Dellums Taskforce Recommendations for
Violence Prevention
The Dellums Taskforce came into being by initiative of the Honorable Ron
Dellums prior to his inaugeration as Oakland’s Mayor early in January, 2007.
Many citizens were mobilized to render advise on a very wide range of public
policy problems, among them, prevention of violence.
This link displays one of the recommendations that came out of a 17-member
subcommittee of the taskforce--charged to recommend violence prevention measures
available to the City of Oakland. The subcommittee approved this and all of its
recommendations by unanimous vote.
The title of this recommendation is “Criminal Revenues: The Key to
Controlling Gangs, Violence, and the Criminalization of Youth.” The
rational for the recommendtation is as follows:
It is now predicted that one out of three Black American males
born today will do prison time. It is not written in the stars. We can change
the specific social dynamics behind this threatened catastrophe by: 1) measures
to reduce crime, and 2) altering certain police procedures. Michael Massing’s
book “The Fix” (University of California Press, 2000) provides three relevant
case histories. Donald Smart’s article “Drug Treatment: A Systemic Crime
Control” explains the social dynamics. It is included in the “Supporting
Information.”
Youth violence and the criminalization of youth are correlates
of adult crime. Control the latter and you control the former.
Gangs fatten on criminal enterprises. The most lucrative of
these are 1) trafficking in illegal drugs, 2) prostitution, and 3) property
theft and sale of stolen property. All three flourish on addiction. Most
prostitutes are held in bondage by addiction. Criminal gangs profiteer on both
their sexual exploitation and their compulsive drug purchases. Similarly, most
thieves work under the compulsion of addiction. They too produce double revenues
for their gang bosses--both as drug customers and as thieves producing inventory
for gangster fences of stolen goods.
Addicts consume 80% of illegal drugs. If we could get all
addicts into treatment, we would deprive gangsters of 80% of their drug sales
revenues. Many prostitutes, liberated from their addictions, would more easily
escape from their gangster pimps and madams, further curtailing revenues that
sustain gangs. Many thieves, freed of the compulsion to earn the price of a fix,
would stop thieving. That would reduce gangster earnings from sale of stolen
goods. Such radical reductions of gangster revenues would force radical
reduction in gang participation and dispel the “get rich quick” illusion that
suckers youngsters into gang participation.
The recommendation is:
that the City of Oakland initiate a systemic crime-reduction program,
including:
1) A project to bring as many addicts as possible into treatment.
For this purpose: more treatment facilities are necessary to make treatment
available “on demand,” rather than delayed by long waiting lists. A central
patient intake facility should be created for initial case evaluation, cessation
counseling, and referral to treatment facilities with treatment modalities
appropriate to patients’ needs. The same central facility should do case follow
up, so that, in the event of relapse, recovering addicts are quickly given
appropriate assistance. To perform its functions properly the central intake
facility should keep current on all key aspects of all treatment
providers.
2) Amending police procedures to avoid unnecessary criminalizing
of young people for petty drug offenses (as describe in the supporting
article).
3) Amending police procedures to avoid criminalization of
prostitutes and to assist their escape from prostitution. Some alteration of
procedures in existing welfare agencies may also be helpful.
The financing plan for the recommended program is as follows:
The first item in the systemic crime reduction program should be conducted as
a demonstration project with funding by a philanthropist or philanthropic
organization. The theory here is that such funders may be attracted to this
project as an opportunity to demonstrate (for the benefit of other crime-ridden
cities) the effectiveness of drug treatment in controlling gangsterism,
violence, drug trafficking, prostitution, property theft, trafficking in stolen
goods, and the criminalization of youth, as well as a host of other health and
social pathologies.
Initial survey and planning work appears to be necessary to: document “as is”
conditions, estimate Project needs, prepare the Project budget, conduct grant
research, manage grantor relations, and manage public relations. The person who
does this preparatory work should also conduct the demonstration project. An
appropriate salary would have to be provided, perhaps for as long as a year and
a half, seemingly from City funds.
No additional funding appears necessary to implement the second and third
elements of the recommended program.
Suplimental information supporting the recomendation follows.
Drug Treatment: A Systemic Crime Control
by Donald C. Smart
A recent report of the Alameda County Death Reporting System for 2002-2004,
is called “VIOLENCE IN OAKLAND: A Public Health Crisis.” The report provides
statistical proof that the extraordinarily high homicide rate in Oakland is not
just a youth problem. It shows that, for every age group, the homicide rate is
extraordinarily high. The unmistakable inference to be drawn is that the high
level of violence among children and youth is caused by the fact that
extraordinarily large numbers of young people are growing up in contact with,
and under the influence of adult criminals. Adult criminals recruit children
into minor roles supporting adult criminal activities--such roles as lookouts
and runners for drug peddling, prostitution, car theft, break-ins, and
robberies. In these roles, youngsters are initiated in the skills and values of
criminals and are pointed on course to spend the remainder of their lives in
crime, violence, jail, and probation.
Clearly, measures directly targeted on turning young people away from the
criminal course are necessary. But such measures will have limited success
unless and until new, more effective measures are introduced to get adults to
quit crime and quit seducing young people into crime. This writing explains how
this can be done, and it proposes measures to do it. The proposed measures will
work because they go to the heart of the economic motive to crime: Adults are in
crime to make money. Unfortunately, crime pays - at the victim’s expense.
Enactment of the measures recommended here will make crime pay a lot less. When
it is harder to make a living in crime, fewer individuals will choose to
participate in it. Then, fewer adult criminals will be seducing youngsters into
crime.
Most local criminals are engaged in three moneymaking opportunity
areas: 1) drug trafficking 2) prostitution, 3) theft and trafficking in stolen
goods. Criminal enterprises in these opportunity areas create no new wealth for
Oakland’s prosperity: They only redistribute existing wealth--to the benefit of
the criminals and the injury of all others. Most criminals who make their living
in these opportunity areas are organized in gangs. According to the “Violence in
Oakland” study, Oakland Police believe that 2/3 of all homicides are related in
one way or another to gang involvement in the drug trade (page 4 of 28).
Criminal gangs are inherently violent. Violence is THE way disputes are
settled when, as is the case of illegal business, there is no recourse to law,
law enforcement and courts for settlement of business disputes. Some violence
follows the arrest or assassination of gang bosses when underlings compete to
take over gang leadership. Some violence results when business deals go sour, or
when one gang steals property from another, or when gangs compete for control of
prostitutes or drug-market turf. Even violence that is not directly related to a
specific gang activity is often an expression of gangster culture.
The measures described below are effective in reducing all such violence
because these measures attack gangsterism itself. They attack gangsterism by
shutting off revenues from drug trafficking, prostitution, and theft and
trafficking in stolen goods--the moneymaking activities that gangs thrive
on.
One final introductory thought: The Sentencing Project
(www.sentencingproject.org), is a nonprofit research organization that keeps
track of unintended consequences of present-day criminal justice measures. One
of their recent predictions is that, if our society continues on its present
course, one of every three black children born today will serve prison time. The
recommendations set forth in this report are made with the devout hope and
intention that this awful future will be avoided. No stone should be left
unturned to redirect criminal-justice policy to avoid this terrible consequence
of today’s approach to control of crime.
In the remainder of this report, four principal recommendations are
presented. They are set out in bolded type. Recommendations
that are subordinate to the three principal recommendations are also
bolded. Additional text provides background information
explaining why the recommended measures will work to control crime and criminal
violence. Such explanatory information is set out in plain text.
• • • • •
First Recommendation: Make Drug Treatment and Cessation Counseling
Readily Available on Demand
It may come as a surprise that this is the single most effective measure to
cut criminal revenues, cut gang participation, and to cut gang violence. The
reason drug treatment is so effective is that an estimated 80 % of illegal drugs
is consumed by addicts. It follows that, if all local addicts were in treatment
and recovery, 80% of the drug sales revenues that sustain local gangs would be
cut off.
Making drug treatment available on demand would also dramatically reduce
property theft, trafficking in stolen goods, and gang revenues from these
activities. This is so because a large percentage of property thefts are
committed by addicts. Many addicts are virtually compelled into thievery by the
need to earn money to support their addictions--a cost that can run between
$10,000 and $20,000 per year. Helping thieves break their addictions is a
necessary first step in getting them out of crime and into legal employment.
Without thieves to bring them stolen goods, gangsters engaged in the sale of
stolen goods (so called “fences”) will be forced out of business as their
inventories shrink, and their sales revenues decline.
Both drug use and the seduction of new drug users will decline in consequence
of making drug treatment readily available on demand. Why? Because drug peddlers
know that their earnings from selling the illegal drugs depend on both 1) the
amount of profit realized in each sale, and 2) how often they can make a sale.
It takes time and effort to seduce a person to drug use, and more time and
effort to develop a casual user into a profitable addict. When addicts can
quickly go into treatment, drug peddlers won’t be able to make enough sales to
justify the increased sales effort. Many peddlers will abandon the business, and
drugs will be much less available than now.
Now, treatment and recovery
resources are chronically in short supply. In consequence, individuals seeking
professional aid (including individuals eligible for diversion to treatment
under Proposition 36) are routinely confronted by long waiting lists. Nor is
professional advice available (to those seeking treatment) as to which
therapeutic regimen, administered by which institution, is likely to fit the
drug abuser’s specific needs best. While we need to increase the number of
treatment slots, we also need to provide central case evaluation, case
management and counseling services for drug users seeking treatment, during
their treatment and after. Post treatment case management is important
because occasional recidivism is a common feature of addition. When recidivists
gets prompt attention, falling off the wagon can be a learning experience,
increasing their competence to cope with their addiction. Without post recovery
help, though, recidivism can lead to deepening personal catastrophe.
Without the changes proposed above, many thieves will continue in addiction
and thievery, supplying their fences as slaves of their chemical
dependence--enriching gang bosses and sustaining gangsterism.
• • • • •
Second Recommendation: Initiate Programs to Rescue Individuals from
Prostitution
A little history explains the power of this measure to control gangsterism
and gang violence. Ever since the 1930’s, when Lucky Luciano introduced the
Mafia to heroin as a device for controlling prostitutes, the addictive drugs
have been used in American cities for that purpose. Addiction is a barrier to
employability in other occupations, and so it mercilessly shackles prostitutes
to their degrading trade. At the same time, addiction motivates prostitutes to
their work: They, like the property thieves mentioned above, have to work to
support a habit that may costs $10, 000 to $20,000 per year. So, addicted
prostitutes are doubly exploited as “money cows” for the crime syndicates,
enriching them both as drug consumers and as prostitutes.
Because a large percentage of addicts are, as described above, trapped in
prostitution, and because criminal gangs derive double revenues from those
addicted prostitutes, society benefits in three ways from rescuing women from
prostitution: first, drug use and the associated health and social pathologies
are reduced; second, prostitution and its associated health and social
pathologies are reduced; and third, the revenues that sustain local gangs and
gang violence are reduced.
Unfortunately, examination of present practices in regard to control of
prostitution is likely to show both that: 1) substantial public costs are being
incurred for police work, and 2) the employed measures are having little, if any
effect on the institution of drug-enforced prostitution and the cash flow it
generates for support of gangs and gang violence. Making drug treatment readily
available to prostitutes is an essential first step toward enabling prostitutes
to escape from their enslavement to criminal gangsters. Strengthening other
social services for prostitutes would further aid their escape.
Drug treatment and cessation counseling are not expensive. Research by RAND
Corporation has shown that savings in criminal justice costs more than make up
for increased expenditures for public health measures of drug control.
Similarly, increased expenditures for social services to prostitutes will prove
less costly than police measures for control of prostitution and more effective
in helping prostitutes escape from their enslavement by criminal gangs. As they
escape, the revenues prostitutes now produce for the support of gangs and gang
violence will disappear.
• • • • •
Third Recommendation: Improve the Policing of Street Drug
Trafficking
Presently employed police measures for control of street drug trafficking are
not producing satisfactory results: The evidence is: 1) Complaints abound that,
when street drug-trafficking is reported, police response-time is slow; 2) The
time between a youngster’s first introduction to drug sales activities and his
first arrest for involvement in the drug traffic is far too long.
The objective should not be simply to arrest and convict young drug
criminals. Following that mistaken objective, our criminal justice system has
filled our prisons with mostly nonviolent petty drug users and low-level
traffickers, all serving long terms. This has given our country the world’s
highest incarceration rate, and, as a further consequence, all social
pathologies have proliferated.
Instead, the objective of local police work should be to break up
drug gangs and discourage participation in gangs while, at the same time,
avoiding long-term incarceration of low-level gang participants. The
proper question, is “how can first-arrests be made earlier in a participant’s
gang activity and more of a learning and behavior-altering experience? Here are
a few suggestions:
First, every scene of street drug-trafficking should be
photographed for identification of involved individuals and their roles. This
should be followed immediately by the arrest of all traffickers, including
children used as lookouts. Low-level arrestees should then be detained the
maximum time allowed without bringing charges. During that time, young arrestees
should have prison visits to learn the sorry experiences of individuals
convicted of trafficking. All young arrestees should be counseled against drug
use, preferably by recovered addicts. They should be warned of the life-ruining
effects of addiction. Girls should be warned of the danger of entrapment in drug
use and prostitution. All drug using arrestees should be offered drug treatment
and cessation counseling.
Interrogation and counseling should take place, both by police and
social workers assigned to suppression of gang participation. Police
interrogation of young arrestees should focus on discovery of higher-level gang
leaders--to gather testimony and evidence necessary to indictments and
convictions. Social workers should attempt to discover primary and secondary
associates of the young arrestees, and where appropriate, discovered individuals
should be recruited to help correct the behavior of the arrestees. All of these
things should happen in quick succession.
To reduce opportunity for drug
criminals to corrupt police and social workers assigned to drug control and gang
suppression, staff assignments should be rotated frequently.
For Oakland, the power of the measures recommended above to affect
change would be greatly enhanced if they could be undertaken jointly with other
Bay Area cities.
• • • • •
Fourth Recommendation: Implementation and Funding
Elsewhere in the world, it is well-established truth that drug treatment on
demand can reduce all health and social pathologies associated with drug use and
trafficking. Not less compelling evidence, from American experience, is set out
in Michael Massing’s book. “The Fix” (University of California Press, 2000).
Tragically, in recent years, we in America have made little use of this low-cost
remedy for urban woes--and our health and social pathologies have
proliferated.
To refocus attention on the powers of this underused remedy, our country
needs a dramatic demonstration project. The great foundations and individual
humanitarian donors are attracted to projects that demonstrate the effectiveness
of low cost, innovative measures. They might value a project of the sort
suggested above precisely for the lessons other troubled cities might learn from
it.
For at least three reasons, Oakland is an ideal place for such a
demonstration project. First, a spectacular turnaround in a city with Oakland’s
“before” conditions would impress anyone. Second, we have a citizenry yearning
for a solution for its crime problem. Third, we have an iconic new mayor, free
of debt to anyone, especially the criminal element. That combination of
circumstances might win donor support for a demonstration project here.
Research and planning should be undertaken immediately to
assemble information needed to contract for grant support for a demonstration
project in Oakland. At the same time, exploratory conversations with
prospective donors should be initiated at the mayoral level.
END
Addendum
Proper understanding of relevant facts is necessary to public support for
sound public policy. With that thought in mind, myths sometimes met in the
marketplace of ideas are identified below, and arguments that may be useful in
dispelling them are offered.
First, myths about addiction: Addiction is NOT the result of moral fault or
lack of character. Addicts do NOT love their drugs and, under proper
circumstances, they do NOT reject treatment. Criminals who profiteer on the
misery of addicts carefully promote myths to the contrary. It helps them control
their most profitable customers.
In fact, the scientific evidence is that
addiction has nothing to do with either moral or intellectual defect. In fact,
addicts hate their addictions, but they also tend to believe they are hooked for
life.
In fact, pharmacologists, psychologists, and psychiatrists define drug
addiction as a treatable disease with occasional relapse a common symptom. Many
common diseases fit that definition. We don’t deny treatment to victims of those
diseases. There is no moral basis for denying treatment to addicts.
Myth also alleges economic benefits from crime. In fact, local society gets
none. As for prostitution and property theft, no new wealth is created. Those
crimes simply redistribute existing wealth--to the benefit of criminals and the
expense of their victims. The economic effect of drug trafficking is worse:
Local drug sales are partially redistributive, in that a portion of local drug
sales rewards local traffickers, pushers, and bribe takers, again at the expense
of their local victims. Local drug sales also suck money out of the community.
To continue supplying their victims, the inventory must be replenished. That
benefits distant drug farmers, processors and traffickers who bring drugs to
Oakland. Of course, the economic benefit that local drug criminals get from
local drug sales is more than offset by the cost to our community in health and
social pathologies generated by local drug sales. Bottom line? All crime costs
the community: Only criminals benefit.
It is sometimes argued that criminal activities by a clique of Black drug
traffickers should be tolerated as necessary to capital accumulation for further
enlargement of the Black capitalist class. Whatever the benefits of a larger
Black capitalist class might be, they are not worth the costs: 1) the
prostitution of human beings, 2) the spreading of crippling addictions, 3) high
incidence of crimes against persons and property, and 4) the mass
criminalization and incarceration of youth. “Get Rich Quick” is precisely the
false bait that lures youngsters into crime. If we want our kids to grow up and
get rich, then we want them in school, learning legitimate skills they can use
to improve their lives and their world.
If we want our Oakland to attract capital investment and new, legitimate job
opportunities for our youngsters, we must work to make Oakland a good and safe
place to invest and be in business--a place intolerant of crime--with an
effective program to discourage it
• • • • •
Federal Programs to Support Drug Prevention Programs of Other
Entities
Drug Abuse Prevention
Community Partnership Demonstration Grant
This program provides funding to communities for the purpose of reducing the
misuse of alcohol tobacco and other drugs (ATOD) through the building of
coalitions of multiple agencies and organizations at the local level.
Dave Robbins
Division of Community Prevention and Training
Center for
Substance Abuse Prevention
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration
Health Service
Rockwall Building II
5600 Fishers
Lane
Rockville, MD 20857
(301) 443-0369
Cooperative Agreements for Drug Abuse Treatment Improvement Projects
in Target Cities
This program's objective is to improve the quality and effectiveness of drug
treatment services in to develop drug treatment systems providing high quality,
patient-oriented, coordinated, and treatment which should be replicated by other
cities.
Ms. Mary Louise Anderson
Public Health Advisor
Systems Improvement
Branch
Center Substance Abuse Treatment
Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
Public Health Service, Suite 740
Rockwall
Building II
Rockville, MD 20857
(301) 443-8802
Drug-Free Schools and Communities--National Programs
This program is designed to assist in drug and alcohol abuse education and
prevention activities as authorized by the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act
of 1986. Projects funded under this drug and alcohol abuse education and
prevention, curriculum development, and model demonstration activities that
address a national concern to reduce the use of drugs throughout the nation.
Seledia Shepherd and Gail Beaumont
Division of Drug-Free Schools and
Communities
Department of Education
600 Independence Avenue,
SW
Washington, DC 20202-6439
(202) 260-2844
Gang-Free Schools and Communities; Community-Based Gang
Intervention
The primary objective of this program is to prevent and reduce the
participation of juveniles in the activities of gangs that commit crimes.
Emily Martin, Division Director
Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention
Office of Justice Programs of
Justice
Washington, DC 20531
(202) 616-3633
Interventions with Drug Abusing Parents--Drug Courts
The Drug Courts Program Office funds adult and juvenile drug courts. Adult
drug courts often include parents whose substance abuse affects their children
in a variety of ways. Drug court treatment for adults and juveniles may include
family members. The drug court program for adults may produce drug free babies
and more responsible parents for infants and other children of the family.
Marilyn Roberts
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Participation
Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20531
(202)
616-9055
Model Comprehensive Drug Abuse Treatment Programs for Critical
Populations
This program is designed to enhance existing drug
abuse treatment programs for specific populations called critical populations;
adolescents, juvenile justice and residents of public, and homeless women and
children, racial/ ethnic minorities, and individuals living in rural areas with
the ultimate goal of improving treatment for these populations.
Thomas Edwards
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration
Rockwall II Building, Suite
618
5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857
(301)
443-6533
Public Information on Drug Abuse--Information
This program provides leadership, coordination, and facilitation for the
involvement of law enforcement in drug prevention and education programs.
Technical assistance publications and information are provided to law
enforcement agencies and the general public to assist in drug abuse prevention
programs through DEA field offices. DEA is not a granting agency and does not
fund outside programs.
Linell Broecker
Congressional and Public Affairs Staff
Drug
Enforcement Administration, Demand Reduction Section
Washington, DC
20537
(202) 307-7936
Safe and Drug-Free Schools--State Grants
This program is intended to establish state and local programs of alcohol and
drug abuse education and prevention coordinated with related community efforts
and resources. Allocations are made to states and territories
Debbie Rudy
Safe and Drug Free Schools Program
Office of Elementary
and Secondary Education
U.S. Department of Education
Room 604, Portals
Building
600 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202-6123
(202)
260-3954
Weed and Seed/Safe Havens
Operation Weed and Seed is a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to
combating violent crime, drug use, and gang activity in high crime
neighborhoods. The goal is to identify drug activity in high crime neighborhoods
and then to ‘seed’ the sites with a wide range of crime and drug prevention
programs, human service resources, and neighborhood restoration activities to
prevent crime from reoccurring. The strategy emphasizes the importance of a
coordinated approach, bringing together federal, state, and local government,
the community, and the private sector to form a partnership to create a safe,
drug-free environment.
Robert M. Samuels
Assistant Director
Executive Office for Weed and
Seed
633 Indiana Avenue, NW, Room 304
Washington, DC 20531
(202)
616-1152