News from Oakland City Attorney
Barbara J. Parker
|
|
This month:
- Continuing our fight to stop human trafficking and sexual exploitation at illicit "massage" businesses.
- Success in several major litigation cases.
- City Attorney in the Community.
- In Brief: California Attorney General Becerra files amicus (friend of the court) brief supporting Oakland's lawsuit against Wells Fargo for racially discriminatory mortgage lending practices against African American and Hispanic borrowers; Oakland City Attorney backs challenge to “public charge” anti-immigration policy.
As always, we look forward to your questions and comments about the work we are doing on behalf of the people of Oakland.
Barbara J. Parker
Oakland City Attorney
|
|
Continuing our fight to stop human trafficking and sexual exploitation at illicit "massage" businesses
|
On August 14, the Alameda County Superior Court
approved a major settlement
of our lawsuit against the former Evergreen (aka Pinetree) massage business on Telegraph Avenue. The settlement permanently enjoins three of the business owners – Hiroshi Odashima, Andrew Lee, and Sook Lee – from owning or operating any business in Alameda County that involves nudity. The defendants also agreed that they will not hold massage or acupuncture licenses, and they agreed to pay the City $165,000 to cover the City’s costs, attorneys’ fees and civil penalties. We previously collected $102,500 from other defendants in the case, including the business’ landlords, bringing the total settlement amount to $267,500.
As City Attorney I have authority to file civil lawsuits against the owners and operators of businesses that are “fronts” for this criminal industry – and the property owners who rent to them. The District Attorney criminally prosecutes crimes related to prostitution and human trafficking,
During the last few years, we have shut down about 25 illegal massage businesses in Oakland, and we have recovered nearly $1 million in settlements, attorneys’ fees, penalties and other costs from the owners and operators of these businesses. We believe these business closures, the permanent injunctions and the financial penalties will deter and disrupt this industry that profits from the abuse of women and girls in our community.
In the case of the Evergreen massage business, Oakland police conducted four undercover operations and found evidence that the women working there were victims of human trafficking. For example, police saw luggage and mattresses in multiple rooms at the business, indicating that the workers lived on site. Police say women trafficked in illicit massage business like the Evergreen are often brought to the U.S. from overseas, speak little or no English and have limited financial resources. Business operators often deny victims access to their passports and rotate them among different locations. During all four police operations, workers offered undercover officers sexual services in exchange for money.
Human trafficking at illicit massage businesses often is tied to organized crime with some individuals acting as the “face” of multiple businesses. The owners of the Evergreen included several “repeat players,” including an Orange County man named
Hiroshi Odashima
, who has an extensive history of opening illegal massage parlors across the state. The City also named Odashima as a defendant in two other lawsuits we filed to shut down illicit massage businesses in Oakland. Over the past ten years, Odashima has executed leases, procured business licenses and completed other necessary paperwork to open and operate an estimated 16 massage establishments across California; all of these businesses have been shut down due to illegal activity. At Evergreen, Odashima submitted a rental application, provided the property owners with a copy of his California Massage Therapy Council license, and executed the lease.
Another Evergreen owner,
Andrew Lee
, pleaded no contest to operating a brothel in Redondo Beach in 2011, and the state Attorney General currently is prosecuting Lee for administrative violations related to several prostitution businesses across California, including the Evergreen. At Evergreen, Lee obtained the zoning clearance, procured the business tax licenses, and paid the rent.
We also sued
Sook Lee
, another Evergreen owner, as a defendant in one other lawsuit for her role in managing and operating a different illicit massage business in Oakland. At Evergreen, Sook Lee executed a lease agreement and paid rent to the property owner.
The City Attorney's Neighborhood Law Corps ("NLC") sued the property owners and business owners and operators of Evergreen in April 2017. A few months later, the property owners evicted the commercial tenants, which resulted in closure of the business. The August settlement brings an end to this case, but the NLC will continue to prosecute businesses operating as fronts for the sexual exploitation of women in Oakland.
|
|
Success in Major Litigation Cases
|
Faeth v. City of Oakland
, Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG18895920
On August 23, the Alameda County Superior Court dismissed an Oakland police officer’s lawsuit challenging an arbitrator’s decision upholding the City’s termination of the officer.
Because the lawsuit involved a personnel matter, we can discuss only the information in the public court proceeding. In his lawsuit, former officer
Cullen Faeth
asserted that the City terminated his employment as a police officer, and that an arbitrator later upheld the City's disciplinary action.
Mr. Faeth's lawsuit does not include details of the incident that led to his discipline – and led the Alameda County District Attorney to charge him with battery, trespassing, public intoxication and disturbing the peace.
According to public information in the criminal case that was widely reported by the press, while off duty and not in uniform, Mr. Faeth allegedly attacked two people after a night of heavy drinking at a bar in the Montclair neighborhood in 2015. Allegedly, Mr. Faeth ended up banging on the door of a home in the neighborhood, and when the residents came outside, he kicked one in the stomach and tackled the other. The residents and their neighbors then detained Mr. Faeth until on-duty police arrived and arrested him. Mr. Faeth ultimately pled no contest to public intoxication and disturbing the peace, and was sentenced to one day in jail and placed on probation until March 2021.
Mr. Faeth’s lawsuit (wrongfully) accused the City of concealing evidence in his arbitration, and demanded that the City reinstate him as a police officer and pay him hundreds of thousands of dollars in back pay.
Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch
ruled that the plaintiff failed to state a viable claim against the City and dismissed three of the lawsuit’s four causes of action. Those three causes of action alleged that the City violated Mr. Faeth’s rights under California’s Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act by concealing evidence and failing to give him a fair arbitration hearing. After Judge Roesch dismissed three of his causes of action, Mr. Faeth voluntarily dismissed his fourth cause of action which asked the court to vacate the arbitration award.
As City Attorney, I am committed to holding officers accountable for conduct that violates the Oakland Police Department’s policies, standards of conduct or the law.
Building Industry Association - Bay Area v. City of Oakland
, U.S.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case No. 18-15368
Oakland, like many cities, requires that developers allocate money for public art in their projects. Oakland's law requires that builders spend at least 1% of their total project costs on public art for non-residential developments, and at least .5% for large residential developments, either by including art in the project, or by paying the City a fee to fund public art.
Oakland's ordinance expresses an important and longstanding public policy. American cities have a long history of adopting such laws to encourage murals, sculpture and other art; government bodies have encouraged art in public spaces and public buildings "since virtually the dawn of civilization," as the League of California Cities declared in its
excellent amicus brief
supporting Oakland's defense.
In 2015, the
Building Industry Association – Bay Area
("BIA") filed a lawsuit challenging Oakland's ordinance on constitutional grounds. The BIA, represented by the
Pacific Legal Foundation
, claimed Oakland's ordinance amounts to an illegal "taking" of the developer's property, and in addition, violates the developer's First Amendment right to not participate in "compelled" speech.
On August 21, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled
that the BIA failed to state a legitimate claim, affirming U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria’s previous order granting our motion to dismiss the case.
The Ninth Circuit ruled: "We find that the Ordinance conditions, which merely regulate how developers may use their property rather than forcing developers to cede property rights to the city, do not facially amount to a taking ... [and] given that the ordinance as a whole preserves wide latitude and flexibility for developers, we decline to hold that it necessarily 'compels' speech."
The Pacific Legal Foundation bills itself as a conservative "property rights group" and is known for its frequent legal challenges to housing and environmental laws like the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. The group also actively fights against racial equality and remedying the effects of past and ongoing discrimination by defending California’s Proposition 209, the 1996 ballot measure that amended the California Constitution to prohibit governmental institutions from considering race, sex or ethnicity in public employment, public contracting and public education.
Also in August,
we won a separate lawsuit
filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation challenging Oakland's tenant relocation payment ordinance. The Pacific Legal Foundation has the right to file an appeal.
We will continue to vigorously defend Oakland's progressive policies and laws against their baseless claims.
|
|
City Attorney in the Community
|
On August 24 & 25, tens of thousands of people flocked to Oakland's Chinatown to celebrate the 32nd annual
Chinatown StreetFest
hosted by the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce. I was honored to speak at the opening of ceremonies (photo to the right).
The event featured an annual table tennis tournament with more than 100 players, traditional Chinese lion dancers, music and the delicious smells cooking food wafting through the neighborhood.
The StreetFest is a delightful showcase of Oakland’s spirit, creativity, diversity and soul. A top priority for me as City Attorney is preserving and cherishing this diversity, which is under ever increasing threat in Oakland's ongoing housing crisis. Too many of our residents and our families are being forced out of the neighborhoods they have lived in for generations; they are being displaced to other cities farther and farther away from Oakland, and in many cases cannot afford shelter and become homeless.
At the StreetFest, I spoke about my ongoing mission to prosecute landlords who are taking advantage of this crisis in order to illegally displace or gouge tenants. In one recent case, we sued the owners of an apartment building in Chinatown who were intentionally making conditions unlivable for elderly Chinese residents in an attempt to make way for new tenants paying higher rents. We
won a $1 million settlement
, approximately $800,000 of which went to the 14 tenants who were plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Many thanks and bravo to the Chinatown Chamber, Chamber President
Rick da Silva
, and my friend
Carl Chan
for hosting this great event! I look forward to next year's celebration.
|
|
California Attorney General Becerra files amicus brief supporting Oakland's lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank for racially discriminatory mortgage lending practices against African American and Hispanic borrowers
On September 12, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra
filed an amicus brief
in support of Oakland's lawsuit charging Wells Fargo with racially discriminatory mortgage lending practices against African American and Hispanic borrowers.
The City of Oakland
sued Wells Fargo in September 2015
in response to the bank’s predatory and racially discriminatory lending practices that violate both the federal Fair Housing Act and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Evidence in our lawsuit shows that Wells Fargo, our nation's largest mortgage lender and one of the most powerful companies in the world, systematically provided more expensive and higher risk loans to African American and Hispanic borrowers in Oakland and elsewhere, despite the fact that they qualified for the same more favorable loans that the bank regularly offered to white borrowers.
Last year, a federal judge in San Francisco
denied Wells Fargo's motion to dismiss
the case, finding that Oakland had provided enough evidence to show that the bank’s racially discriminatory lending practices may have resulted in a spike in foreclosures and a massive reduction in property tax revenue.
Wells Fargo knew when it issued predatory loans that many of them would result in foreclosure. In Oakland and across our country, the bank's discriminatory conduct devastated individuals, families and communities, increasing poverty and wiping out or drastically reducing wealth of African American and Hispanic individuals and families while bankers prospered. None of the responsible bankers has been held personally accountable to date.
We applaud Attorney General Becerra for standing with Oakland to hold Wells Fargo accountable and stop these racially discriminatory practices.
Oakland backs challenge to Trump's "public charge" anti-immigration policy
On September 9, Oakland and 28 other local government agencies, collectively representing more than 27 million people,
filed an amicus brief
to support a challenge to the Trump administration's "public charge" rule, which says the government can deny entry or permanent residency to legalimmigrants if authorities believe they might use public assistance programs.
As the San Francisco Chronicle put it: "The rule could drastically alter the landscape of legal immigration to the United States, shifting it away from a system focused on family unification and toward one that prioritizes merit and skill ... Immigration officers will also weigh education, household income and health to determine whether to grant immigrants legal status."
Trump's "rule" that only affluent immigrants are allowed in this country is his latest transparent attempt to deter immigration through naked cruelty and the threat of family separation. We will continue to stand up for our neighbors, coworkers, friends and family members who are the targets of this administration's anti-immigrant crusade. I will keep you posted on this case as it moves forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
