Good morning and welcome to this special concurrent meeting of the Oakland City Council
Before I call roll I will go over speaker card instructions if you would like to speak on any agenda any
agenda item on this agenda
Please fill out a speaker's card before the item is called or hour and a half from the start of this meeting
This meeting was called at 9 a.m.
So that would be 10 30 m this morning
You can fill out a speaker's card by going to the table at the front where the clerk representative is seated
If you're looking to fill out a card online that time has passed as they were due 24 hours from the start of this meeting
Enroll for this meeting our council members Brown
Council member five
council member Gallo
council member Houston
council member Unger
council member Wong
And council member Rama Chandra who will be sharing this meeting?
showing five members present and three members excused
Your first item on this agenda is item three. I'm sorry did you have any
announcements today? No happy election day after this meeting if you haven't
voted yet that is an option to you and looking forward to getting through some
important items today thank you. And starting with item three on special
orders of the day item 3.1 receive an information report on Cal
transmission 980 and interstate 580 access studies in the city of Oakland
and I'm showing no speakers on this item. Is anyone from the city
administration prepared to present on this? And correction we do have one
speaker on this item. To the city administrator should we wait for a
speaker or we can come back to this okay then in the next item we'll change the
order and come back to this thank you. Noting we will come back to item 3.1
going to item 4 modifications to the agenda for seizure items. Thank you to
the administration I believe there's a change that you all would like to make.
Through the chair yes that we would request that the item be pulled for
further consideration of Betty at this time. Which which item? Item number 27th
Street. Item number eight 27th Street, complete street construction award
contract. Thank you and I believe we need a full vote of Council to officially
pull this off. I will make the motion and to the administration is this to pull it
off and put it on the pending list with no date specific or move it to a future
council meeting through the share we request we move to a future council
meeting likely the next meeting that you all have scheduled so through the
chair the next City Council meeting would be December 2nd the second so the
vote would be to pull the item and then there'd also be a scheduling motion for
the full council would be scheduling this item to the December 2nd meet on
motion to remove item eight on
this agenda and schedule to
December second I will read
item eight item eight is. The
twenty seven street complete
streets construction contract
award. It was adopted
resolution awarding a
construction contract to
redrick construction. For the
twenty seven street complete
streets construction contract
award. It was adopted
resolution awarding a
construction contract to
redrick construction. For the
twenty seven street complete
the city of downtown. And the
city of downtown. And the city of
downtown. For the 27th Street
complete streets project project
number 1003978. The lowest
responsive responsible and
responsive bitter and of course,
the project plans.
Specifications and state
requirements. And what
contractors bid in the amount of
10 million 418,000 dollars. I'm
sorry, 18,573 dollars and 50
councilmember brown to withdraw this item reschedule it to December 2nd and
Madame clerk on consent I'm sorry the body will still hear the speakers when
we get yes I was gonna say that yes it just was with regular practice as this
item was removed in this meeting we will still hear speakers on that item
councilmember Brown aye councilmember five councilmember Gallo councilmember
is excused councilmember Unger. Can we get some clarification on why this is
being pulled? Through the chair to councilmember Unger we have a
representative from the Department of Transportation here that can speak to
that particular request. Josh Rowan, Director of Department of
Transportation. Through the chair there was an inappropriate effort to bid
We did protest through committee last week.
We have addressed this with the law department.
Right now we're asking for time so that we can address this request properly and bring
it back.
So there's no rush on this item.
We need to thoroughly address the items that were put before us.
Councilmember Fyfe.
Thank you.
I would like to change my vote.
I was concerned about not hearing the totality of information on this item.
was a lot of confusion surrounding it understanding the explanation that we
were given I would like to change my vote through the chair to the city
attorney can I restart the vote over in its entirety yes the vote was not
complete so you can recall the motion so there was a motion by councilmember
Rama Chandra and second by councilmember Brown to withdraw item 8 from
this is the agenda and reschedule it to December
second.
Councilmember Brown.
Aye.
Council.
Aye.
Aye.
Councilmember Gallo.
Aye.
Councilmember Unger.
Aye.
Councilmember Wong.
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandra.
Aye.
Motion passes with a vote of six ayes.
I'll say to the clerk, since item 3.1 was passed over,
can we hear that item at the end of the non-consent calendar?
Under item four, thank you.
To the city administrator, is that sufficient time
to hear that item?
Okay, thank you.
And I believe that dispenses with item four.
There were two modifications.
One to pull item nine, to reschedule to a future meeting
and the second was to hear item 3.1
after the non-consent calendar
and that dispenses with it.
So thank you.
With that, we'll go to item five, which is the consent calendar, starting with item 5.1,
a resolution regarding the declaration of a local emergency due to the AIDS epidemic,
item 5.2, a resolution declaring a medical cannabis health emergency, item 5.3, a resolution
declaring a local emergency on homelessness, item 5.4, a resolution regarding the Rockridge
bid annual report and intention to levy fiscal year 26 through 27.
Item 5.5, a resolution for Montclair bid and report in
intention to levy for fiscal years, 26 through 27.
Item 5.6, a resolution for a lease of airport warehouse
for urban search and rescue program.
Item 5.7, a resolution in support of California
assembly bill, AB1243.
Item 5.8, a resolution for OPD 2025 DNA backlog
reduction program.
$5.9 a resolution regarding IMICS technology professional services contract
And a five point ten a resolution regarding the corridor safety ambassador grants
out of five point eleven a resolution proclaiming
October's domestic violence awareness month and a five point twelve a resolution for OPD Concord police associations fire range agreement
and a five point thirteen
appointments to the
I'm sorry, the Privacy Commission. Item 5.14 includes multiple pieces of legislation regarding the purchase of asphalt paving materials for in-house paving and sidewalk operations.
Item 5.15, a resolution to approve old Oakland Fire Department Fire Staff Premium Side Letter Agreements to the IAFF, Local 55, MOU.
5.16 information report on equal access to services ordinance annual compliance report
I don't 5.17 a resolution for the 42nd and high Street
I-880 access improvements
I don't 5.18 a resolution to establish the right-of-way repair fund
And if I point 19 a resolution extending no parking restriction at Lake sort, excuse me, Lakeshore cul-de-sac
item 5.20 a
resolution for a feasibility study for a potential San Antonio Bart station
Item five point twenty one includes multiple pieces of legislation regarding the 2025
California Department of Housing and Community Development home key resolutions
item five point twenty-two a
resolution
Regarding Bonterra tech LLC contract amendment
item five point twenty-three a
resolution for
amendment to PSA with the Urban Institute for Grant evaluation services, item 5.24 is an ordinance
for amendments to the city's conflicts of interest code if approved it will be approved for
introduction, item 5.25 a resolution for community champions game time grant 2025 for San Antonio
Item 5.26 a resolution for OPD enterprise rental car contract amendment, item 5.27 is
a settlement agreement for George Seguer versus the city of Oakland and your final consent
calendar item is a resolution for a claim of Saba Grocers Initiative and you do have
multiple speakers on this item.
Thank you.
Can we go first to the public speakers?
So, noting the arrival of Council Member Houston at 9-12.
Going to the consent calendar speakers.
This is for item, all of the item fives.
If your name is called, please approach the podium in any order.
Please state your name for the record before beginning.
If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.
Starting with Miss Asada Ola Bala, you have multiple items on consent.
Dave Kurtz, Barbara Pine are fine, Emily Wheeler, Sarah Rowley, Derek Barnes, Jennifer Finlay,
Stephanie Warren, Quinn Edie, Pastor Joe Smith, Ali Obad, Zoe Janek, or Jonak, sorry if I
said that incorrectly, Sarah Rowley, oops, I just got multiple cards in here, Mr. Hazard,
We're going to go ahead and
started with item 5.7.
Oh, oh, no, you clock up yet.
No, it'll sleep.
I don't know why it's not showing there, but I can see it.
I don't know how to pace myself, baby.
OK, we're working out.
I'll do it. Go ahead. Ready? All right. Five-point-seven appointment to the Privacy
Commission of Bryant White. If you look at his resume, he has expertise in technology.
He has no reference to how he has expertise in handling the police officers' non-association
with ICE or the Department of Justice.
Item, the next item is 5.16, the equal access
to service ordinance.
Every year, this annual report
to the Finance Committee never gives any financial cost
related to translation and interpretation documents
and so forth.
It's supposed to be a financial report,
but you do not report on how much money
is spent on the equal access to service ordinance.
The other item is 5.21, a need to report on what's going on with the Oakland Housing Authority.
You are responsible for public housing and you're responsible for Section 8.
You never hear from the Oakland Housing Authority what's going on and you need to have a report
out your you were you appoint members to the the board but you never have a
report the last thing is that that besides these other ones the city grant
for $500,000 with 5.28 you never executed the grant and the matching funds
okay let's go to 12 of the 28 consent items did not go to committee that means
you approving them and you have no dialogue or interaction with staff, anything publicly
about these items.
So information report on the vision for 980 and 580.
Now you approving this and then you're going to give the report after you approve it.
You can't do that.
You need to pull that item and then vote on it after you have the report.
report on Montclair Business Improvement. You've never seen it. Lease of warehouse for
the airport over $355,000. So you're going to rubber stamp that. For six years, OPD Backlog
reduction for DNA. That's $344,000. You're going to rubber stamp that. You never looked
into if it's done right. OPD technology, $300,000. You never went to committee on that. You're
going to rubber stamp it. Carter Safety Ambassador Grant, $2 million, who's getting the grant?
Never discussed that you're going to rubber stamp that. OPD agreement for $250,000, you're
not identifying the source of funding in that one. Asphalt paving materials, $4 million.
This one is the one you're gonna have the wave thank you miss all of all your time is up
Good morning. My name is Barbara Ryan our
hine and I'm here on behalf of
1,000 grandmothers for future generations along with a broad coalition of a lot of other
Organizations that are supporting item 5.7 on a consent calendar
We're deeply grateful to City Council members Zach Unger and Carol Fife
for bringing this forward and we very much hope it passes.
Oakland has, it creates a super fund which eight major oil companies pay into
to pay part of the cost of all the pollution caused
during the decades of their lying about the seriousness of the climate crisis.
17 other cities in California have already approved similar resolutions supporting it comes before the California
legislature in January and we definitely need
To know that there's a great deal of Oakland support. If I'm from Zack Unger's district every time I talk to someone
Good morning. My name is Zoe John ik. I am here representing myself as a lifelong Oakland or third-generation Oakland er and
And on behalf of 350 Bay Area Action,
which is a climate justice group here in the Bay Area,
and our youth mobilizing team,
which is in strong support of item 5.7
on the consent calendar,
the resolution in support of the
Polluter's Pay Climate Superfund.
This is a wonderful measure to take,
and thank you Council Members Fife and Unger,
and thank you to the rest of the city council
for hopefully supporting this resolution,
as it will support an important bill
that will make a huge difference in saving Californians
hundreds of billions of dollars in putting the onus
on the companies where that have caused the damage
as it belongs, thank you.
Good morning council members, I'm Rod Fujita.
I'm a climate scientist and an activist
with Indivisible East Bay.
You know, 40 years ago when I started my career,
I documented the effects of climate change
on the coral reefs around the world,
saw them dying en masse, and I looked on them with outrage
as the polluters who caused this massive environmental problem
lied about them, profited handsomely.
And now, the effects are affecting us all.
All Oaklanders, all Californians are suffering from the effects
of intensified wildfires, sea level rise,
infrastructure damage due to these pollutions.
It's high time that we stop paying the full cost
of these things and impose equitable fees
on the polluters who caused this problem.
That's what the Make Polluters Pay Bill does and I urge you
to support the resolution.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Quinn Eide and I'm also here in support
of the Make Polluters Pay item on the agenda, number 5.7.
And we'd really like to add that we've already seen a measure
like this pass in Richmond
with Richmond being owed now money from Chevron
as a result of their impacts on the Richmond residents.
And it's really important, especially in this moment
of rising climate change,
that California's budget doesn't directly get impacted
by the rising costs of protecting us
from the climate destruction.
So I urge you to support this resolution and help make sure
that it's the fossil fuel companies
that are held responsible for these costs.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Diana Curiel, and I'm here in favor of item 5.7,
the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act, and Joanie Lohman is also here in favor.
And we're both citizens of Oakland, thank you.
Hello, my name is Sarah Rowley.
I am here to speak in support of resolution 5.0, which is a feasibility study
for a infill BART station at 14th Avenue.
I represent San Antonio Station Alliance,
which has a petition with 1,500 signatures
in support of the station.
We have support from local organizations
like Tribe and Ebacy, as well as several businesses
and broad political support.
We're in support of this feasibility study
because this is the first step to bring such a thing
to fruition. Not only will it be a station it will be transit oriented
development, hopefully a green bridge that will connect our community to the
waterfront and address the disinvestment that has been in our community for a
very long time since the inception of BART. This will be of no cost to the city.
BART, thank you. Greetings, Hope, all as well to my council person and the rest of the
council know how mr. Houston's and whatnot I'm here speaking about the
West Oakland senior center it was supposed to be open over a year and a
half ago for whatever reason is constantly getting pushed back and we
keep telling them the longer it goes pushed back the more it's gonna create
blight people are gonna go in in Clinton weather people gonna use the building we
have 25 million dollars worth of insurance we can move them we have trucks
and trailers we have the manpower we're willing to pay for it we just want our
seniors to be able to have a place and our senior director who's been moved to
North Oakland where we've displaced and misplaced our seniors we want to be able
to come back home and please keep your hands your staff keep your hands off of
our senior director thank you sorry I'm to the member of the public can I get
your name for the record sir. Thank you Teresa thank you. Good morning city
councils before you spend my time can I can I find out if every one of you guys
got the packet before you spend the time please and I have two speakers that
yield their time to me Pastor Joe Smith and Taha Obad. To the member of the
public there's no seating time during consent. Good morning city council members my
My name is Ali Obad, Dear Mayor Lee, President Jenkins,
member of the City Council, City Attorney Richardson.
As a corporate owner of multiple stores participating
in the Sabah Grocer's Initiative,
I respectfully request that agenda item 5.28,
file number 26-02.9,
claim of Sabah Grocer's Initiative be removed
from the November 4th, 2025 Council agenda postponed,
pending further review.
It is both redundant and necessary
that no council action be taken
until the city auditor finding a fraud,
waste, and financial mismanagement
related to sub-funded programs.
Thoroughly investigated the city auditor,
July 1st, 2024 report,
and related past statements, documents,
serious deficiencies, including unauthorized payments,
misuse of debit cards, and undocumented expenditures.
These find it indicates systemic control failures
and raise credible concerns that the program remains
at risk of continued misuse of public funds.
Given this unresolved issue.
Thank you Mr. Obadja, time is up.
Mr. Obadja, time is up.
If there's anybody left in the chambers
who would like to speak on consent,
please step to the podium.
Otherwise we'll be moving to the Zoom speakers.
For Houston.
Kind of likes to stand away from the mic a little bit,
It's kind of like this.
I don't know what you're saying
but I'll leave Mr Ali I mean
when you talk and so we can
really hear what you say.
Can you just elaborate a little
bit more on it and I wanted to
say through the chair to the
city attorney- can I speak to
this now that is in- open form
because it was in closed
session.
Can I speak to this and ask him
a question and elaborate on
some because I got eight minutes
on anything I want to speak on
the city council approved this.
comment afterwards we will each get a maximum of up to two minutes to speak on
the consent calendar and we can ask the city attorney more clarifying questions.
So through the chair again so you're saying I got two minutes? After public
comment finishes. Okay. We all do. Okay. All right. Thank you. Go ahead. I'll talk to you tomorrow.
Go to clean Oakland dot com and look at that. Go to my blog and you'll see the
disparity study from Dr. Ramsey on the fact that black folks don't get
contracts in this town 1% and you also those who have disabled individuals you
will see all that also that disparity study let me say this I don't even know
why this meeting is called this morning on Election Day where's the urgency see
you keep violating your own rules. This meeting is a bogus meeting and you knew
it's going to be sparse attendance. Also the January 15th meeting wasn't an
illegal meeting, Madam Chair, because you said an urgency. You didn't describe an
urgency. The council was going to be held the next day and you went through the
entire agenda and I noticed you on September 22nd to cure and correct you
didn't do that so I'm going to file the next legal action which is a writ
because everything that you did on that date is void and also you've been
properly served, Madam City Attorney, with the rent I filed on May 19th and on
August 22nd, 25th, the supplemental on Measure A that you said was a sales tax.
You are illegally collecting a sales tax that went into effect on October 1. And
you sit there with grins on your face as though you don't know what I'm talking
about but you have 30 days from October 29th to answer that what you've been
properly served on measure A the transaction and use tax it's not a sales
tax councilmember Unger and when councilmember Jenkins on December 16th in
an agenda report talked about a sales tax well why didn't he talk about that on
on January 9th when you approved the ordinance 13833.
It wasn't.
So that wasn't a sales tax.
It wasn't a sales tax when you approved resolution 90740
on June 3rd with the state to administer the tax.
Go to, and this, this should be pulled.
This is real clear.
Saba is fraud.
Read the auditor's report.
and you're doing this service if you.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard, your time is up.
Again, if your name was called and you're in chambers
and you wish to speak, please approach the podium.
Please state your name for the record.
Fifth Base Cities, ministers Baptist Union.
We again, we again are sitting here working with the city,
doing the work of the city,
but when it comes time for funds to go out,
it looks like everybody forget about us.
They remember us at election time.
They remember us at every other time.
But the churches are the one that do the work.
And Bay City represents 85 churches in the Bay Area.
And so all we're saying is that you
need to consider us and what you're doing.
When you had a closed door meeting,
we actually not do it today and do it later.
My church is in West Oakland.
I hope you receive that.
Thank you for your comments.
Good morning, council members.
My name is Stephanie Warren.
I'm a licensed general contractor
and lifelong Oakland resident.
I come from a proud legacy of builders in this city.
My father, John T. Warren,
founded John T. Warren Associates
and contributed to major public works projects,
including the BART extension projects.
During his era, the city of Oakland and its agencies
made intentional efforts to contract
with black-owned and local businesses.
Those policies didn't just build roads and rail lines,
they built generational opportunity.
They allowed small contractors like my father
to hire locally and train apprentices and young engineers
and reinvest in Oakland neighborhoods.
Today, however, those pathways have narrowed.
Too many contracts go to large outside firms.
Thank you.
Your time is up.
Moving to the Zoom.
So if your name was called and you were online,
please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.
At this time, if you still wish to speak,
please raise your hand.
Jennifer Finley, I have you with multiple items.
You will have three minutes.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Good morning.
It is really unfortunate to say at least
that this meeting is being held at 9 a.m.
And I'm grateful to Mrs. Asada for bringing up
that there were 12 items that were moved
to the consent calendar on Rule 24.
They did not go to committee.
We've got 12 items now
that are, have not been reviewed by the council, were not reviewed by committee or not being
presented to the public and were given a short time on the agenda that was available to the
public before today's meeting. This is part of a long-standing, if there's going to be a
The history of the Oakland City Council for 2025,
it's this lack of transparency and this clear intent
to avoid the scrutiny and input from the public
by moving public safety meetings from 6 p.m. to 9 a.m.
from changing meeting dates, from making meetings early,
from deciding that the public can only have one minute
to comment for different things,
to the more things go on to consent,
people have less time per item there any number of reasons is transparency is an
ongoing issue I'll talk about it more at at this time I don't see any other
hands on the zoom raise in the zoom cue again if your name was called on zoom or
you are in chambers and you still wish to speak please approach the podium or
raise your hand on zoom otherwise we will be closing public comment at this
time madam chair I don't see any other hands raised and there is no one in the
Thank you colleagues colleagues questions comments on the consent calendar
Councilmember Houston, I know you wanted to say something after councilmember Brown
Go ahead
Excellent. So just want to start off. Thank you so much to the members of the public that came and spoke on various items
Thanks to the leadership of councilmember Unger and councilmember five for the polluters pay climate
Bill and being in support of that. I definitely am also. Thank you
Councilmember Wong in the coalition from San Antonio Street station. I'm very
Looking forward to that feasibility study as I've been supporting
So much of the efforts that you all have been making for some time now
And then in addition, I just wanted to uplift that any of the items that you see on the consent calendar be it
Especially ones that are regularly scheduled for community and economic development
Given on average we've been averaging about seven to eight items per agenda meeting
The corridor safety ambassador grant that was an item that we we wanted to ensure we move forward with as so many of these
Community groups have been waiting on this funding. So that was a priority and then in addition there is item
5.6 as with all items that are here
every council member has the opportunity to be briefed by staff to ask any questions any questions and so
Just wanted to share those things out. And so I'll happily make a motion on the consent calendar. Thank you
Thank you, and I will second that
Council comments council member Houston
make sure through the chair want to make sure that
5.14 and five point two eight I say no on
I'm just make sure that's clear now vote the rest on the consent and I did want to speak to
appreciate that
Item number eight 27th Street complete Street construction contract was pulled
I appreciate that because of the things that were said
Patricia I want him to hear
I have a question about.
The things that was said.
About me last week which I made a complaint to the public ethics
commission and I just passed it around to you guys because I
don't appreciate things being said about me that's not true.
So I appreciate that being.
Pulled and if I like I am I'm a new council member if I say
I'm not going to be able to.
I want to thank the individuals who came out to make polluters pay.
Barbara Rine, thank you for working with your neighbors to organize this.
I'm proud to support this in conjunction with Councilmember Unger.
And I also think it's important that in this moment where we see incidents that are happening
in Kingston, Jamaica, flooding, heat, fires, wildfires, all of the things that I've been
trying to figure out how to work with community to hold these some of these big polluters accountable for that we're moving in support of the state legislation. So I want to say thank you to everyone who came out for that. And I also want to register a no vote for item 5.1 for there's some potential legislation coming forward that contradicts this and I wanted to my voice to be very clear on what's happening. That's underlying this this item.
To the chair. Can you repeat what your no item is please?
Item five point one four. Thank you
On the consent calendar move by councilmember Brown seconded by councilmember Ramachandran noting a no vote for councilmember Houston on item
5.28 and five point one four and a no vote for councilmember five on item five point one four councilmember Brown
councilmember. I councilmember five. Councilmember guy oh. Councilmember Houston. I also remember
how much I'm sorry how some of them are challenging councilmember younger. I councilmember Wong.
In chair Rama Chandra. I motion passes with a vote of. Seven eyes one excuse Jenkins.
motion. I'm going to item six
aye. Motion passes with a vote of seven ayes one excuse Jenkins. I'll read the
title conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion adopt a resolution requesting
that the California governor's office of land use and climate innovation grant a
two-year extension for the adoption of the updated open space conservation and
recreation element of the Oakland general plan. Person with a government
Code section 65361.
You do have one speaker on this item.
OK.
To the staff, we can put up to 10 minutes if necessary.
Good morning, Chair Ramchandra and members of the City Council.
I have a brief report for this item.
My name is Lakshmi Rajagopalan, and I'm
a planner for with the strategic planning division
in planning and building.
And our staff are here to request
that the City Council adopted resolution requesting
the California Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation
grant a two-year extension for the adoption
of the updated open space conservation and recreation
or the Oscar element of the Oakland General Plan.
As the council is aware, the city
is currently engaged in a comprehensive update
of its general plan in two phases.
And phase one was completed in 2023
and included adoption of the housing element,
the safety element and a new environmental justice element.
Phase two of the general plan includes
comprehensive updates to the land use
and transportation element or the lute,
the open space conservation and recreation element
or the Oscar element as well as creation
of a new infrastructure and capital facilities element
and updates to the noise element.
The estimated timeline to bring these elements
for adoption to city council is spring 2027.
Senate Bill 1425, which was passed in 2022,
qualified as Government Code Section 655.5,
requires all cities to review and update their open space
elements by January 1, 2026, in correlation
with the city's safety element and the environmental justice
element.
And cities can request that the state, the governor's office
of land use and climate innovation
can grant a two-year extension.
The city's current EJ element and the safety element
already includes several action items
that provide a strong foundation for demonstrating compliance
with SB 1425.
An attachment A in your agenda packet
provides the list of current goals, policies, and action
items that are in these EJ and safety elements
and also address equitable access to open space,
climate resilience.
Requesting this extension will ensure that phase two elements
are updated in a coordinated manner,
and this avoids piecemeal compliance or omissions
across these critically integrated elements.
So this is why staff is requesting a two-year extension
from the state LCI.
In conclusion, again, we recommend
that the city council adopt a resolution pursuant
to government code section 65361 requesting
the California Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation grant a two-year
extension for adoption of the Oscar element of the open space, I mean
Oakland General Plan. This concludes my report and I'm happy to answer any
questions. Thank you so much. Colleagues any questions or comments?
Councilman Gahan. That information is certainly enjoyed speaking with you and
getting more clarity on it, but for the public's information what is the
financial. What is the financial obligation of or the financial concern
with the city of Oakland to make sure we carry through with this? Sure. So this
general plan update process kicked off in 2021 and as part of this process
staff did bring forward to council in 2021 a contract resolution to adopt to
approve two contracts as part of this. So we have we are working with two
consultant teams, a technical consultant team, and a community consultant team, and it's
all within the budget that's approved as part of that resolution.
But for 2026, what is the number that we're looking at?
Because right now we're making many investments, many concerns, but then I want to make sure
we stay balanced, and the public understands the money that we are receiving, whether it's
from the county, the state, you know, where is that money going to be invested and how
and when, and I don't want to show up after the fact like we did last year, and I've never
seen the council at this level, we find out after the fact what we're doing or didn't
do with the money that we were committed to use in Oakland.
Yeah.
Through the chat, Councilmember Caiu, we are not requesting any additional funds or anything.
So this is a resolution to request the state to grant an extension of the update that's
already currently underway, which is already included as part of our budget.
All right, thank you.
Council Member Wong.
Thank you, through the chair.
This is really important work.
Can you just clarify for us who are interested in land use updates, or just as City Council members?
I look at ways in my district where I want to see zoning changes, maybe opportunities for mixed use development, more housing.
How do we weigh in, what is our opportunity as City Council members to help shape this plan?
Through the chair to Council Member Wong, so the general plan update process includes an extensive community engagement process.
But to your question on how can we involve city council members,
staff will continue to hold study sessions with council at key milestones in the process.
But independently we can also work and hold community engagement meetings in your district, which we are doing.
And the general plan update website does include all the events that have been conducted to date across the city, and that's a priority.
Okay, and just to confirm, this is the process by which if we wanted to make zoning changes, this would be one tool to do that.
So the general plan update includes updates to the land use element, so we are looking
at changes to land use designations or any updates to the land use designations.
As part of this process we will also be updating the zoning codes, so yes.
Okay.
Great.
Thank you.
Councilmember Brown.
Excellent.
And so I just wanted to say thank you to the planning and building team for your due diligence
on this item.
that it's related to the Senate bill 1425 and so basically we're just you
know granting that two-year extension to ensure that everything we can
fall in line with everything as planned and so I'm happy to make a motion to
close the public hearing. Councilmember Houston. And real quick and adopt the
resolution. I'm sorry that was that was a motion okay.
Councilman Houston. Yeah through the chair I just got one question. Between what's the
difference between Oakland what is it a I mean OSACR plan and the state local
open space what's the difference between those two? So cities are by state law
cities are required to adopt and update their general plans and they have
specific topic requirements.
So open space, land use, conservation, recreation.
And the city's general plan, we decided
to include open space conservation and recreation,
or OSCQR, as one element.
And the state law requires us to update the open space
portion of that area.
So since we are already working on a general plan update,
we are going to be updating the OSCQR element
as part of this process.
so that requires a two year extension?
So if you look at your staff agenda packet,
figure one provides a timeline of when we are
hoping to bring these elements forward
to council for adoption, but we are also underway
and we are undergoing extensive community engagement process
and we've held several events across the city.
So requesting this extension from the state
will make sure that we are able to adopt
all the elements in a coordinated manner.
I got it, I got it, I got it, thank you, appreciate it.
Thank you, if there's no more comments
we will take public speakers.
You have one speaker on this item, Mrs. Asada Olabala.
Issue of preservation.
The issue of protection of natural resources,
I'm sure is gonna be in the plan.
When you address funding, the source of funding,
Is there any obligation from the city of Oakland
or all of this coming from the state, coming from grants?
If there's an obligation for funding from the city,
what is that source that should be identified
in this discussion right now?
That's important.
So when you talk about Oakland spaces,
you're talking about Leon Canyon region, open space,
King Estate, open space.
Now, no land, park, open space.
And he got a Timmersdale Park.
And then, are we all doing the exact same thing
for all of these spaces?
Are there some differences?
What are the differences?
So I live close to the Leon Canyon region.
My concern about that space,
there is a lot of animals
who are considered potential threats.
There's coyotes, there's mountain lions,
bobcats, snakes of different varieties.
And I've been in there and I've had to leave
because I've encountered some of these animals.
What are the safety enforcement processes
for encountering any safety issue in these open spaces?
Who is the enforcement authority in these open spaces?
who is the maintenance, if any,
you have to have some form of maintenance in these spaces.
How does that happen?
Personnel wise, staff wise,
if any, what kind of staff exist in open space?
Thank you to our public speaker.
Colleagues, I will entertain a motion
or additional questions, comments if you have them.
Through the chair, you just need a second.
Council Member Brown.
Oh, apologies.
I will entertain a second.
I'll second that.
Well, the motion by Council Member Brown
to close the public hearing and adopt the resolution,
seconded by Council Member Unger.
Council Member Brown.
Aye.
Council Member Fai.
Aye.
Council Member Gallo.
Aye.
Council Member Houston.
Aye.
One more time.
Council Member Unger.
Council Member Wong.
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandran.
Aye.
Motion passes with a vote of seven ayes.
One excused.
Jenkins.
I have a motion to approve.
Thank you very much madam clerk
before moving to the next item
because of some technical
speaker issues.
I would like to make a motion
for a five-minute recess.
Chair Ramachandran has requested
a five-minute recess moved by
councilmember Houston.
Councilmember Brown.
Aye.
Councilmember...
Councilmember Fife.
Aye.
Councilmember Gallo.
Aye.
Councilmember Wong I and chair Rama Chandra motion passes with the vote of seven ayes
If council members are present we are waiting for quorum to restart the meeting
Convene
The recess is over. It looks like we have a quorum
on the dais
through the chair to the city attorney
We will take a vote to reconvene
council member Brown
Council member five aye
Council member Gail. Aye council member Houston. Aye
Council member Unger aye
Council member Wong aye
In chair Rama Chandra. Aye
Motion passes with a vote of seven eyes one excuse showing seven members present
going to
Your regular non consent item starting with item eight
which was pulled but I will read it and we do have speakers on this item a
Resolution awarding a construction contract to rhetoric construction for the 27th Street complete streets project number
10039 7 8 the lowest responsible and responsive bidder in accordance with project plans
Specification state requirements and the contractors bid in the amount of 10 million four hundred eighteen thousand five hundred seventy three dollars and fifty cents
and adopting appropriate sequel findings. We do have two speakers on this item Miss
Asada, sorry one speaker on this item, Miss Asada Olibala. I am totally
frustrated with the amount of money that is being allocated for bicycle lanes.
$10.9 million to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety and accessibility for
making streets calmer. $10.4 million, protective bicycle lanes. I just don't
get it why this city spends so much money on that and we can't get the pot
holds done. And we can't eliminate the illegal dumping. We can't deal with our
homeless community, but we got good bicycle lanes on the roads. It just
doesn't make sense. Improve the crosswalks and curve ramps. Ten point four
million dollars. Why you're pulling it? And why when you pull it, I thought she
said you're going to put it on the consent agenda when it comes back, Madam
clerk, is that correct, just to shake your head? Yes. That means you're going to do something
to cover up whatever reason you were bringing it to non-consent. You do so much stuff that
doesn't allow for the trust that should be existing, for the opportunity to say we're
going in the right direction. Somebody needs to stop this agenda of bicycle lanes. Look
outside the door here with that mess that was created with these protected
bicycle lanes and we got the majority of the city being one lane, one
lane. God help you people if y'all gotta evacuate folks out of this city with one
lane and all the major corridors created so you can have your number one priority
related to transportation is bicycle lane. Thank You Ms. Ollabala that was our
only speaker on item 8. Thank you we do not make a motion correct because we
pulled this item off. Okay thank you. Going to item 9 a resolution amending and
restating the council rules of procedure in their entirety in order to
assure council meetings run in an orderly and efficient manner allow for
non-consent items to be heard earlier in the meeting, create an additional
presiding officer position to serve as presiding officer in the absence of the
council president, and make non-substantive technical edits. And you
have about six speakers on this item. Thank you. If Ketop can pull up the
presentation, please. Okay, great. In council president Jenkins's absence, I will run
through this briefly just for a little history and context. The process to draft these amendments
started about 18 months ago. Much gratitude to the city attorney's office, the city clerk's office,
and city administration for really trying to do a thorough job of seeing how we can
bring these council meetings in a post-COVID era in a way that's efficient and effective
for the entire city council, members of the public,
and our staff.
These are unprecedented times still,
and I'm grateful that as a city,
we have made an active choice to continue hybrid meetings.
Not all cities do this, and I think that's important.
That being said, there are things we have to do
to adapt given having these hybrid meetings continue,
and changes to rules of procedure are natural,
they're normal, and it's running through the timeline
The first set of amendments in recent past was post-COVID,
bringing back meetings into a hybrid format.
Then was in December, 2023, which was myself,
then council president, Nikki Bass,
former council member, Treva Reed,
former council member, Rebecca Kaplan and myself
that authored the next set of amendments.
And then from that time onward,
in the December, 2023 resolution,
there are a few whereas clauses that directed city council
within six months to contemplate a second set of changes
and that is what we basically started
about 18 months ago myself and council president Jenkins.
So all that to say this has been a very detailed process.
These amendments were first released in September
of this year.
We went through two different rules committee meetings
to flush out more details and receive feedback
and so the final version is in front of you today.
Again, I've already stated the goals,
I'll run through it quickly.
We want to have reasonable time for input from the public
and also input from our fellow council members and staff
that have effective meeting agendas
and some predictability in which key items
requiring active votes will be discussed.
And that being said, the first major,
so these set of amendments have both substantive
and non-substantive changes.
The non-substantive changes were proposed by our city attorney's office and are minor
details that will not affect the course of meetings effectively, but they are present
and happy to explain the non-substantive amendments or elaborate on these substantive changes.
The biggest proposed change is changing the order of consent and non-consent.
Basically this means that once the meeting begins, we will go straight to the items that
require an active vote from council.
because everyone's energy is brightest right at the start
of a meeting and the public will have a better sense
of predictability to be able to make common on items
that require an active vote.
When a public makes vote on an item on a consent calendar,
that's already on the consent calendar
and the most council members can do is register a no vote,
but typically they pass, versus non-consent items
being at the start of the meeting,
expedites the process for having constructive debate
dialogue with the public rather than at the tail end of a meeting when we're
voting on important items where our and where our ideas can in fact be
influenced by very much so by public commenters who are present. That being
said because the meeting start time is not the meeting start time is not
changing it remains at 3.30 p.m. but the requirement to have non consent items
start at 5 p.m. will be eliminated so that all the consent items can start as
close to 330 as possible. Moving items off of consent. Now, this is this was a
proposal to require a majority of council members to move an item off
consent rather than just a motion and a second. We have received feedback that
some council members would prefer to keep it the status quo and I will make
a friendly amendment to remove this portion of the amendment and keep the
status quo as is that pulling an item off of consent only requires a motion
and a second ceremonial items this has already been our practice for the last
several months of this year that we are not going to have ceremonial items during
the course of the meeting ceremonial items are still can still be voted on
they would just be via advisory resolutions on the consent calendar
this does not take away from the ability of council members to be able to have
ceremonies either in committee when individuals might be on or groups might
be honored or in standalone ceremonies that will be noticed to take place in
these chambers. They are just no longer a standalone item at the start of the
council meeting which has been our practice for the past few months
unofficially already. This is a change to the unanimity requirement for
non-consent. This is really just a clarification. Right now the Rules
committee has say in whether an item is scheduled to consent or non-consent.
This is not changed. The only difference is that the recommendation that goes to
rules is currently the chair making a recommendation whether an item goes to
consent or non-consent, whether or not the vote was unanimous. This would
change the recommendation being the entire committee would make a
recommendation to send an item to consent or non-consent. But the ultimate
decision-making body is continues to be the rules committee and of course all
council members who are not on rules committee are welcome to come to rules
committee to make their voice heard on whether or not they want to hear items
on consent and non consent and just so just to paraphrase the flow of how
items are heard items are brought to rules first then they go to the committee
most of the time and that's what we encourage to happen not to go straight
to council. At that committee, there is a vote made. If it's whether it's unanimous
or not unanimous, as long as it passes with at least three votes, it goes back to rules
committee and it's that rules committee that decides whether or not that item goes to the
consent calendar or non-consent calendar when it's heard by council. So that is remaining
the same. It's the recommendation that's taking, that's not just the chairs but the entire
committees, that's going to be the recommendation now. This is an addition
for an additional vice chair for committees. This proposal will give
committees the opportunity, but not requirement, to vote to designate having
a vice chair for committees that members of the committee will choose, will vote
on, not full council. This is especially in cases of absences of chairs to be
able to maintain quorum and keep meetings flowing.
So just to recap, based on the proposed changes,
this is how the order of business would go.
Regular meeting would start at 3.30.
There would be a roll call.
We'd hear modifications to the agenda.
That means that's the opportunity
where council members or staff can pull an item,
can request to change an item from consent to non-consent,
and we can modify the order of agendas, too.
That remains the same.
Next, we'd hear public hearings on nonconsent.
Then we would hear other nonconsent items.
Then we'd hear the consent calendar.
Then council member acknowledgments, announcements,
followed by open forum and adjournment of the meeting.
There's no change to the start and end time of the meeting.
There's no change to speaker card processes.
There's no change on the ability to hear items
on an emergency basis and ability to hear ceremonials
in committees and other celebrations in chambers.
no amendments to the discretion of the Rules Committee.
There are non-substant changes as well
that do not impact the flow of meetings whatsoever
that the city attorneys have proposed
and can explain if there's any questions,
but just clean up language.
And happy to take questions and comments.
Council Member Houston.
Through the Chair, I just wanna make sure
you said we're pulling the one that,
we just have to have a second and then,
okay, that's pulled, right?
So let's get the one bullet point number six real clear.
I want to understand about removing the requirement
that committee recommends, recommendations
that are not anonymous must go to the non-consent calendar.
So it goes to rules, then it goes to committee,
and then if it's three votes that says yes
and one vote that says no, it goes to non-consent, correct?
Not automatically, it goes back to rules committee.
So I have been part of votes, for example,
where it is the vote on a specific committee,
and this was last year,
I have a very specific example in mind.
Three of the committee members voted yes.
I voted no.
The chair of that committee, which was not me,
said we would still like to forward this
to the consent calendar, even though I was a sole no vote.
We still chose, the chair of the committee
recommended to rules to move that to the consent calendar.
rules committee we discussed that item again and the rules committee said you
know what in the interest of the public they should actually be moved to
non-consent so the item was moved to non-consent and at the next meeting we
heard it at non-consent so basically the process is to change it from rules
committee to is the opportunity to change whether an item is not consent or
non-consent remains at the discretion of the rules committee and sometimes
council members I was part of the rules committee so I mentioned in rules
committee you can anyone can come in and say that item that got three votes but
that would got a unanimous vote that should still go to non consent for such
and such reasons being in the interest of the public blah blah blah and that
that part remains okay so so so when it goes to full council that means me and
okay say for instance I say I wanted to move it to non consent and
and ugger council member ugger says second it then it goes back to not
consent so we're just going around in a circle with that one that's what that
means to me it's like because if I wanted to start it off with not consent
then it goes to consent then I go back to council for not consent it was just
going in a circle can I do the chair can I have the city attorney address that
sure this is Michael Branson deputy city attorney essentially there's an order of
precedence for setting things on consent versus non consent that moves from the
standing committee the substantive standing committees to rules and then
the council as a whole so when the item is heard at standing committee the
current language reads that the chair may designate an item as consent only if
the standing committee's recommendation was unanimous but so let me take that
section first so there's discussion at standing committee as to whether it
should go on consent or non-consent,
then is actually made by the chair,
but can only be done if there's a unanimous vote on it.
The next section of that, the next clause says,
provided that the Rules and Legislation Committee
has authority to make a final determination
of consent or non-consent.
So after the item has gone to the Standing Committee,
it then goes to Rules on that Thursday
to finalize the agendas.
And during that section of the rules meeting,
the rules committee can revise any of the recommendations
of the standing committees to move something
from consent to non-consent or non-consent to consent.
And if I may, Council Member Houston, last thought.
Then there's the final jurisdiction
of the council as a whole.
So when the council meeting occurs
during the agenda discussion, there's an opportunity,
and this is the subject of the friendly amendment,
There's an opportunity for the council,
a council member to request that an item
that is on the consent agenda be pulled off
and moved as a non-consent item.
And the current rules provide that that is done
based on a motion and a second,
regardless of the council president's opinion on that topic.
Got it, so through the chair,
so that's exactly what I just said.
It just went around the circle.
So, but you said something through the chair,
you said final.
It's not final because final means that
if it went to committee, it couldn't be changed.
That's what that means to me.
You said final.
Through the chair, I said final
with regard to the rules committee.
Right.
It's final in terms of what's agendized.
Okay.
What's printed on the agenda,
but then at the actual meeting,
there remains that prerogative for a council member
with a motion of another council member to remove that.
So those two go hand in hand.
So I, I, I, that's just going to serve us a waste of time in my opinion.
And like I said, I'm new, I'm new, teach me, teach me.
Cuz what I hear is totally going around in a circle.
To Councilmember Houston, this is something that came up,
that's come up a lot in my now three years on this body.
The public's opinion changes on what is considered an item of interest.
So sometimes things pass through committees
where they're seemingly non-controversial,
and then someone, groups decide, wait, actually this,
we didn't realize that at committee,
we wanna have discussion and debate on it,
we wanna pull it.
So it's not linear.
It's not where something comes to committee
that's automatically, if there's four votes,
it goes to consent.
If it's three votes, it's going to non-consent.
Because these processes take time,
people's and even council members opinions change on a lot of items so I
think having this process with multiple checks to be able for council members
to decide you know what we can change our mind now we can change your mind
again it is important because we're trying to make this a deliberative
process where it's not like we're deciding on the first time it ever comes
to counsel that's just my perspective through the chair I hear you I like that
And I don't know what they're
saying but my main point is
transparency.
If one council member agrees to
actually want it to be
transparent to the public and
another one agrees with them,
then I want the public to hear
it should be transparent.
So I hear what you're saying
but that first one, that's first
and second, let's pull that one
off like you said.
So I'm good, I'm good.
We need to make a formal amendment to change back to the status quo or you can just pull
it.
Since I'm the author, I can verbally delete that portion and it would restate to the status
quo.
All good.
Please, parliamentarian.
That's correct.
Whoever makes the motion can include that we'll be removing that proposed change so
So it will revert back to the existing language, which requires a motion and a second to remove
things from consent to non-consent.
Great.
Thank you for doing that.
And to the chair, if I may, just can I read in specifically what sections you're proposing
to retain?
So I think it's in Rule 7.
There's a change that currently says for modifications of the agenda, a request with a motion and
second from council members to pull an item from the consent calendar and reschedule as
Non consent item on the same City Council meeting agenda pursuant to rule eight six and then so then there's a
corresponding
revision in rule eight six
That says that any council it currently reads the rule reads any council members entitled to pull a consent item from the consent calendar
and place the item on the non consent calendar as
A non-consent item if another council member seconds the motion it is not necessary that the council vote on or pass the motion
And it is not necessarily the presiding officer consents. So that would be the language that's retained
Thank you for working on this council a few questions
So just to confirm on the non consent piece
So it sounds like now the chair has the discretion to make an item on the consent calendar
Even if it's not unanimous, that's a key change
The rules committee maintains that discretion
Yes, they have the final decision. But now the chair has this next lever of discretion
I will let the city attorneys
Exclaim the nuance of the it is at the discretion of the committee
committee. So the committee would include in their motion whether to place it, to recommend
to place it on consent or non-consent. And if that motion passes with the majority of
the votes, then that would be the recommendation. So currently you would need four votes of
the committee to place it on consent. Under the change you could have three votes to,
if that's what the motion says, to place it on consent. That would be the recommendation
that goes to Rules, and then it would be up to Rules Committee as to whether to proceed
with that recommendation.
Okay. Thank you. And then I'm hearing from some members of the public to just concerns
around the ability to hear the non-consent items earlier than 5 p.m. Can you just explain
the rationale behind that amendment, Councilmember Ramachandran?
Yeah, so last week, the last council meeting we had, we had to take a 50-minute recess
in the middle of the meeting because our meeting time is remaining the same, 3.30,
but then you can only hear non-consent items at 5.
So we effectively start the meeting and have to wait around until the public to wait around
before 5 p.m.
Otherwise.
So it's just at the start of the meeting.
We're having business in the order that it happens.
Okay.
We have to have a staff meeting.
Which could very well be 5 p.m. in instances.
and our staff are waiting around essentially
during that time, okay.
I think I had one other question, but I'm forgetting it,
so we'll get back to you.
Okay, we will move to public comments.
Wait, did we do that already?
Yes, thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
I appreciate this item being heard
at a time where I could be present.
I did have some concerns when it came
to the Rules Committee with several of the amendments
being proposed, but I think overall,
what I'm hearing from the public is a concern
about diminishing democracy and access to counsel.
And so the fact that our meeting,
we are having far more special meetings
than we've had in the past.
The meetings are being scheduled for earlier in the day.
One of the things that really stands out to me
is the item that council member Wong just talked about,
which is waiting to begin the meetings at,
or waiting to have the non-consent items until after five.
I do want us to consider the fact that
we moved the start time earlier
before people get off work.
And my interest is having more public participation
And not less and if we're hearing consent items,
I'm sorry, non-consent items earlier in the day,
we run into potentially having less public participation
than we should have.
So I would like to have this body consider changing that
so we can have the items that people really care about
happen after the traditional get off work period
at around five, six.
So I wanted to talk, to debate that with this body
to see if there was room for amendments
in that particular area.
Thank you.
Neither myself or my co-author,
Council President Jenkins are interested in that
primarily because our flow of meetings is,
we typically have a lot of items,
especially in our busy months, which is around the budget,
which is around the end of the year.
items are going to be heard way after 5 p.m.
Even with the same 3.30 p.m. start time,
when we have a lot of items in an impacted calendar,
our meetings are still going to go past 9 p.m.
And so starting the meeting a little earlier
does not necessarily change that.
Also, we still have public hearings first.
Typically, there's fewer public comments
than our public hearing items,
and that's still going to have to be first anyway.
So realistically, by the time the items
people really want to comment on come in, it's going to be later and then it's
going to be later, as well as the consent calendar. Actually even more than non
consent items as the last several years of meetings have shown, we have the most
number of public speakers on the consent item. So in fact we're moving, we're
increasing the ability of people to be able to comment on the item that most
people come to comment on, which is the consent calendar, from moving it from
330, which is typically right when it's heard, to later in the evening after non-consent items are heard,
we're actually increasing the ability of the public to participate without having them have to stick around and wait for
the period of time and have some recess and all of that. So
there's always going to be different interpretations, and I understand that, and there's going to be people in
different sections of viewpoints on this that are going to be
Frustrated and that is part of the process how again not all cities even have hybrid meetings
We're making intentional choices to keep our meetings as open to the public as possible
While maintaining our ability to debate voting on key items
I remember so vividly we had to vote on a general plan update that had a series of amendments two years ago
That's that discussion started at 11 p.m. At night
And that's the kind of thing that we are trying to avoid on items that are non consent items
We want to be able to have maximum
partici- meaningful participation first and again the people that will be that historically comment the most
Do come to the consent calendar which will be way later than 5 p.m.
And their ability to make that comment so this does increase that ability
But I understand there will be lots of viewpoints on this and we are always a city in progress and our rules of procedure is
There's always a live document, so if we take this as an experiment to improve democracy
and improve creative output, maybe we like the results.
Maybe six months from now we say, you know what, that was a good experiment, an innovative
democracy and good government, but maybe we want to go back to the way it was.
This is a live document, and as we've already had amendments since this, since COVID, we
can continue to have amendments.
Councilmember Wong.
Thank you, Chair.
So I remembered first just my question.
On the vice chair for the standing committees, can you elaborate more on the process?
Like would it be initiated by the chair or can any member of the committee make a motion?
How would that play out in reality?
To the parliamentarian, if you want to explain the process.
Yes.
So it would occur during the Standing Committee meeting, but it would still be agendized the
same way any other item would be.
So there would be an item that would go to rules similar to the resolution that comes
for nominating a chair of the Council as a whole where it basically says an item to nominate,
and then there's a blank certain member to be vice chair, and then that would be scheduled
on a certain standing committee meeting.
The significant difference is that
the standing committee would be the final actor on that.
So I believe it would be taken by a motion,
not a resolution, it would be agendized as a motion.
And it's at the standing committee's authority
to choose their vice chair.
It would not then go through the process
of getting sent back to rules
are going to the City Council as a whole.
Okay.
I think that's helpful.
My other question is back to this debate
on the non-consent piece and the timing of it.
I think some of it, for me,
matters on the logistics of public comments.
So can someone only submit their speaker comment
at the start of our, so at around 3.30,
that's when they at the time submit their speaker comment.
And so even if we have this now only at five p.m.,
someone cannot after work at five p.m. submit a speaker card
at that point in time.
This, nothing changes the speaker card process
to the city attorney and or clerk if you wanna clarify
what takes this status to us.
With the current speaker card process is?
Yes, so it's in rule 12 that covers the submittal time
for speaker cards.
There is a perhaps minor adjustment to extend the time
for submitting speaker cards to be within the first two hours
after the meeting is called to order,
rather than the first hour and a half.
We felt was an appropriate adjustment
based on the change of order.
But otherwise, yes, you would need
to submit a speaker card for a non-consent item
within the first two hours after the meeting is called to order
or before the clerk begins reading in that item,
whichever occurs earlier,
and for the consent calendar again within the first two hours
after the meeting is called to order,
or before the city clerk begins reading
the first consent item,
because we treat the consent calendar as a whole.
Okay, I see, so, and just through the chair
to Council Member Wong, just to clarify,
and none of this would change
the online speaker requirement,
because that is a different system,
So that portion would still be 24 hours
before the start of the meeting.
Okay.
Okay, thank you.
We can move to, did I call another one?
It's a public comment, yeah.
Moving to public comment, as I call your name,
please approach the podium in any way.
Did Council Member Phyfe want to speak
before public comment?
Yes, thank you.
I'm sorry, I'm trying to work out another agenda item.
I appreciate the conversation about,
you know, the two makers or bringers of this item forward,
not wanting to change the consent start time,
but I'm really concerned about the public
being able to participate fully,
especially for working class people,
that the reality is a lot of times folks get off late.
And the reason why I, that I've observed,
why so many people comment during,
during the beginning of the meeting is because so many items from committees get moved to
consent that you have to have a number of individuals speaking on consent because that's
where the items are because, you know, things are moving from committee straight to council
and there are a lot of changes that have been made that are limiting the ability of the
to participate as fully as I think is necessary,
and that's what I'm hearing from people as well.
So I am gonna make a friendly amendment to change that
so that we are hearing our non-consent items.
And I understand that there are two members of the council
that don't wanna do that.
I'm asking for us to think deeply around
who actually gets to participate and how,
and why there are so many commenters
on public comment right now.
So, I'm gonna make that as an amendment.
There are also other items.
I think having a vice chair for committees,
I have not heard from any of my colleagues.
We're having this debate right now,
so perhaps we can hear it.
We can have some more debate around, is that necessary?
To me, it sounds like,
well, I would like to hear from you all
around the need for a vice chair for committees,
because right now, as it stands,
we can call each other and say,
hey, I'm out sick, can you chair this meeting?
I don't, I don't, I would need to understand
why it's being memorialized in this way.
My colleague to my left just left,
he's saying that this feels very political.
And I, unfortunately, Council Member Gallo
isn't here to express his full perspective
on what that meant.
But that is what I'm trying to understand.
So I wanted to state that before we go to the public speakers
because again, I think that is a deep concern for me.
It's just the ability for the public to participate,
particularly working class people who are not retired,
who are not wealthy, the people who are working jobs
that find it difficult to participate in the public process,
despite all of the rules and the barriers
that make it challenging sometimes.
I'm complete.
Thank you.
Before going to Council Member Houston, just a note.
I think the real question is we're always
trying to figure out what's the best way for people
to participate.
If you want to come to council to make comment
on a consent item that's already on the consent calendar,
you know you're making a public comment to make a statement,
not change a vote, which is important.
I've done it.
I've done it plenty of times before being on council
to make bold statements, which is
part of our democratic process.
But the people who want to come to make public comment on items
that we are actively debating, whether that's
a contract or a general plan, those
are the people who want to influence this council's vote.
And to make them have to wait till 11 PM at night,
to make working class people have to wait till middle,
very late at night, to do that is inherently unfair.
To make the people who want to come to this council
to change our minds, not just make a statement,
is absolutely critical.
Once we hit that consent calendar,
the most someone can do is register a no vote.
You can't pull it off of consent anymore.
That is how it is.
And in our Rules of Procedure,
the first round of amendments that I worked on
with then Council President Voss expressly says,
we want to limit the number of items
being ruled 24 to council.
In the whereas clauses of this very resolution,
we encourage council members and staff members
from various departments to move everything
through committees.
When I'm in the community every single week,
I talk to people about attend committee meetings,
participate in that.
This is something that is important
about how legislation is really baked and debated.
So there's a lot of debate about coming to council meetings
and when people can.
But when you have, a lot of us have been here,
a room full of children and young people and youth
and elders waiting till late at night
to have to comment on an item that will actively
influence our active vote on a non-consent item,
that is undemocratic and unfair, versus having it
at the start of the meeting with a sense of predictability
is, in my perspective, and the perspective of a lot of people
that we've discussed over the course of these 18 months
of this amendment is something that is important
to give people who are coming to sway council's vote
a chance to be heard in a timely fashion
that's not super late at night.
Councilmember Houston.
Mine is just a comment through the chairs
that this relates to the encampment abatement policy
on the street, walking down the street,
phone calls and people are just saying the people that came to speak against it don't
speak for us. And they were business owners, they were residents, they said why do we have
it so early? And you know, per my councilmember Brown said Ken why are we having it so early?
I should have listened. It should have been a little bit later because they are saying
that it was too early for business people, residents and people that are working. This
is just a comment from what my constituents are. As a matter of fact, across the board,
I'm across the city of Oakland, not just my constituents.
But that Zoom does make it really easier
for people to speak,
because a bunch of the business owners
had called me up and said,
hey, we're gonna use the Zoom link
so we don't have to come down.
That does make it pretty good,
but that 24 hour before,
sometimes people are waiting till the last minute to do it
and they can't speak, and I've heard that a bunch.
So mine is just a comment on that process,
because I thought 930 was pretty good
until my council member Brown said, nope.
So I understand it, so mine was just a comment.
Council member, did you have any comments
on the vice chair item?
Oh, no, I really like that.
I mean, no, I really do because just in case,
like if the council member's not there,
you are not comfortable or maybe be feeling not good
and that person could take that person's place
Or it might not even be that person's skill set, right?
It might be the other council members,
like say for instance,
like with me and council member Wang,
if it's about sideshow, she might say,
hey, you know, you might have a little more experience
on the sideshows for safety, maybe, I don't know.
But I really like that vice chair.
It's almost like being a vice chair of a pro tem.
You know, you have somebody pro tem at council, right?
So why not have a vice, I really like that.
So I'm, I'll prove that one.
Council Member Fife.
I am happy to hear from the public speakers
if you want to move on to the public speaker's chair.
I will reiterate my amendment
after we hear from the public.
Thank you.
Moving to public comment.
As I call your name, please pause the podium
or raise your hand if you're participating via Zoom,
please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.
Brooke Levin, Mrs. Asada Ola Bala, Mr. Hazard,
and Ali Obad whenever you're ready, Mr. Hazard.
These are kangaroo proceedings.
This matter should be kicked.
You don't even follow your own rules.
This meeting is illegal.
Section 2A of the Oakland City Charter
outlines the rules of Oakland City Council's meeting.
Special meetings.
Calling special meetings can be called
by the Mayor, city administrator, or three members of the council.
Emergency, the charter also addresses holding meetings and an emergency outside of the play.
You could only talk about one agenda item.
You're talking about multiple agenda items.
You don't even follow your own rules, Madam Chair.
And, Council Member Houston, when you talk about transparency, and
you got the unmitigated nerve to say that you and
President Jenkins are not interested in what the public says.
Council member Fife indicated what the public sentiment is,
but you're not interested in it.
You violate your own rule, and I get tired of that.
And you sit up here, you talk for 25 minutes on some BS,
and the rules are real clear.
This meeting is illegal on its face.
It's not an urgency meeting,
plus you called for a multiple item.
And you should reconsider 5.28.
You could do that when Mr. Obad showed you
the auditor's report.
Or Saba, they violated and committed malfeasance.
And you went along with it.
Pull that item, reconsider that item.
It's illegal and you're complicit.
Thank you Mr. Hazard, your time is up.
I just don't understand why city council members
can't get into a motion and try to pull out the items
from 5.28 when it's right here with the city auditor report.
That shows there's so much fraud lands going on
with this organization.
And you guys are stealing STIST and I've given them
another $500,000 where there's another million or two million
that's already approved to them again.
So right here in front of you guys,
and you have it, the city auditor is right here.
You can call your city auditor himself.
And it's right there in front of the public.
So much fraudless was going on with this organization
and you telling us, telling the public that you cannot
pull it out of, to get a motion and pull it
out of the consent calendar.
This doesn't make sense, and if the city council
keep giving away money like this to these fraudulent
organizations, the churches are here doing so much
for the city of Oakland, they don't give one single dollar.
Where you got these non-profits that come in front of you,
lobbying, and the people, Nikki Bass and Kaplan,
were the ones that were pushing so much
with this organization, because they were working
for their, under their campaigns.
So if this thing keeps going on,
keeps giving up to this organization,
I think we should get the Department of Justice
to investigate the city council,
to investigate the city of Oakland,
and to investigate these organizations.
Thank you.
Insulting to hear the statement we're hearing from the public.
When I come to just about every meeting and speak,
and you never respond, but you respond to some hearsay public
that's telling you what they need to have done
and you're acting upon it.
But the people that actually come to the meetings
and participate, you ignore them.
That's insulting.
So you should have rules that say
under certain conditions only,
items will not be allowed to go forward
without returning to counsel
unless there is a valid explanation.
You should have a rule that says every item that is funded by the city has to identify
the source of funding.
You should have a rule that once an item is approved it has to be followed up within a
certain time limit.
I'm talking about Art Shanks, renaming of the street, Art Shanks Jr. has never happened.
You should have a rule that once you have a grant you must identify all of the possibilities
for which that grant can be used, that's because your staff is picking certain ways the grant
can be used, but there are multiple ways that the grant can be used and you need to understand
that to follow up if you have another recommendation other than what staff is recommending.
You should have a rule that all items that are under rule 24 and rule 28 has to go to
the nonconsent item, okay?
You should have a rule.
All amendments that you make has to be presented
before public comment.
You should have a rule that states, that requires
that the mayor and the council make appointments
to all boards and commissions within a timely manner,
because sometimes you go years without appointing people.
You should have a rule that you should notify.
Thank you, Ms. Ollaballo, your time is up.
Thank you, colleagues.
I will make a motion to your Zoom speakers.
Move into your Zoom speakers, starting with Brooke Levin.
Please unmute yourself.
Please put two minutes on the clock for her.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Thank you very much, Chairperson Ramesh Andre,
members of the Council, Brooke Levin.
And I only really have one comment,
and that is about rule 12, the 24-hour requirement
for e-comment and for Zoom speakers to sign up.
It was impossible last week
in the case of the Published Rules Committee agenda
on Wednesday at about one in the afternoon
and the meeting the next morning at 10.30.
It would have been impossible
to actually sign up for that meeting
or make an e-comment on anything on that agenda.
I was very thankful that the city clerk's office
was willing to sign me up a speaker's card for that,
but other than that, you could not sign up online.
And I don't understand why there has to be
that 24 hour rule, I think it's an impediment,
especially in light of the fact that there are many,
many special meetings that are extremely last minute.
Today's meeting, for example,
the agenda was published on Friday,
And that was the first time we saw the item 10,
which is the next item on the grand jury reports response
from the administration.
So that was Friday and we had the weekend,
and then we have early today to address that item.
It's hard to get people to sign up.
It's hard to organize for people.
And additionally, I do agree with some of the other speakers
and council members that having these special meetings
popping up with irregular times is very difficult
for the public to track.
So thank you for considering changing that 24 hour
for e-comment and signing up.
And also, you know, making an effort
to have less special meetings
unless there is something extremely urgent happening
because it is a burden on the public.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Moving to Jennifer Finley.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Hi, Jennifer Finley district two.
I've got a few things.
We really need to make sure that things are accessible.
Of course, this means we need consistency
and we need the opportunity to speak.
Later meetings, consistent meetings
at the times that they are scheduled.
It's key, the public needs the information.
Right now we've got 12 things that went
to the consent calendar that came through on roll 24.
The consent calendar is meant for things
that came unanimously through committee
were non-controversial, but Rule 24 is they are urgent, so urgent that they're bypassing committee
that's the obvious of unanimous. Nobody has had a chance to discuss it, let alone vote for it
by putting it on consent. Listening to Chair Ramachandran, she's saying this is effectively a
yes vote before, you know, you, somebody can wage it a, a low to no vote, but that's not going to
change the turn of the tide, it's basically considered pass at that point.
Anything with Rule 24 needs to go on non-consent.
Also, some confusion about what things are going to which committees, it's very confusing to me
still that the EMP or the EAP was assigned to public safety versus the LEC or public works
To frame it in that way is a public safety commission. There are just too many things going to consent right now. The more things that go on consent.
Public still only has a very limited number of time. We don't get more time per item.
That gets cut, we get less public conversation.
Often times we will get time cut.
Thank you, Miss Finley for your comments. Madam chair. That was the last speaker.
I fully agree with everyone that's talking about A, have fewer special meetings and B,
don't send as many items to committee and these rules of procedure don't change any
of that.
That has to be decisions that we're making on Rules Committee predominantly to decide
whether or not we hold special meetings and when items are sent to committees with urgency.
I would strongly prefer that we have no items sent by Rule 24, but like last week we had
to committee meetings that were canceled due to lack of form.
Departments requested to hear that item today
on the consent calendar so that they can be approved,
so grant money can be received,
so contracts can be executed,
but that also means that as council members,
we have to do our best to make sure
that we have quorum for meetings,
that items we bring forward go through committee first,
but that has nothing to do with these rules and procedures,
nor is bringing emergency, sorry, not emergency,
special meetings that is something that is the choice of council and the rules
committee and we can all work on having fewer special meetings and also fewer
items sent to rule 24 including departments so I fully agree with all
those commenters that just has nothing to do with these rules of procedures
councilman Brown thank you thank you madam city clerk I just wanted to
reiterate reiterate my amendment to retain the existing orders of business
This, in Rule 7, sands the change to ceremonials.
I want to make sure that the consent calendar is heard after modifications of the agenda,
and I also want to request to retain the non-consent item be heard no sooner than 5 p.m.
I have been an elected official now in this body for a little over five years, but I've
been coming to this body consistently for 11 years.
we were here and not this is not the model of how things should be but it
would be until 2 p.m. 2 a.m. in the morning sometimes 1 a.m. midnight that
does provide a burden on on staff and it allows people who no longer get to
comment as one of our public speakers said on every single item but it allows
the public to know that they can get off work and be here and speak to an item
versus not being able to speak to it
because they can't get here in time.
And I also, I'm in community all of the time.
We just heard public speakers
who I have no relationship with express their concern
with how all of these issues come together
and limit the ability for the public
to engage fully in this process.
So I again, want to reiterate that amendment to rule seven.
that will help facilitate what the public speakers who spoke
today and the countless public speakers that I've heard over
the last year, um, do when it comes to being able to fully
participate in these meetings.
So I would like to make that amendment and make that as a
motion.
Okay, um, well thank you so much.
Um, council member Ramachandran and also council president
Jenkins, um, for bringing forth these amendments.
with these amendments.
And I do think that a lot of the feedback
that we heard from the public is definitely important.
And also just, I think even in rules committee,
we've consistently just kind of uplifted the fact of,
ensuring that we're not having so many special meetings
at times like at an earlier time.
And so I think what my hope would be
is that as we are making some of these changes,
we can ensure that our meeting time stays consistent
with our rules of procedure of us starting at 3.30 p.m.
and being as close as possible
to hearing some of the key items after five.
And also at the same time,
we have been operating in this manner for some time
and so I am interested to see
how some of these proposed changes
would impact the flow of the meeting.
And so with that said, I don't have any amendments
that I want to propose, but I do appreciate
the amendment that was made to the item
that Council Member Unger had mentioned.
But overall, I think that the changes that have been made,
I'm interested to see how they will kind of impact
the flow of our meetings.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Long.
Yeah, just going back to rule seven,
I hear the challenges that,
the tax that we have on staff time,
but I do think about just rereading the logistics
around doing the speaker comment,
I would just say that.
You know, especially someone
who is say working like a job
at a coffee shop or something
where they're standing.
They're not able to make like a
virtual comment like someone
who does an office job that I
think about.
You know, I I would say that
either I second council member
5 amendment or.
If we want to compromise to
submitted a speaker card. I don't want them to come to the meeting only for the
item to already have passed and for them had to have made that time to come all
the way to City Hall or to submit a virtual speaker card and unless there's
an ability for them to make a retroactive comment then that person
loses the ability to to say their piece. To Councilmember Wong I think I'm
I'm understanding your motive but not the actual solution.
So if someone who is working a full time job
wants to make public comment on an item for non-consent
that we're voting on, that's something that currently,
they're going to have to wait a long time with no sense
of predictability when it will be heard, and they leave.
I've talked to people from all over Oakland,
not just constituents about this.
So one of the motivating factors for this
were groups of communities who said,
we need predictability on when items are heard.
And typically, the items that are up
for the most contentious debate, where council members are
making up their mind, are aspects
of the non-consent calendar that's not public hearings.
So if we adopt these rules, we give people
the greatest amount of flexibility after five p.m.,
but not as late as nine p.m.,
for people that want to make public comment,
because right now, the issues that are really
affecting people from all over Oakland,
they're held at the later ends of meetings.
And especially when things get,
when our calendar gets impacted,
that can be as late as 10, 11, and beyond p.m.
So when we have people of all ages coming here
to talk about renewing violence prevention contracts,
which is an example that I remember very clearly
where we had youth here, a packed room of youth,
who had to wait five hours to be able to be heard.
Many of them had to leave.
But if that was moved to earlier in the evening,
after the public hearings items,
that's gonna be after 5 p.m.
But it's the most predictable way to say hey,
between the hours that make most sense for people,
5 to 7 p.m. That's only two hours of time where you would have to predict being able to sit at a
council meeting, not come at 3.30 and maybe your item will be heard by 10. So I think this is
in response to basically people who want to comment to influence our vote. The consent
calendar, that takes up some of the most amount of time on our calendar for items that have no
for us to change our bonus on the consent calendar which is to make a
statement and that's a powerful part of our democracy I'm not again I've done
that for years but the people coming here who really want to come the people
who come for their first time to council meetings because they want to help
influence our perspective those are on non consent items and now we're going to
give people a sense of predictability between 5 and 7 p.m. your items going to
be heard versus between 3 30 and 10 you might have to wait so I think if you're
Our objective is listening to the greatest number of people who want to impact votes
that have active consideration from council.
These amendments are the way that we get there.
And again, it is also an experiment and we like to take it seriously.
So I am newer to council, only been here for a few months.
I haven't yet seen one of our full council meetings go that late in part because I think
We've been doing a good job of, through the rules committee,
has been doing a good job of putting many of just saving
only the most important items for the non-consent calendar.
So I haven't seen that yet.
I'll just say that these sort of late-night meetings.
I hear you.
I don't want people who show up are frustrated and leaving,
but I haven't seen that layout yet.
And I do worry that this change may,
I'm fine with everything else that's laid out,
but I think this one piece,
I'm worried that it would do the reverse.
I think there are no perfect solutions here, right?
If we hear the substantive stuff early,
there are people who are gonna be at work
and not gonna be able to make it.
If we hear the substantive stuff later,
there are people who are dealing with childcare
or have to go to bed so they can get up early
the next morning.
there are no perfect ways to capture everyone
who wants to speak.
I do know that we, or let me speak for myself,
that I am not at my best at midnight,
and if we try to debate the substantive items very late
and make complicated amendments,
I would rather do that when my energy is fresh
earlier in the evening.
I think that that is an important consideration for me,
but I do acknowledge that whatever we do,
we are going to leave some people out,
and that's unfortunate, but we have to pick a time,
and I also appreciate the comments about predictability.
I like people being able to come here
at a predictable time for what are generally
the most contentious and most important issues.
Through the chair, Brook Levin had mentioned,
and I had mentioned too, about the 24 hour
to register for the Zoom.
Is it any way we could change that as a council
to make it longer or?
Through the chair, as I've stated before, multiple times.
We use a system that is outside of the city of Oakland.
Say that again, I'm sorry.
We use a system that is outside of the city of Oakland
to, for people to sign up to speak.
When the council has regular meetings
that started 330 that are noticed via sunshine,
the members of the public have approximately 13 days
to sign up to speak and provide e-commerce.
When you all shift into special meetings,
depending on when you call the meeting
and when we have the materials to notice,
we'll determine when the public can sign up.
It may be only a day or two before the start of that meeting
depending on when we receive the materials.
There's nothing else that can be done for it to correct that.
If people are having trouble signing up,
there are directions on the agenda
for them to reach out to my office.
We will sign people up to speak
if they are having trouble with the system.
But there's nothing that can be done about that.
Okay, see, that's what I need.
Clarity, I'm good, thank you, appreciate that.
Through the chair to Councilmember Wong,
was that a second, or is a friendly amendment
my amendment to change the time to yes it's a friendly amendment to your
friendly and if it gets turned down then it's a second understood I do want to
say I wanted to also ask the clerk because you were here on many of those
evenings where we were here until 12 o'clock 1 o'clock in the morning from
to the clerk do you recall any time from the last maybe year or two where we've
gone until two o'clock in the morning, one o'clock in the morning, or had these
late meetings, intensely late meetings. Through the chair you've had many
different iterations of your rules of procedure. As you guys have been in this
330 start period, you have not had meetings that have gone into the wee
hours of the night most of the time in the past where your meetings went into
the 2 a.m. time period your meetings did start at 530 at a time and that is
when you tended to have later items going into the wee hours of the night or
the morning. Thank you for that clarity because I don't recall having those
those meetings not in recent history and again I don't understand and maybe I
I just need more conversation.
But I would definitely like to move the amendment
that I pass and see where the body stands on this.
I don't see how this offers any additional predictability
in that we don't know how long certain items will go.
And I do agree with Council Member Unger
that someone is not going to be happy.
I would just err on the side of giving more folks
opportunity to participate during the later hours after,
as Councilmember Wong stated, if they have an office job
or some other things, the consent calendar
has been extremely overburdened.
So it forces people to condense their conversations
on substantive items to the consent calendar
because of the things moving from the rules committee
or bypassing committee to come to the full city council.
I would also argue that agendas can be modified
at the top of the agenda.
So if we need to make changes because if there's
an item, say, the youth vote that's on the agenda
and young people come to speak at the top of the meeting,
the chair has the ability to move that item up on the agenda
so people don't have to wait very long.
So there's already, we already have the capacity
to do the things in here,
and that the scheduling is one of those items,
and the better we are at rules,
the better we are at our full city council meeting.
So I feel like we're going around in circles.
There's been an amendment.
I could point out every single thing
that's concerning with these rules of procedure.
But it is a living document.
They can be amended at a later date.
I'm just asking for the specific amendment on rule seven
that I made today.
Council Member Brown.
And then I just had a quick question.
Because I thought that Council Member Wong,
I know you said that you're supportive of Council Member
Fife's motion.
But did you change it, actually?
So can you just please restate?
Thanks.
The substitute amendment, or whatever
is called is to change it sorry just to clarify before you go on council member
yeah there's a motion on the floor from council member five does that mode and
and counselor five perhaps you can restate it and the clerk can correct me
but I haven't heard is there a second to that motion okay so you're just
seconding without not making a substitute motion yeah I said let's do
this vote I would recommend and then if that gets then I would like to advance
the substitute amendment as a compromise. Right okay if council member five can
restate her motion and then council member Wong can state on the record
whether there's a second and whether in or if there's a friendly amendment
whether it's accepted by the maker of the motion. I am making an amendment to
retain the existing order of business in rule 7 so that the consent calendar is
heard after modifications of the agenda and additionally requesting to retain
the non consent items be heard no sooner than 5 p.m. or 4 30 p.m. Sarah oh no no
ma'am to the chair just a clarification on the motion the 5 p.m.
5 p.m. Rule is written into rule 7 there's also a line in rule 8 that restates the 5 p.m. Rule
So I'm assuming that your motion includes modifying rule 8 as well to say 430
I'm seeing a yes to that
From from council member five. Yes, it's a
motion to amend
the current proposal with amendments to rule 7 and rule 8 I
Any questions or comments?
I need to.
And I would now like to make a substitute motion.
Oh, Councilmember Houston.
Yeah, I'm just sad that Councilmember Gayle is not here because I don't know if you guys
is counting because the six of us here.
And I'm just hoping the mayor is available because I see a split here.
This is what I see right now.
So I'm saying this, I wish Councilmember Noel didn't say that this meeting was political.
So that's what I wanted to say.
We better see if the mayor is available.
Thank you.
I would like to make a substitute motion to adopt these rules as is with a friendly amendment
that I think gets a little to a compromise of starting the meeting at 4 p.m., which would
basically, given all the things that happen in the first hour, including public hearings,
public start non-conset items by 5 p.m. in order to try to compromise between
the two. Is there a second? I'm making a substitute motion to go back to the way
it was written with the one exception of changing the meeting start time from
3.30 to 4. So we get closer to that 4.30. We're basically compromising between 3.30
and 4.30 by starting at 4.
Second.
My amendments, my substitute motion is adopting, as is the originally submitted proposal with
two amendments.
The first one that was discussed earlier, which is canceling the part about requiring
majority to take an item, to pull an item off of consent to non-consent, keeping it
as is for a motion and a second. And the second amendment would be to change the meeting
start time from 3.30 to 4. So that's a compromise between 3.30 as it is now and 4.30 which was
the proposal.
Starting with the substitute motion moved by councilmember Madam Clerk, does the body
need clarity on either of the motions? If not, yes, you'd vote on the substitute motion
first.
Starting with the substitute motion that was made by councilmember Ramachandra and seconded by councilmember Brown
So adopt these rules as is with the amendment of starting at four and keeping
The motion the second requirement to remove an item from consent
Starting with councilmember Brown. I
councilmember five
No
Councilmember Gayo is absent
councilmember Houston
before I say this is just 30 minute difference from what
council member five said that's all this is 30 minutes
difference.
If I may perhaps I need clarity on them.
I think the substitute motion on the floor is to change the
start time of the meeting which is currently 330 and move the
start time to 430.
For for for council member five's motion was changing the
Is there a motion to start the
non consent calendar or were you
also changing the start time?
Yeah, so I think councilmember
five, your motion was changing
the time to start the non consent
portion of the meeting, not the
meeting, not the start time of
the meeting, if that makes sense
to councilmember Houston.
So it's 30 minutes, that's all.
Ask them first.
Was to have the start time of the meeting that the full meeting start at four
The reason I'm saying half an hour is because Councilmember fives proposal was to
Not to still have the consent calendar first and not have the non consent calendar first
Which is which is the biggest change of these amendments in order to give people a sense of when you can anticipate your item
being heard, having non-consent items moved up.
The real issue that is being brought up is when can people start to speak on the calendar?
And that, as was discussed by Council Member Wong and Fife, was we want people to be able
to start speaking on non-consent at 5 p.m., which is what we currently have.
If we change the meeting start time to 4, by the time we go through the first few items
of the meeting as well as public hearings, the earliest anyone is going to be able to
comment on the non-consent items is 5 p.m. So it's basically the same start time for
non-consent items given that the first hour is all sorts of other stuff that start our
meeting. So it's really getting to that same start time by pushing our meeting start by
now or otherwise people are going to have to come in and we're going to have to recess
and they're gonna have to wait to be able for it to be heard councilmember
Houston you have to stay up stay councilmember Unger councilmember Wong
not to be a pain but I okay so the 40 is can I do a substitute to the substitute
motion for 415 p.m. I think that is at least what I've seen with these meetings
play out is what is needed for the start time yeah at this point there's a
motion and a second on the floor so that's what we're voting on if the
substitute motion fails we will revert if the substitution passes then that's
the vote and the original motion is moot if the substitute motion motion fails
we'll go back to the main motion no our meetings don't start till 15 minutes
after anyway but yeah I think for now I get where you're getting at Councilman
Ramachandran I don't think it's enough for me to feel I like the solution only
if it's like it is more delayed so we can ensure that people who get off that
work can make comments so for this I have to Ramachandran motion fails with
They vote of three ayes, two noes, one abstention, one absent.
One excused.
So can we make a substitute now at this point?
So we're back to the main motion, which had a second.
Are you asking if someone can make another substitute motion?
Yeah.
Yes, if it has a second.
I'd like to make a substitute motion
motion to move the start time of meetings to four fifteen.
Correct the substitute failed but now a council that's what I couldn't get you
asked if I may through the chair to the parliamentarian asked for clarity on
what exactly is happening right now we have a substitute motion fail we should
be going on to the main motion is there another substitute substitute squared
make sure we have a motion.
Okay we're on the record motion
being made right now.
For if if so I need that restated
on the record I'm I'm deeply
confused about what is happening
right now.
It sounds like there's another
substitute motion on the floor
I have not heard a second.
This would be to the four
fifteenths.
I will second this one.
With another substitute motion
on the floor moved by council
member Rama Chandra and second
the motion was to make a motion
to make a motion at 4.15 P.M.
Councilmember are we having
debate on any of these things
what is happening.
Because this is I'm I'm
comfortable we want
consistency but now we're
talking about moving the start
time of a city council meeting
from three thirty to four
thirty to four fifteen but
we're advocating for what we
want is more consistency.
order, period. If we really want consistency, that is consistency. What these games we're
playing right now are ridiculous.
We have parliamentary procedure and we are allowed to make substitute motions something
you've done many times before, so this time I'm doing it. You can vote no.
Okay, relax. All I'm just asking is for clarity and for things to be restated on the record
because this is abnormal to have a substitute fail
and then ask for another one for 15 minutes
to change from a 3.30 start time to a 4.15 start time
to me is odd.
So I am ready to vote no on this substitute squared motion.
No.
Council member Brown.
Council member Fife.
No.
Council member Houston.
No.
Councilmember younger now
councilmember Wong
You don't have to press the button. Let me unmute you myself
Councilmember Ramachandran
Okay, aye
Motion fails with a vote of three ayes three noes one absent one excuse I
Will I have confirmed I can do this. I will make another substitute motion to vote on the original proposal
The original proposal as is written here with the one change being the request to change the taking items off of the consent calendar
requiring a second
Say, I'm sorry, please restate your motion
My motion will my substitute motion is voting on the original item. That is on our agenda
with the one amendment of
Changing the ability to take something off of consent requiring majority vote
So what was discussed earlier?
So the one amendment you read as you were giving your report, the second one amendment.
Okay.
On the substitute motion moved by council member Rahmachandran.
This is the original item that was before us with the only change was what I had verbally
stated, which was taking out the ability to move something from consent to non-consent
requiring majority vote.
Okay, that's the only change.
Councilmember Fife's main motion with a second is still on the floor, so if the substitute
motions fail, we go back to Councilmember Fife's main motion.
Seeing as there is no second for this item, we will go back to-
Oh, two seconded, sorry, I forgot to press it.
Can you state your second, say your second into the mic?
Yeah, I'd second Councilmember Fife's amendment on Rule 7 and Rule 8.
so you're not seconding the substitute motion
that is on the floor.
I thought we already voted on that.
There's a new one.
The motion on the floor is to keep
what is noticed in the packet
and keeping the amendment that Councilmember Ramachandran
read into record about keeping the language
in your current rules of procedure
that allows the item to be removed from consent,
from consent with the motion and second.
What is on the floor? Yeah, I'm I'm not seconding that I'm second. Okay, so you don't have this okay
Okay, so is there a second for council member Ramachandran's motion?
Seeing as there is no second for that
Council member Houston and Unger are on the speaker list if either of you want to speak
I'm I'm in favor of council member Ramachandran's motion, but I want us to vote on council member Fife's amendment
Then I will remove my substitute motion and we vote on that first
Just for clarity since we keep going back and forth for myself and my staff
Councilmember five can you restate your motion one more time her motion was she stated her motion
This is what councilmember Wong second it for clarity for the public. So there's no confusion
Can you please state restate your motion?
I'll say it it was
the state of the state. And I
council
Councilmember Brown. I am in favor of councilmember Ramachandran's
Measure as she stated it but I think out of courtesy to councilmember five who put an amendment on the floor that we haven't voted
On I would like to give
The option to for us to consider councilmember fives amendment
Another councilmember that's the main motion. So if you vote on that it's going to be a final action
there's councilmember Amatran or propose a substitute substitute a motion doesn't have a second another council member can find another
You know motion that they want to propose and if that one gets a second, you know, you can vote on that first
If you're trying to
Yeah, that's cool
We do need quorum for the rest of the meeting if council members want to hear the grand jury item
Which we need to submit by November 7th
Okay, we will see if we can bring back quorum to be able to hear the other two items on our agenda today
Council members if we could return to our seat. Thank you
Madam City Clerk attorney if you could just restate what motion we're voting on right now
So I understand that the last substitute motion on the floor has been withdrawn
So we're back to the main motion, which was councilmember fife's
motion and
It if anyone needs that motion to be clarified again
Please let the maker of the motion know
Through the chair. I want to skip over this and go to the grand jury. I want to pass this over
Councilmember Fife
We're voting first on councilmember Fife's
Motion and then seeing what happens and then or amendments and all that stuff. That's crazy
So let's just pat let's fail it and move on
It's on for Brown and then I guess just for clarity when we vote on this this go-around
No matter the in the result it will either pass or fail and there can't be any other motions
Is that correct? No, then we can make a motion if it if it passes it has if it fails
And if we can make another motion and consider what was originally agenda.
Through the chair to the city attorney correct if the motion passes its final action and
that version will be adopted if the motion fails someone else could make an alternative
motion or some other motion to dispense with the item.
motion. Thank you. On the main
eyes three noes one absent one abstention one excused and now I will
make a motion to go back to the originally noticed proposal with the
only change being any council member can going back to the status quo with
pulling an item off consent no changes to that I'll second that motion by
councilmember Ramachandran to go back to the main motion with the removal of a
the state of the state. And I'm
most of the revisions but I continue to have concerns around the non consent
piece so no councilmember Ramachandran aye motion fails with a vote of three
ayes two noes one absent one excused four still fails four eyes one no one
Excused we've contacted the mayor's office for a tie-breaking
And we're gonna see if there I'm sorry about the abstention. Yes
Through the chair to the body so your council rules of procedure rule 29
Provide for a tie-breaking vote by the mayor
In the event the council members are evenly divided in their vote on an item
The item will automatically be continued to the next regular meeting solely for the purpose of allowing the mayor to cast a vote
Provided that if the mayor so chooses the mayor may cast a vote at the meeting at which the tie vote occurs this meeting
Thank you and to the parliamentarian. What happens if the mayor opts not to
Will there be a reconsidered vote or what happens then?
if the mayor does not break the tie the
Item will fail
Moving to item 10 adopt a resolution authorizing the council president to submit a response
On behalf of the City Council to the 24 25 Alameda County civil grand jury report
You have five speakers on this item
Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the City Council
My name is Rose Ruble and I'm an assistant to the city administrator in the city administrators office
Before you today is the city's proposed response to the 2024 25 Alameda County civil grand jury final report
Which is included with this item as attachment a?
Which was issued June 20th 2025 each year the civil grand jury conducts
Investigations based on citizen complaints regarding local government and presents opportunities and recommendations for agencies to function more efficiently
This year's grand jury report included five sections which detail investigations concerning the city of Oakland and those are
Bad roads and no building Oakland's budget problems mean no bonds for the city's needs
And I'll just note that this section did not include any findings or recommendations from the grand jury
So did not require a response from the city
The next is Oakland's potholes a bumpy road and inadequate oversight
Oakland's poor stewardship of measure Q funds jeopardizes its effectiveness
Adding insult to injury Oakland issues parking tickets to stolen vehicles and lastly Oakland's wildfire preparedness good vegetation
management, but emergency access needs improvement
Responses to each of these investigations were requested for multiple city departments
and agencies, including Oakland Public Works, Finance and Management, the Oakland Department
of Transportation, Oakland Fire Department, the Office of the City Auditor, and the City
Council.
Attachment B to this item contains proposed responses to each report section prepared
by city staff.
By default, formal responses to the grand jury report are due 90 days after the report's
public release however the city requested and received an extension of
the time to respond from the grand jury's representative. In accordance with
the extension the city's responses are due by Friday November 7th 2025. Adoption
of the proposed resolution will authorize the council president to
submit the responses on behalf of the City Council to the Alameda County
civil grand jury. And I'll just note lastly there were two of the grand jury
report sections the one regarding potholes and the the other regarding stewardship of measure q
Which contain findings and recommendations that were directed specifically to the city auditor
And so in response the office of the city auditor issued a separate
Response to the grand jury report on August 7th of this year and we have included that separately as attachment C to this item
And with that concludes my presentation and myself and department representatives are available to answer your questions. Thank you
Thank you questions from council members on the grand jury report. If not, I have a list
Councilmember Houston I want to move it. I don't have no questions. Okay
Okay, there's not questions I will
Ask a few is the city auditor available as well
Thank you. So this is really, I have questions on two items, the pop hole one and the measure
Q item. Starting with measure Q, do we, I'm not sure if this is for the auditor administration,
do we have a clear definition of extreme fiscal necessity at the moment? Because I know that was
a hotly debated topic and I know it came to the finance committee last year but there was not a
a final vote.
Sorry, there was a different question for the auditor.
Council members, Brad Johnson with the Finance Department.
We have, via your adopted budget resolution,
a definition that you adopted for extreme fiscal necessity.
It was in your budget resolution.
However, we have not formally adopted a,
we have not formally adopted, and that was resolution 90327CMS.
We have not done through our consolidated fiscal policy, adopted a definition for
that outside of the context of your budget cycle.
Thank you.
Were meetings with Measure Q stakeholders conducted to define this item?
And is the resolution just to come at the next budget, or will there be others in between?
There are ongoing conversations with the stakeholders of Measure Q and our other ballot measures.
I'm not going to prejudge the outcome of those conversations, but there's ongoing conversations
around the different elements related to compliance with the local measures, and it's a component
part of your fiscal roadmap that we have those conversations and that we engage in a plan
to come into compliance with them.
Okay.
Thank you.
question is to the auditor on both potholes and measure Q being part of
the work plan for next year there was discussion back and forth of whether or
not KK or you even had an audit done so some kind of clarity on whether an audit
actually happened and whether or whether will be done in the future for both the
potholes and sorry measure KK and you and also measure Q. Michael C. Houston the
City auditor in my response. I clarified that I had you know, I was unaware of any
audits
Measure KK and measure you ever being conducted
And it was not that's not necessarily on our work plan either
Measure Q it is one of those recurring audits that should be done on a
predictable cadence
We've done one it is in our 25 26
It's vague as far as who should conduct it but it is clear to me that it is to be conducted.
Thank you and I guess to the administration is it under the plan to conduct an audit of KK or you now after this report.
make as far as who should conduct it, but it is clear to me that it is to be
conducted. Thank you. And I guess to the administration, is it under the plan to
conduct an audit of K. K. Are you now after this report through the chair to
members of the council? So, yes, certainly want to consider the auditing
of measure K. K. And we can certainly convey that with not just our finance
team, but also external auditors that do our broad city wide audit of our
financials. Thank you. And last question, what is the administration back to the
potholes item? What is the holdup with the iBond meetings? There was a note of,
you know, there's issues with staff and vacancies. Is the issue finding quorum
because there's too many vacancies that need to be proved? Is it that there's not
staff ability to get the meetings organized what's the biggest issue with
not having those meetings be thorough and attended again Brad Johnson with the
finance department we are actively working to schedule the next I bond
committee meeting we were trying to hold the meeting at their regular scheduled
time which is in the second or third Monday of the quarter which would have
been October at that time that we found that we were not able to make quorum of
the commission members. We have conducted a poll of all the commission members for dates
through the remainder of this calendar year and into the in and around their, what would
be their January meeting to try to find a date where we can get quorum for the IVON
commission to meet. And we are actively trying to pursue that with the commissioners to ensure
that we have a date where that can happen.
Okay. Thank you. And just a comment on the wildfire item. I know their grand jury noted
a number of issues with public education and you need to inform the public more about evacuation
routes and red flag days and all of that.
I do just want to recognize that our fire department and administration has been doing
quite a bit but there's always more to do so those aspects of the report are noted and
I think that goes for all emergency preparedness that there's a lot more to do but I do want
acknowledge how much has been done over the last specifically 30 years since the 91 fires
on that regard of community education.
And last question for administration, sorry I'm jumping around, back to the potholes,
25-7 recommendation talks about, or the issue talks about prioritizing hiring for DOT.
I had to look at the website this morning,
and there's only one DOT position currently there.
What is being done specifically
to help with hiring for DOT?
The only one I see is transportation engineer,
which I know there's a lot more positions
needed to actually prioritize paving,
because our city, we repeatedly state lots of priorities,
but there's only, there's very few positions
that are actually ended up being prioritized on our website.
So I just wanna get clarity
on what the action plan is for hiring.
Through the chair and I apologize, there may be someone from Human Resources stepping to the mic, but I do know that the Human Resources Department did move forward with hiring existing recruitment staff to backfill some of those positions so that we can move forward with expediting hiring as this body has certainly directed and what we'd like to do.
so I'll need to get further clarity with respect to the timing of when
The priority hires hires will be coming forward and we can certainly report back to to this body
That would be great
Council members comments questions
Somebody from Public Works, I think for item 25 eight. Do we have anybody from Public Works here?
Yeah, I have a question about item 25 8 at director Rowan. This was about the small business
Requirements and how I believe in the grand jury mentioned in 2021. We had to reject
10 bids for
Because none of them met our requirements. Is that is that still an ongoing issue?
through the chair to the to the council member we continue just in general to struggle with getting high turnout for our
Projects we put out to bid and so we're looking at ways to
Increase competition and as this body knows we have had several opportunities to to seek
SLV e waivers on on project awards even
Looking at waving the program for our ADA consent decree also for our sewer consent decree
on Semba Wong
Thanks through the chair to the city and administrator. So there's a lot of
Findings many of which that we agree with are there certain
Bindings like the implementation of these findings that you think we can prioritize or that would be easiest to address in the near term
So I appreciate the question. I think some of the ones with respect to
Wildfire preparedness, I think there's quite a bit of allocation of funding and staffing and contracts that are in place
So I certainly appreciate that work
moving forward pretty pretty quickly
I would certainly say with respect to items around the potholes and sort of our public infrastructure
I think you all approved the item to procure
requisite materials so that we can address some of those issues on the front end but also as we move forward with our bonding process
That will certainly help us down the line. So I was you know, certainly say all the items
There is a space in cadence by which we can accomplish delivery on these so it's really just a matter of time
and resources. And then one question to Director Rowan, you're here. This is related to finding
25-9 around, so the jury found that we lack adequate control over change orders on our
paving and street projects, and I think there is another finding later in this thing related
to change orders again, and we disagreed with that finding. I am noticed as a member of
the Public Works and Transportation Committee,
we often wind up approving amendments,
added dollars to our contract.
So how would you disagree with this finding?
Through the chair, to Council Member Wong,
that's actually a mostly accurate assessment.
I would give a big shout out to some of the folks
on the Public Works team about a year ago.
We re implemented the department's 2019 construction management plan which actually has a decision making matrix for how they get approved.
There are still a few issues and implementation but we have actually gone so far as to self report ourselves to the city auditor and are undergoing an audit right now of our internal audit or change order control process.
So you will likely see more from us as we seek to daylight those and bring transparency to the change order issue.
OK. I see. So you're saying we're actually going to see more of those coming for the committee.
But it's only because of more transparency rather than more change orders.
So projects have changed and we don't want to shy away from that in construction.
There are really two ways that you can approach it.
You can have big contingencies and no changes but you just pay a premium for your work.
We're trying to be pretty pretty fiscally responsible with our budgets which means when things change we have to change orders.
And so when when they're of a large enough dollar amount we will be seeking to be as code requires to be bringing those back to council for approval and daylight those.
And so we feel that we we don't want to be afraid of change, but we need to be providing explanations for what is happening.
And so you'll see you will see more change coming from us just because on many of these projects, once we dig into the ground is when we really learn what's actually there.
There, even when a project goes to bed, there are still a fair number of unknown unknowns that we then have to address during, especially during the construction phase.
Okay. That makes sense. Thank you. Okay. We can move to public comment. Is there anyone
else on the queue? Oh, sorry. Councilmember Houston? Number five. I'm sorry. Is it my
turn to speak? I just called your name, so yes. Whoa. Okay. Through the chair to our
city attorney. If I could ask a couple questions about the grand jury before my my questions about the DOT items. I who's. Or maybe staff. Yes. Can you give me your name again please. Rose Ruble. Rose Ruble. And you're with the city auditor city administration. City administration. Awesome. Can you just tell me a little bit about who makes up the Alameda County civil grand jury and how are they chosen. How.
Where does this body come from?
Sure, I can speak to that a little bit
and might need to get a little help
from the city attorney on that,
but my understanding is it's a citizen body
and it's organized through Alameda County.
It's an opt-in type of process,
so folks are solicited for their participation
and if they choose to then participate,
it's about a six to eight month investigation process
where they work with the county to,
they review complaints that are submitted by Oakland citizens,
or Alameda County citizens, I should say,
and then select which investigations they would like
to conduct based on the complaints that are received,
and then spend a period of time doing those investigations,
gathering the information, conducting interviews,
and then ultimately release their final report.
And do they report on other cities other than Oakland?
It feels like we take up a lot of their attention.
This year was a bit unusual in that five of the six sections of the report were all specific
to the city of Oakland.
That has in years past not been as common.
Well, I know they spend a lot of time talking about city of Oakland dysfunction, and I think
that was on full display today, but that's neither here nor there.
I will ask for Director Rowan to come to the podium.
I just have one question about item 2518, because this has been debated for quite some
time around the SLBE and our LBE program being a hindrance to being able to timely
get the paving projects done in a timely manner, and I know there's been a lot of accusations
about why.
I would just ask understanding the recommendations and then the feedback that the city gave that
the City of Oakland has mandated equity tools to ensure that our minority contractors are
able to bid on contracts.
How do we ensure this moving forward if they are stating that trying for the City of Oakland
trying to make sure that black contractors brown minority contractors
women get access to contracts if that's a liability I want to hear more about
what we are doing to address it because I personally don't feel it's a liability
I think it's a city's asset and I think we should be doing more of it but want
to hear how that jives with the grand jury findings through the chair to
councilmember five those are those are excellent comments and if I could kind
to bifurcate my response a bit on the on asphalt paving it's oftentimes very
difficult to achieve any meaningful SLBE participation because the cost of the
asphalt mix is so high there there if you start doing the math just on how our
program works it's almost impossible numerically to make it make that happen
On paving, on concrete projects, we believe that we should be procuring more projects,
smaller projects, and creating an environment where more smaller businesses can participate.
We took the step last year of issuing an RFQ for an on-call contract for small businesses.
And we probably need to address that again because we only got four responsive bidders.
I was surprised at the low number, but I think we have we have project types that fit more
With with those who are our smaller contractors trying to get in to do the work with the city of Oakland
Those are mostly going to be the the the you know
Some of our some of our sewer work some of our storm drainage works sidewalks and and more of your your concrete flat work
The the asphalt actually pencils out where we can't comply with those numbers because of just how the
The costs are distributed in a typical paving job
Okay, there's no one else we will move to public speakers
As I call your name, please approach the podium in any order
Please state your name for the record before beginning if you are participating via zoom, please raise your hands so I could easily identify you
Miss Asada, Ola Bala Brooke Levin
Jennifer Finlay
David boat right and Mark Barat
David Boatwright, District 4. The City Council recess extension aside given the
grand jury report was issued June 20th with a 90-day response time, I believe
the council owes its constituents an explanation as to why the important
grand jury points are just now on the council agenda. This report has too many
important issues that the city constituents need to know about whether
a response by the city was ready or not. This report was issued on June 30th of
this year and you were supposed to reply in 90 days that meant that this report
was due on September the end of September. This is November the 4th so I
don't know why it wasn't done. You also have an interim you got some issues with
public works, and you have an interim public works director, you have the
person who's over transportation being interim, and if you're going to do
anything, you need to have a public works director put in place. As it relates to
the item that the report identifies, failure to achieve wildfire prevention
goals such as enforcing parking restrictions and communicating
plan and evaluation routes to residents and nobody asked how they were going to deal with
those Pacific identified problems in the report. It said that the audit, it said that you have
a housing and infrastructure oversight committee, it wasn't that they just, they weren't meeting
regularly, it says in the report that they failed to produce any reports since 2022,
and how you're going to deal with that was not dealt with today.
It says that in the report that you have inadequate controls over construction change orders.
What does it mean, inadequate controls?
It says that you have difficulty with getting approval to hire workers.
I don't know specifically how that is dealt with.
It says that the Oakland, uh, the city of Oakland did not sell any bonds in 2024 due
to his precarious fiscal situation, but you're selling bonds in 2025.
There's a clear date in the report of the, uh, audit that says, I'm sorry, not the audit,
grand jury findings that says there's a specific date.
Thank you, miss all about the moving to the zoom speaker, starting with Mark Barack.
Sorry if I said that incorrectly, please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Okay. Thank you very much. Hello, Madam Chair and Council members. Good afternoon.
My name is Mark Barish, very close on the pronunciation. Thank you.
And I serve as chair of the parks and recreation advisory commission.
Which, as you know, has been granted oversight of measure Q.
And I'm just gonna focus my comments
just on that section in my remaining time.
The city's response to the grand jury report
just came out this past Friday after its extension.
And it's really caused this process to be very, very rushed.
And there's a lot of material here
and many people are unavailable to comment
or even study it in this short couple of days.
So due to that, what we would request
is that the measure Q portion of the report
be scheduled through the rules committee
to be placed on an upcoming public works agenda
so that we can have a more comprehensive discussion
that would be really beneficial, I think.
In the remaining time, there's so many line items.
I'm not gonna attempt to go through them.
I'll just highlight one or two key ones,
which is 25-17, the city disagrees about there
being no public discussion
about the extreme fiscal necessity.
The truth is that this thing was sort of jammed in
at the last second into the budget resolution in June of 2023.
A definition was created to meet the needs after the fact.
It really never went to a proper public discussion.
And indeed there is a group working on the financial roadmap
and the rules definition.
That progress has been slow
even though we have an upcoming meeting
which is mostly focused on the financial roadmap.
Lastly, I'll just say the audits are super important
for public trust and for fiscal management.
And I ask that the efforts be properly funded
and that the results be shared transparently
to the entire community.
Thank you.
Brooke Levin, please unmute yourself
and begin your comments.
Thank you.
Thank you, council member Ramachandri,
members of the council city administration.
I echo, commissioner pre commissioner chair comments.
I agree completely 100% with all of them.
Getting this agenda item
with the administrator's response on Friday
for this morning meeting has made it very difficult
for us to spend time with our community for comment.
And we would request that even though we know
you're going to push this forward to submit
to the grand jury by the Friday deadline
that you now have, we would like to have full discussion
of the Measure Q Public Works portion
at the Public Works Committee meeting.
The extreme fiscal necessity is still a very,
very important item.
Yes, we have had several meetings and we have another one,
but the fact that it was in a budget resolution
that was published on a Friday
for a Monday special council meeting
that no one had ever seen,
was never in any definition in the any ballot measure including the two library measures,
measure q, measure nn, which is the most recent measure pass that has it, and it wasn't in the
charter change that affected the auditor's office, it wasn't in democracy dollars, and it was created
after the fact when the city had a financial challenge to fit that need to not meet the
in all of those other ballot measures which are all put in place by the voters who have a trust in the city.
And I know the city wants to put another ballot measure forward potentially for about 40 million dollars.
And what is there going to be that will endear the community's trust if you're not, you know, aligning with the requirements in all of these existing ballot measures that have parcel taxes.
So there's lots of other things, as Mark said,
and we would like to have this heard
at Public Works Committee for discussion.
Thank you, Jennifer Finley.
Are you on Zoom or in chambers?
Otherwise at this time, all names have been called.
Okay, thank you, colleagues.
Any questions or a motion?
The motion was already made by Councilmember Houston.
I'll second it.
And just to clarify what the motion is to the parliamentarian our approval of this item will
Empower the council president to jointly author a response along with city administration, correct?
That's correct
There's a resolution in the packet that authorizes the council president to submit a response on behalf of the full council to the grand jury
That response would be the response that the city administration drafted and that's in your packet as attachment B to the report
Okay
Houston
Councilmember Fife then councilmember Houston. I didn't turn this on. I just wanted to make a comment
About our LBE and
SLBE in
2001
That was adopted by City Council. What's that?
24 years ago
Twenty four years ago, we're talking about the same thing that we don't have the workforce.
We don't have the companies.
Twenty four years ago, we're talking about the same thing.
I remember this, right? And I'm reading here.
Let me pull this up real quick.
I'm reading here one city official estimated that Oakland could save
10 to 15 percent on projects if reforms were implemented.
And then we're talking about saving money
by not using and building our local SLBE and LBE.
I spoke up about a contractor just recently
and why one was pulled.
And my voice was trying to be squashed
because I'm fighting for the community
that I represent in District 7.
And Oakland as a whole has been underserved
for so many years, 21 years, 21 years,
my folks have been suffering.
My contractors have not been, it's always wave this,
wave that, wave this, that SLB, 21 years.
Councilmember Unger, 21 years.
Councilmember Wang, 21 years.
I must speak to each one of you.
Councilmember Ramachana, 21 years,
before any of us was on here.
Brown, Council Member, 21 years.
Council Member Fife, you brought it up 21 years.
This is a crime.
Not to implement and embrace companies
that want to help very, very, very small businesses
to be competitors and hire individuals
within our community.
While my youngsters, men and women, Brown and Black,
are dying on the street because they don't have opportunity
But why? Because we wave the SLBE. 21 years. I remember my cousin Darryl Carey
used to say this, and I'm gonna close it with this, if you're not mad now, when
will you get mad? And I'm gonna say this, I'm not mad, I'm angry.
Thank you. Are there other speakers?
I just wanted to make a comment actually about the grand jury.
I am on page 11 of this report.
I got to say that, look, I don't know everybody's racial identity, but it looks like there's
one Asian lady and everybody else is white on this grand jury report.
I think the grand jury also needs to have some improvements to get more diversity.
And I think, and that would change some of the viewpoints here in this report.
That's it
Okay, no more comments. We have a motion that I vote that already begun, right?
So do we have to start from the beginning?
I'll start from the beginning
On items hidden moved by councilmember Houston second by councilmember Brown
Councilmember Brown. I
councilmember five
Councilmember Houston. I
Councilmember under I
Councilmember Wong
aye and chair Ramachandran
Noting that councilmember guy was absent councilmember Jenkins is excused motion passes with a vote of six eyes
Are we going back to 3.1?
going back to item 3.1
through the chair
Through the chair members of the council this particular item. We do have a representative
Cameron oaks from Caltrans who will be presenting this particular item
I'll go ahead and read the item. It's a record once again item three point one
receiving information report on Caltrans vision 980 and interstate
580 truck access studies in the city of Oakland
Right. Thank you Oakland City Council members for giving us the opportunity to present
Today, my name is Cameron Oaks and I serve as the deputy district director for transportation
planning and local assistance for Caltrans District 4.
So today I would like to provide an overview of two transportation planning study efforts
that we are conducting in partnership with the city of Oakland and other stakeholders.
The first effort is the Vision 980 study, phase one.
And the second effort is the I-580 truck access study.
There we go.
Okay, so the objective of the Vision 980 study
is to define a new and collective transportation
and land use vision of the Interstate 980 freeway
in West Oakland.
Going back to the 1930s, West Oakland was redlined
by the federal government and considered a bad investment
for federal loans.
However, despite that, the community was still managing
to do very well.
But then, as happened with many communities of color
across the country, the community was selected
for a new freeway alignment.
The freeway in place today is a barrier to local travel
as well as opportunity between West Oakland
and downtown Oakland.
And the Vision 980 study is looking at reconnecting
the West Oakland community with downtown Oakland
and is considering all options.
So the Vision 980 study is divided into two phases.
As mentioned previously, the phase one effort
seeks to identify a new concept and vision
for transportation and land use
along the entire I-980 corridor.
Phase two, in partnership with the city of Oakland,
Caltrans will perform a more detailed feasibility
and technical analysis of the concept
or vision initially identified in phase one.
Development of evaluation framework
to ensure the vision meets equity performance measures
or benchmarks in an equity assessment conducted
in phase one will be carried forward into phase two
and then future phases of this effort.
In terms of vision 980 study goals,
these were the goals that were developed by the study.
I apologize, we have to pause.
We've lost quorum if any of the council members
who have left the room could come back
so we can finish this presentation.
Or if there's staff or present,
if you can ask any of them to turn the room.
Thank you.
Okay, great.
So these are the study goals that were developed by the study's technical advisory committee,
community-based organizations, as well as the public.
I'm not going to read all these that they're here, but I think one of the main goals is
to engage the community with humility to earn a meaningful and long-lasting relationship
that empowers co-creation and collaboration for visioning through implementation.
So the Vision 980 study project is bounded by West MacArthur Boulevard to the north,
Broadway to the east, 3rd Street to the south, and Interstate 880 to the west.
So given the large geographic size and varied characteristics of communities within the
project area, two sectors have been identified to create manageable planning areas.
So the first sector, west of San Pablo Avenue, is where Interstate 980 is primarily a depressed
or below grade freeway.
The second sector, east of San Pablo Avenue, where interstate 980 is primarily an elevated
or above grade freeway.
In terms of the vision 980 study phase one schedule, here's the timeline.
Existing conditions were developed and the first round of public engagement was held
or conducted between April 2024 and December 2024.
Through that process, three potential scenarios were developed.
An additional public comment was gathered
to either enhance, cover, or remove the freeway.
And that was conducted between December 2024 and July 2025.
And these three corridor scenarios were then evaluated
based on previously mentioned grant goals,
as well as the equity performance measures,
as well as public comments
between July and this month of 2025.
And again, a corridor concept or vision will be presented
in the phase one final report later this month.
then we'll be carried forward into the Vision 980 Phase II.
In terms of, we continue to encourage everybody
to visit our project website and sign up
to receive ongoing information on the Vision 980 study.
You can feel free to contact us at this email address
that's presented here.
So now I'd like to, oop, sorry.
Now I'd like to transition to the 580 truck access study
briefly.
How many minutes will you need?
maybe like four minutes.
So in 2019, the West Oakland Community Action Plan
known as the WOCAP identified the need
to look at the I-580 truck ban.
So the WOCAP identified numerous strategies,
almost 90 in total, including one to examine the effects
of removing the truck weight restriction on I-580.
Based on conclusions in the WOCAP
as well as a few local news articles at the time,
the I-580 truck access will be studying the question,
How will removal of the I-580 truck ban affect traffic safety, reliability, and throughput
along the I-880 and I-580 corridors, and achieve equitable public health for nearby populations?
So the study has been divided into four components, first being traffic studies, then an air quality
and noise impact assessment, a racial equity assessment, and a comprehensive community
engagement strategy.
The study also represents a working partnership between Caltrans, the Bay Area Air District,
and the City of Oakland, and other cities and stakeholders.
And the study's air quality analysis will be completed by the Bay Area Air District,
and the Racial Equity Assessment is modeled after the City of Oakland's equity evaluation
framework tool.
And both the Air and Noise Assessment, along with the Racial Equity Assessment, will help
ensure that this study looks beyond mere traffic analysis and forecasting.
So the map you see here, this is the truck access study area.
The study includes the limits of the current I-580 truck ban,
which begins at Foothill Boulevard in San Leandro and ends at Grand Avenue in Oakland.
The study limits also include parallel segments of the 880 corridor, other state highways and
major arterials connecting 580 with 880.
In additional areas of Piedmont, San Leandro, Alameda, as well as unincorporated areas in
counties such as San Lorenzo, Ashland, and Cherryland are also included in the study area.
This is our study schedule. We kicked off in late spring of 2025 and we plan to end the study in late
2026 or early 2027. On November 12th at 6.30 p.m. we'll be hosting our first virtual open house
which will be through a Zoom webinar. For those who cannot attend we plan to record the webinar
and posted on our study website.
The main goal of the phase one engagement
is to introduce the study to members of the public
that live within the study area.
The second goal of phase one engagement
is to communicate the study's purpose.
The meeting will go over the various study components
that I mentioned, the timeline, and then dive
into existing conditions data that we've collected so far.
Afterwards, we'll have a facilitated question
and answer period.
To promote the open house, the project team
has sent out meeting information on our listservs
to, in English, Spanish, and Chinese.
We've also begun posting media information on Instagram,
Facebook, and X, as well as in the languages
that I just previously mentioned.
And the project team will continue to send out reminders
about the meeting through our communication channels.
We've also notified elected officials
within the study area about the upcoming meeting.
And lastly, we've been doing pop-ins to advertise
for the November 12th public meeting
through various city councils, committees,
and commissions within the study area.
So this is just the last slide of my presentation
that lists the constant contact address
where you can find information about the study and sign
up to receive information about the study.
We've also established a study website and a GIS story map
and you can also contact us by email.
But this concludes my presentation.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We've lost form again.
Is Council, oh, no wait, no.
Councilmember Houston is here.
Colleagues, questions?
Okay, well Councilmember Brown.
Excellent, no questions at this time.
I'm just grateful for the last slide
that showcased the community engagement.
Good to see that there's one date that is lined up.
I am curious if there is a continued community engagement
plan that extends outside of the virtual space?
Yes.
So we are planning to conduct three rounds
of public engagement.
So in the beginning, midway, and then
towards the conclusion of the I-580 truck access study.
So we will be doing both virtual and we'd
like to do open house events as well, in-person events.
We are very open.
We're also going to be doing surveys as well
during the process.
So yes, very open to having sit down discussion with that.
The first one is just going to be virtual to introduce the study
and understand what people are looking for in the study
and so they understand what we're
looking to conduct in the study.
Perfect.
Thank you so much.
Also, just wanted to say thank you so much
for sending the supplemental information so that we could
read through some of those items.
I hope that also members of the public
can also who who must be on the listserv but just want to make sure that members
of the public can also read through those materials as well absolutely we
should post them on our website okay is there public comment as I call your name
please approach the podium in any order miss Asada and mr. Hazard so you just
This went through rules of procedure and you violated your own rule of procedure related
to this item.
This item was on the consent and it was rule 24 so you never had it presented and you voted
to approve it and after you approve it then you hear the report.
Confusion confusion.
So this is supposed to have, related to 580, a racial equity assessment.
There's never been a racial assessment, equity assessment that has produced anything of change
related to racial equity for African Americans.
So why is this going to be different in this case?
Because it's never happened.
As it relates to 580 and the issue of evacuation, that is a main source of the Oakland Hills
fire evacuation, adding more traffic to that 580 is going to hinder the need to accommodate
evacuation appropriately.
related to the West Oakland situation where you say you want to deal with more
sustained West Oakland. West Oakland has been devastated by gentrification. It's
already been upheavaled by gentrification. Blacks have been pushed
out. McCliman's High School is in devastation related to gentrification
and we have a council who has never dealt with any form of gentrification.
It's in the report that gentrification is an issue. The city of Oakland has never
dealt with gentrification's impact on the city. So just like racial equity,
gentrification, they ignore it. If this is the component of the...
I'm gonna speak to the procedural and councilman Houston I'm angry I'm angry
because even on the consent calendar and you use rule 24 so the matter is never
discussed and you had the audacity to come in at the end to have Caltrans to
present this. The city attorney has set on the Mason Tillman report for five
years but you go to cleanokens.com and Jean's blog I got it up there and it'll
go to councilmember Houston's comments about waiving contracts. Goes to the
the issue of why blacks only get 1% of the contract.
And you sit up here with your pompous behind, yeah, I'm angry.
Look over your glasses, and you claim to be from law school, and
you let all these violations go down, how dare you?
Insulting to the public, every single last one of you,
and Mr. Unger, you don't even know what you're talking about.
and Wang you want to use oh the makeup of the grand jury and you want to keep
black folks who are entitled to housing in Chinatown how dare you try to thank
you mr. has it your time is up you will need a motion to receive the report if
the motion is seconded by councilmember Ramachandran seconded by councilmember Brown to accept this
report. Councilmember can we just some additional questions? Thank you. We're about to lose quorum. Can you ask them offline? Since this is not an item we have to make an active vote on? Are we, is councilmember Houston about to step away?
I'm just requesting if you're if it's not pressing if you can make your questions off on thank you
Councilmember Brown aye
Councilmember Houston aye
Councilmember Unger
Councilmember Wong aye and chair Ramachandran aye motion passes with a vote of five ayes
to excuse
In one absent your final item you have councilmember announcements and
and open forum.
Colleagues, any announcements or adjournments?
If not, we will move to open forum.
Moving to open forum.
As I call your name, please approach the podium in any order.
If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand.
Curtis Fleming, Jennifer Finley, Stephanie Warren, Mrs. Asada Ola Bala, David Boatwright,
Mr. Hazard, Ron Muhammad, and Tony Cooper, Nick.
Maybe, I can't see the last thing though.
And for those procedures, we have one minute.
I'm gonna ask you to stop using that comp,
that thing called people of color, okay?
You gotta stop using it.
So if you're not willing to say colored people,
you shouldn't be willing to say people of color.
And besides to me, the whole idea of color
seems a bit specious, really.
I mean, what should we call white people, people of no color?
Isn't pink a color?
And in fact, white people are not really white at all.
They're different shades of pink and olive and beige.
In other words, they're colored.
And black people are rarely black.
I see mostly various shades of brown and tan.
And in fact, some light skinned black people
are a little darker than the darkest white people.
I'm sorry, lighter than the darkest white people.
Look how dark the people in India are.
They're dark brown, but they're considered white.
May I see the color chart, please?
People have a phrase that obscures meaning
rather than enhancing it.
What shall we call fat people?
People of size?
All right, stop using that term.
Thank you, Ms. Olivella.
Your time is up.
My name is Rev. Dr. Curtis Flamingham,
Bay City's Minister of Executives,
also a former Commissioner and Chair
of the Safety Services Oversight Commission
for the city of Oakland here.
Also SSC, chair for Prescott Elementary School
and the local housing provider.
I would like to speak in reference to the initiative
that audits have indicated their ineffectiveness.
I want to also extend our gratitude to the city
for its empathy toward the needs of the neighbors,
but there's a couple of things that I would like
to also say if you're looking at design thinking,
there's a couple of steps that are being missed when you first
of all had empathy for those in food deserts.
But you forgot a couple of things.
And one of them is I appreciate your empathy.
I appreciate the fact that you defined the problem.
But you didn't prototype it, okay?
You didn't test it.
You just went right to implementation.
You need to make those steps available.
You need a motion for reconsideration on the 5.28, the Saba contract.
The city attorney lied to you.
You haven't seen any evidence of how much money Saba has spent.
Yes, there was an initial agreement, but Saba ain't spent no $500,000.
Have the city attorney to show you.
The city auditor has already indicated that Saba has
fraudulently misused some money, even from the federal government.
They have not spent any million dollars.
You need to do your due diligence and ask the city attorney to show you
evidence where Saba has gone into their pocket for $500,000.
There's no evidence of that.
Go to cleanokens.com, Jean's blog,
and you can see Madison Dillman report on disparity steps.
Thank you.
I have a feeling you're gonna say something.
I just wanna clarify that council does have the power
to reconsider motions, and we are in open form,
and we can't do it at this time,
but we can in a future council meeting.
Through the chair.
Through the parliamentary.
because, can I speak through the chair real quick?
I'm the city auditor works very, very hard
and this was passed in July, 2024.
And you know, like I always content,
I always say this to the public,
I say this to my council that I'm new,
292 days in, and I'm learning.
And this right here is like ignoring
with the hard work that the city auditor put in in place.
And I would like to reconsider,
but I couldn't do, can I do it after this?
Can we consider the consent calendar to pull that item?
So your council rules provide that a member of the body
that voted on the prevailing side of the motion
can make a motion to reconsider.
That can happen at this meeting or the very next meeting.
So it can happen, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off.
It can happen now or it can happen later.
It can happen at the next meeting.
We can't so I don't know.
So the council rules say a council member vote on the prevailing side of a motion or
action taken at the immediately proceeding meeting.
OK.
So it could be your very next council meeting or you could do it.
No, no.
I want to know that because I don't want to hold up council members of other things and
I want to be able to read this thoroughly and then digest with the city auditor to make
sure the things that I'm saying is correct and accurate.
So it's clear because I like to be clear.
My next meeting I can reconsider this.
It has to be the motion to reconsider must be made by someone who voted on the prevailing
side of the original motion.
So someone who voted I on the original motion in closed session.
So in today's meeting at the consent calendar,
5.28 on the consent calendar.
Okay, okay, all right, got it, got it.
And so I believe you registered a no vote,
but everyone else here, we can talk offline,
but there are options to get it reconsidered.
Okay, and that's what I like to do, on the record.
Okay, is there more public comment?
Apologies.
I voted I but I will be honest in that closed session. I felt rushed in that vote when when would the
reconsideration need to be moved
It needs to happen at the very at your very next council meeting or two which is okay
Not today, but we can happen today or at the next council meeting
Okay, I'll do that consider that for the next council meeting. Thank you
Mr. Boatwright David boat right district for in addition to AIDS cannabis homelessness
I recommend adding city finances road maintenance public education and the need for audits of city operations as
Local emergencies these additional issues affect a lot more city
constituents than AIDS cannabis homeless
combined
At this time all names have been called I don't see any hand raised in the zoom queue
Thank you, everyone. The meeting is adjourned.