Oakland’s next city attorney will have no shortage of high-stakes cases to handle and one of the biggest is the years-long legal battle over a proposed coal export terminal in West Oakland.
The developers who have been fighting the city since 2016 in state and federal courts for that terminal have a clear preference for who replaces City Attorney Barbara Parker next year: retired judge Brenda Harbin-Forte.
Two southern California businessmen backing the proposed terminal recently contributed $24,000 to an independent expenditure committee run by a local lobbyist who has worked for several years representing the coal industry. The committee is buying online ads to boost Harbin-Forte.
The committee SOS Oakland was created last year by Greg McConnell, a lobbyist who represents Insight Terminal Solutions, one of the companies that wants to build the terminal, which would be located near the foot of the Bay Bridge on the former Oakland Army Base. Insight Terminal Solutions, which changed ownership several years ago after falling into bankruptcy, is currently suing Oakland for roughly $1 billion in Kentucky bankruptcy court for damages after the city allegedly breached its lease to allow the construction of a terminal.
The biggest contributor to SOS is Jonathan Brooks, a Los Angeles financier whose hedge fund, JMB Capital, controls Insight Terminal Solutions. Brooks gave the SOS $20,000. Vikas Tandon, an executive with JMB, gave the committee $4,000. Tandon did not respond to an interview request and we were unable to reach Brooks.
Brooks and Tandon’s contributions account for 54% of the $44,254 McConnell has raised through the SOS committee. Most of the committee’s other contributions are smaller amounts from local individuals, including the NAACP Oakland branch President Cynthia Adams ($175), Singer Associates, PR firm run by Sam Singer, who represents the Oakland police union and former OPD Chief LeRonne Armstrong ($1,000), and Robert Jackson, the leader of Acts Full Gospel Church ($300).
McConnell told The Oaklandside that Harbin-Forte is one of several candidates that SOS is recommending to voters to “change the direction of the city.” He said he didn’t ask Harbin-Forte about the issue of the coal terminal but found her general perspective on legal matters refreshing.
“To hear the judge, not on the issues of this case, but generally in her judicial capacity, say that her job was to decide cases, but to decide them fairly and decide them objectively, and look at all the evidence and all of the facts — I think that’s a refreshing perspective,” McConnell said.
The city attorney’s job is very different from a judge’s. As legal counsel to the city of Oakland, the city attorney is tasked with advising the City Council, Mayor, and other officials about legal issues confronting the city and following the direction of the city’s leaders in major cases. Under the City Charter, the city attorney cannot settle or agree to dismiss any lawsuits or legal matters — like a judge would — unless they have the permission of the City Council. Since 2016, the city attorney’s office has worked with the council and mayor to oppose the development of the West Oakland coal terminal on the grounds that it would cause pollution and harm Oakland residents and workers.
Independent expenditure committees like SOS Oakland aren’t allowed to coordinate their activities with candidates.
Asked about the ads, Harbin-Forte said, “I have a broad base of supporters, some of whom don’t want to see coal in Oakland. They support me because they know I will approach the coal litigation and all other cases against the city in a more ethical, fair, and intellectually superior manner than my opponent Ryan Richardson.”
Environmental groups say they’re alarmed to see coal money in Oakland’s election — again
No Coal in Oakland, an advocacy organization opposed to the efforts to ship coal through the city, interviewed both the candidates running for city attorney to gauge where they stand on the coal issue. The group also asked them to sign a pledge to not take money from coal interests.
Ryan Richardson, who is currently the chief assistant city attorney, told the group he would follow whatever directive the City Council and city administration gave him regarding the coal lawsuits. Richardson said he would not solicit or accept support from any of the individuals or companies trying to build a coal terminal.
Harbin-Forte refused to sign the group’s pledge. In a blog post summarizing their interview, the No Coal activists wrote that Harbin-Forte also made several comments that they thought indicated she won’t fight against coal. As an example, Ted Franklin, a member of No Coal, told The Oaklandside that Harbin-Forte emphasized her fairness and how she is open to listening to both sides.
“That sounds like a judge’s perspective, but of course, in this case, she’s obviously not setting herself up to be a judge,” Franklin said. “She’s going to have to make decisions about what resources to put into fighting the coal interests, which the city of Oakland has decided are not in the city’s best interests.”
In an October 1 blog post, No Coal wrote that Harbin-Forte’s “unwillingness to refuse campaign contributions from coal terminal interests as well as her uncritical repetition of coal lobbyist McConnell’s claim that the city sabotaged the settlement talks of 2022 raise serious concerns about how well she would represent the best interests of Oakland and Oaklanders if she is elected City Attorney.”
Speaking to The Oaklandside, McConnell said he was impressed by Harbin-Forte’s legal experience as a judge and attorney and felt like she would provide sound legal advice to city officials. He also believes that in contrast to the current city attorney, Barbara Parker, Harbin-Forte will view the city as her client — not the people of Oakland.
“Judge Brenda’s perspective of the role of the city attorney was crystal clear: the city attorney advises the city, the decision-makers in the city, which happens to be the city council — that’s what the city charter says,” McConnell said. “That is not then the perspective that the current administration of the city attorney’s office has.”
The Oaklandside reached out to Barbara Parker for a response. We’ll update the story if we hear from her.
Coal interests spent heavily in 2022 trying to elect a mayor who might take a more favorable approach to their project. Insight Terminal Solutions’ Jonathan Brooks put $550,000 into a committee run by McConnell to support former City Councilmember Ignacio De La Fuente’s campaign. And Tagami’s company, Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal, which owns the ground lease for the land where the terminal would be built, put up another $50,000 into a different committee that also paid for ads backing De La Fuente. De La Fuente lost but picked up enough votes to come in third place.
Harbin-Forte says anti-coal activists have mischaracterized her statements
Harbin-Forte declined an interview but told The Oaklandside in an email that No Coal’s blog post about her is “inaccurate and misleading in several respects.” She demanded that the group release the full unedited Zoom video of her interview with them. Harbin-Forte also posted a copy of the email response she sent The Oaklandside on X.
“The message I sought to convey to the No Coal group was that I would never meet with the coal interests and make commitments to that side leaving the no-coal contingent out of the discussion, and so I would not make commitments to them without considering both sides of the issues,” Harbin-Forte wrote. “I stressed that I could not be bought in any event, and donations from the coal interests or from the no-coal interests will not sway my actions.”
Harbin-Forte said she told the activists she didn’t know enough about the case and that she wanted to study the contract at the source of the dispute and the court rulings to determine the best path forward, “including whether it might be time to look at trying to settle the litigation if it appeared in the best interests of the city to do so.”
No Coal’s blog post also raised concerns about Harbin-Forte’s interest in reducing the city’s reliance on outside law firms. The office spent $650,000 to pay for additional attorneys in fiscal year 2022-2023 to help with the cases, according to the most recent annual report from the city attorney. No Coal argued that it’s imperative Oakland pay for specialized outside attorneys who can match the legal talent hired by the developers.
Harbin-Forte responded that Oakland may have already spent millions of dollars on outside counsel, and the city may end up being on the hook for significant legal fees or damages.
“Given Oakland’s fiscal crisis, it would have been irresponsible for me to promise that I would not explore ways to settle the case on terms that would satisfy the important interests of all parties,” Harbin-Forte said.
Harbin-Forte said her statement about the city rejecting a settlement offer was based on press reports and did not come from McConnell.
Ryan Richardson said he agreed to sign No Coal’s pledge because he felt it was important to not create the appearance that anyone was trying to influence him.
“It’s important that the public understand that it’s really the City Council that gets to decide whether the city continues to pursue its appeal or whether the city explores a settlement or not,” Richardson told The Oaklandside, adding that the city attorney’s role is to carry out the council’s will “wholeheartedly.”
