OAKLAND, CA — An Oaklandside News investigation reveals sideshows have increased over the years, and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors passed a law to stop them—but the law violates constitutional rights.
The Oaklandside’s Jose Fermoso explains how sideshows are dangerous and contribute to the deterioration of street infrastructure that costs millions in street maintenance, noting their publication from last year finds there were about 2,300 reports of sideshows at more than 700 locations in Oakland between January 2019, and November 2022.
Additionally, Fermoso describes a recent event that highlights the reality of the dangers sideshows can cause, writing, “Underscoring how bad it’s gotten, last month, following a beautiful Juneteenth celebration near Lake Merritt, a fight during a sideshow led to a mass shooting that wounded 14 people.”
Fermoso adds a law that was passed by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors last year, in response to significant pressure from constituents to take action, makes it a crime to spectate sideshows, which encourages law enforcement to target individuals who participate in and promote them on social media. As a result, these individuals may receive a three-month jail sentence and up to a $1,000 fine.
But Fermoso points out the law is a violation of our constitutional right, charging, “Unfortunately, this law goes too far and criminalizes activities protected by the First Amendment, including reporting practices like observing events in a public space and taking videos or photographs.”
Other groups such as the First Amendment Coalition object to the sideshow law, claiming “it fails to distinguish between people who are purposefully attending a sideshow to promote it and anyone else, including random people who are simply going about their lives, and even those who might be recording a sideshow to report it to the authorities or share information about it through the media.”
Moreover, more opponents are concerned people of color will be further unfairly targeted, as they have been historically, under the pretense of the sideshow law, said Fermoso, adding, “Researchers have found, over and over again, that Black and brown people are more likely than others to be arrested and treated violently during chaotic, mass-arrest events.”
Fermoso explains The Oaklandside has joined the lawsuit directed by the First Amendment Coalition because the publication disagrees with the direction the Board of Supervisors have gone in by passing a law that violates constitutionally protected rights.
Instead, Fermoso states, “The police already have lots of tools to stop sideshows and punish participants and organizers.”
He noted infrastructure changes have been added in an effort to prevent sideshows in California and, according to the locals, they have been helpful. For example, roundabouts, traffic islands, Bott’s Dots, and sidewalk bulb-outs are useful infrastructure tools.
The Oaklandside agrees with Elisa Márquez, member of the county Board of Supervisors who opposed the sideshow law.
Márquez suggested that “police and county do more to prevent sideshows by redesigning roads and increasing patrols to target the actual participants—the people behind the wheels of cars doing stunts.”
Fermoso also points out that reporting on sideshows, a major issue in Oakland, requires firsthand observation and talking to participants. However, Alameda County’s sideshow spectator ban, which doesn’t distinguish between journalists and bystanders, hinders this coverage.
Without reporters, the public might only hear the government’s perspective, missing important views and facts, Fermoso claims.
For example, the police might only know a portion of what happens in the community because not every minor event is reported, yet it still occurs.
“According to the police, there were 55 days over a nearly four-year period in which there was at least one sideshow. But when I interviewed people who live around the intersection, they said sideshows, some quite small and involving just a few cars, but still a nuisance, happened ‘nearly every night,’” Fermoso writes.
Fermoso shares his own concern, as a person of color, noting, “I had an additional concern—I’m a Mexican American in an increasingly gentrifying city. Many people don’t expect me to be a journalist, including law enforcement.”
“The county has claimed that the spectator ban is helping them build legal cases against some sideshow participants and organizers. But they haven’t released any information about these cases. They haven’t said how many times they enforced the spectator ban and how this has made a difference in reducing sideshows,” Fermoso reports.
In the meantime, the reporter adds, “As part of the lawsuit, we will ask for the county to hand over data to examine these claims.”
