. in san francisco, this is an police reform era. the police chief has been involved with the board has been involved. the police commission. and the two things that came out of the d.o.j. report were to rebuild trust in the -- >> please fin you shall your sentence. -- to finish your sentence. >> rebuild trust in the communities and eradicate racial bias, so i would ask the city attorney who is not involved in this because it is not a criminal office, whether they really believe that gang injunctions are improving the climate in this city and are necessary, and i think they are not and i would invite them to join the reform movement. >> thank you very much.

>> the co-founder and executive director and a native san franciscan born and raised, intergenerational family from the mission district. my organization was born out of the gang injunction in oakland. as a result of our involvement in that, we did expensive research and -- we did extensive research and they move crime around. and one of the points of change in oakland -- i should note as of march 2015, all gang injunctions were lifted in the city of oakland and the fers community organizing effort in the country to fully defeat a gang injunction. at this point in time, let me rewind and just say that in terms of the gang injunctions in san francisco, we pushed and as community workers were always asked to prove the effect of what we do.

we asked that the city attorney and the police chief at the time do the same with the gang injunctions and despite their best attempt and effort to fudge the numbers, the evidence demonstrates that crime had gone up in the gang injunction zone. there was no analysis of that, but due to our research efforts and identified by taking young people and further detaching them, further isolating them, prohibiting them from opportunities and accessibility to employment and educational opportunities as a result of gang labelling, that was the cause of the increase in crime. young people in my organization, my staff members, were defending the gang injunction have received accolades and many former defendants in the gang injunction who are working as community workers who work as credible messengers to assist young people in making life-affirming decision. i strongly urge you to be a leader and this is part of an antiquated crime prevention strategy and it is racism camouflaged as a crime of prevention. >> thank you for coming today.

let me call other speakers. [calling of speakers] >> good afternoon. i was someone labelled a gang member and went to prison. i came home and in 2006 and 2007, i saw gang justice spearheaded in san francisco. and as an historian, i look back at the inclusion act of 1882. i look back at 1942 and the japanese internment act that president roosevelt enacted. we are in 2018. and the black and brown because we're targeting black and brown people that may be caught up in the destructive behavior. but they need guidance, need mentors like myself, like the brother that came and spoke as

an expert witness that know that gang injunctions or what we call community restraining orders because that is what they are. they are restraining orders that don't have a due process. and i think dennis herrera and anybody who supports that. and to ready to show the communities and not target the youngsters and actually provide them real life experiences that will give them the options. the reason i believe i was successful is an i had a community that walked with me. but many youngsters don't have a community. if you invest in places like courage and critical resistance, and if you invest in places that has shown the whole industry, we're going to actually see that gang injunctions have been in seven years from now, very obsolete and something we did not want to use as a tool. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> good afternoon.

rebecca young, co-chair of the racial justice committee at the san francisco public defender's office. i have been a public defender for 15 year. i have worked with african-american youth in the bayview and sunnydale communities and i have come away with the observation that gang injunctions fracture and isolate communities which are already struggling with poverty and underemployment. the city attorney's presentation to this subcommittee i believe was well intentioned. but it is simply not the reality of what is happening on the ground. and in working in sunnydale over the last three years, i have spoken with community-based organizations and the leader of those organizations, larry jones, drew jenkins, kim mitchell sr., and not a single one of them was ever consulted before these people were put on those gang inuncjons. furthermore, tim mitchell sr. has a son and nephew on the gang injunction, so these two people are cousins. they cannot walk down the street

together in sunnydale. they cannot go to the community center together, not to the basketball court together. they cannot be seen together. and the idea that the police are not entitled to stop somebody if you are on the gang injunction and all you are doing is walking down the street is just sheer fantasy. i have interviewed and spoken many times with an individual on the visitation valley gang injunction, initials l.l., and he was stopped walking down on treat with a man on the gang injunction and take on the jail for four hours. that other individual was not on the gang injunction and it didn't stop the police from doing the stop and frisk. so i believe that by criminalizing routine daily activities, gang injunctions do more to fracture a community struggling with poverty than they do to heal a community. it also destroys public safety because the people in the community grow up watching the police harass their brothers,

their uncles, their -- >> finish the sentence please. >> thank you. and there is built an inherent d distrust for the police and disrespect. they learn as people in predominantly white communities to, the people are resistant to call police. that is how public safety is destroyed in the communities. so the police become an occupying force. and they are not seen as -- i encourage people who come up and give presentations without any experience going there. to talk to people and they are losing jobs. and jason jones presentation about coming down to the courthouse and being excluded and committed by l.l. in an interview with me. and larry jones, drew jenkins had a van full of people from both the towers and from sunnydale, so-called rivals, drove them down together in the

van and were not allowed in the courtroom. >> thank you very much. >> that is t a reason the gang injunction should be lifted. the due process was not real. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker please. >> good afternoon. i am andrew, critical resistance, and also born and raised in san francisco. and i have been involved with the no-u.s.a. jail campaign. here to speak to the demand that the city attorney drop the gang injunctions in san francisco. in 2015 the board of supervisors voted to close h50 bryant and in that campaign some of the numbers that we're seeing around and arrested are black according to the next examiner op ed published today, the san francisco jail is 56% black, and even though they make up 3% of

the city. so the connections here between the board of supervisors voting to close the jail and increased criminalization of bl an brown youth that -- black and brown youth need to be decriminalized and efforts to close the jail and the gang injunctions need to end. >> i stand here as the interim policy coordinator. and as you may know, the council is a 24-member board and supervisor fewer definitely sits

on the board. . and the gang injunction and spearheaded by council member jose who represents one of the seven re-entry members. on our meeting on april 26, we did -- it was a vote called to end gang injunctions. where the majority passed. no one opposed it, but we did have seve abstentions. 11 majority. and basically we thought out to speak -- we sought out to speak to the city attorney's office and they tabled it to the meeting. and submitted to the city attorney herrera from the body on may 29 for you all to review. >> thank you very much. next speaker please.

>> hi. my name is elizabeth and i am coming together as a researcher and educator who has studied the health and paths of police violence for the last several years. i am also here representing public health justice collective and do no harm coalition with memberships of several hundred health workers in the bay area. so i want to say, first and foremost, that gang injunctions are a public health issue. as we've heard, gang injunctions have been shown to exacerbate targeting by police among those who are already experiencing disproportionate targeting. again, as we have heard, gang injunctions increase hahs rament by police of the individuals who are named on the injunction as well as their friends and family members, and this is troubling to me as someone working in public health because police harassment is associated with trauma and poor health. so specific findings and frequent stops and with

individuals living with frequent stops and to have diabetes, overweight, experience poor mental health. we are seeing direct health impacts. and gang injunctions tie folks into the prison system by extending sentences, for instance. and one i think really startling statistic is that each year in prison is associated with a two-year decline in life expectancy. so want to encourage you to end the injunctions to protect public health. >> thank you very much. [calling of speakers] >> hi. ed ramsey, resident of san francisco and here to urge you to stop the gang injunctions.

and somebody talked about the relation to the jail and also in relation to the jail for anyone labelled a gang member. nd they get two bad days and that will increase the number of those who are put out and is a without racial bias and if they areo sfpd who is known to have racial bias, and i believe a whole federal investigation about it, then how could that be true? and i believe let's stop the gang injunctions because they are a horrible policing tool in our city and increases the policing of people of color in our city. >> thank you very much. next speaker please.

>> and if san francisco is serious about supporting families and racial injustice, then we need to end the gang injunction. and basically had whole mayoral campaign, several flyers and campaign slogans around families. so i i think if we're really serious about families, not being torn apart or being able to see each other and be with each other, we need to do the injunctions. as a white woman, i will never experience the sort of state violen violence. i don't want my brothers and sisters of color to experience this violence either. so please end the injunction and not just reduce the names. >> thank you very h. next speaker please. >> hi. thank you for holding this

hearing today. my name is jess haney with critical resistance and the san francisco no injunction. and much appreciation for having this hearing because the policing tools often go unrecognized and unacknowledged and it takes year of community effort to have them be seen. when the folk who are directly targeted with them stick their necks out and try to defend themselves, the first few strikes are not treated with designa dignity. i am glad you are taking the community seriously and falling in line with the rest of california. and organizing against gang injunction and stop the injunction coalition. and started a beautiful community garden and is an intergenerational and if it were

up to the city, the people we started the garden with would have been kicked out and dismissed. part of the time we were starting the garden, one of the people had to commute from a city 40 minutes away because he was forced to live out there because the family was harassed every day by police. and so investments in community and organizations such as courage which george spoke from show what's really possible when we invest in communities. and we cannot do both. and the city leads with the criminalization and policies and to restrict the outcomes and truly dignified approach to working in communities that are experiencing what is being labelled as crime. and so i want to encourage you to look at this op-ed that was published today in the yt san francisco examiner." the time is up by gang

injunctions by professor of african-american studies at u.c. berkley. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. denise. >> hi. thank you for holding this hearing. i am the president of the central city democrats. i am the daughter of a man who was murdered by the police in oakland. and i am also a member of the harvey mill club and axis of love. i am saying that gang injunctions are public safety or gentrifycation? and if the cops keep arresting the same people over and over and over, and then calling them a gang, it just seems like they

are creating the narrative. and why -- now, i am not really posing this as a question, but lenoir was developing property across the street from the first injunction in the bayview. i am aware of that. so it's just -- i am more afraid -- it terrifies me. and i walk down the stre all the time at night, every time of night in the tenderloin where i live and no one has ever messed with me. i don't know if it's because i'm a big girl, but no one messes with me, you know. and i have -- i love people there in the tenderloin and it is my heart. and no legal representation and a huge violation of the civil rights and they are on the list for life. and when i was hippy in the 70s, we went to jail just for having

brown people in the car. so we know that this is all about the color and the race and nothing more really. so i would like to say public defender and thank m. and i urge you to end the gang injunction. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> an i am jose, with the san francisco re-entry council and also on the no injunctions coalition. i want to start off, first of all, with saying thank you for having this hear. i want to counter something that i heard today and san francisco somehow did things differently. we did things that other counties didn't do. i will challenge that and say did we do things differently? to date, not one single gang in the entire history of the implementation of gang injunctions, not one single quite white gang has been put on the injunction list even though

we know the existence of white gangs. no one single person in l.a. and orange county and the same way they have done in oakland, not one single person was given the right to counsel. what happened and things would have been different if those cops were cross-examined. people weren't given the right to due process. i want to bring this home and really imagine that you are sitting in county jail and that you are 19 years old and statistically at risk for cancer, imagine raised in the bayview, 19 years old, black, and they serve you with 2,000 papers. now you're required to go to civil court. how are you going to get from there? this is not a fictitious person. this is mario woods. and let's brick it bring it back to today. the city attorney has the nerve, the never to wait until he was murdered in his own neighborhood and the pavement still with the blood and the cops acquitted and

you want to release him off the injunction list? how dare the city attorney do that and insult the communities like that? these injunctions need to go. and i know that the legislative branch is a check in our power, and i urge you to check that power because we will. the community is going to check thatpower. and i want to send a very clear message to the city attorney's office, we're not going to go away. we're not. we're going to be there every day and go to every school, every shelter, every park, every community center. we're going to educate the community. we're not going to go away. >> thank you, jose. next speaker please. >> hi. i am becky littleton with sf-nic and no injunctions coalition. and i want to thank you for holding this hearing today. and also in my day job i am an analyst and working in criminal justice for more than 10 years. and i want to -- there is a lot to say about this issue. and i want to drill down on a coup of points regarding the

city attorney's insistence that ineffective, and second th in these are effective. first, there are no studies and the city attorney has the studies on the website. ane of those studies from 2005 which they point to as an indication that injunctions are effective and actually has very mixed results if you read that study. and they have very mixed results. they find in some neighborhoods there is a short term decrease in violent crime and other neighborhoods there is actually an increase in violent crimes. and they specifically state in that study that there is no -- they find no evidence that there is any kind of long-term benefit to the injunctions that they are studying. they also discuss the results of other independent evaluations of gang injunctions. and again, find very mixed results. they even pull up one study that concludes that injunctions

increase violent crime. and so there is really no evidence to support this claim. and in terms of these injunctions, the internal arrest data that the city attorney's office recently looked at, they are making incredibly tenuous assump they are looking at kind of before and after arrest rates. [please stand by]

which did take up this question of gang injunctions. this has been a fascinating afternoon for me. i remember when i was working for the city and reentry council we had so many conversations, for three years about racial disparities in the criminal justice system in san francisco and saw over and over again how deep these disparities ran and how it was such a difficult thing to come to any kind of conclusions about how to end it. and parallel to that, was this whole question of the gang injunctions. i'm not saying we can end

racial disparities and racial disproportionality but i could certainly say it's not helping and when we look at anything in this city when we have such a small african american population at this point and such a huge number of relative huge number of people on these gang injunctions we see a problem and i think it's time to open the eyes of the city attorney, maybe rejoin the reentry council on this, let's look at this with an open mind and say maybe this isn't the time, this isn't the purpose and in fact it's exacerbating the problem the city says its trying to address. so, again, i'm not sure what exactly your role in this is, other than as an advisory body because the reentry council is to the city attorney. but i certainly, strongly, urge you to take this question up over and over again with the city attorney's office so we can finally put an en to this

really unfair and disproportionate practice. >> thank you, karen. charleen cue, peter van wesep. edgar, -- walton, jeff w. mayoni. i know i'm not saying it right. crenshaw. and charles brenson. hello, how are you? >> thanks for allowing me this time. my name is jennifer beach and i teach at san francisco state university and i work with san francisco showing up for racial justice. my daughter was raised in bayview. i'm intimately involved in the communities affected by these gang injunctions. anything that criminalizes the black and brown in our city isn't serving our city. it's been made very clear. i want to thank jeff adachi for

his eloquent explanation of the problem with gang injunctions. but i just want to remind the city who you are representing in front of me right now that we have an opportunity to make a statement about racist criminalizing practices, that we face a period where increased incarceration and lifts of people who get special charges for expressing themselves, that really is fascism, we have to ask ourselves did we decide to do that? we decided not to do that, because the liberties we give up and the communities that are impacted are tsomething we are willing to give up. so i just want to encourage you to look at the broader social situation and the importance of making very strong statements against racist criminalizing practices and that's from my neighborhood. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please.