Good morning and welcome to the special finance and management committee meeting of Tuesday, April 21st
2026 the time is now 9 a.m. And this meeting may come to order before taking roll
I will provide instructions on how to submit speaker cards for
Items on this agenda if you're here with us in chamber and would like to submit a speaker card
Please fill one out and turn one into myself or a clerk representative
No later than 10 minutes after the start of this meeting or before the item is read into record
Registering to speak via zoom is now due 24 hours prior to the start of this meeting time
This meeting came to order at 9 a.m. And speaker cards will no longer be accepted 10 minutes after making that time 9 10 a.m
We'll now proceed with taking roll council members Brown
Unger here Wong president and chair Ramachandran. Thank you. We have four members present and
Before we begin chair. Do you have any announcements at this time?
Looking forward to getting through everything. Thank you
Okay, reading in item one as today is a special meeting. There are no minutes to be approved
Item to determination of schedule of outstanding committee items and we have one speaker that signed up to speak. I
Just wanted to advise that at rules
Week or so ago. I had identified I would publish the
Council policy directives on the
City administrators website this week or I was supposed to do it last week. I'm a little behind
So it'll occur this week, but it'll be available for the public to consume this week. Thanks. Thank you
Collie and the public speaker that signed up to speak on item to miss Asada ola Bala, I
do have several concerns, but I'm only say one because of the
Agenda being so tight today. I'm going to mention that you had a process
involving
$700,000 for the
Oakland roots project related to the world football event for which you
Help to fund the renovation of the field or whatever was going on
That project was supposed to be in combination with the city of Alameda and the city of Berkeley
I saw a last summer that the city of Alameda
Dedicated a hundred and fifty thousand dollars the total from the three cities was supposed to be seven hundred thousand dollars
and we we provided the whole payment for the dedication of what happened to get prepared that
site for training and how did that happen and what i'm saying in one example is are we
fiscally responsible when we make decisions about money spending and i'm saying we are not
not all the time so i would like to see a report on that seven hundred thousand dollars
the whole seven hundred thousand
dollars or was alameda and Berkeley
supposed to be in partnership to make the total payment from the three cities.
Thank you for your comments share that includes all speakers on this item.
Okay.
Is there a motion?
So moved.
Second.
Thank you.
We have a motion made by councilmember Unger seconded by councilmember Brown to accept the
Okay.
Councilmember Brown to accept the determination
of scheduled outstanding committee items as is.
On roll, Councilmembers Brown?
Aye.
Unger?
Aye.
Wong?
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandran?
Aye.
Thank you.
Item number two passes with four ayes to accept the determination of scheduled outstanding
committee items as is.
Reading in item three, adopt a resolution initiating the fiscal year 2026-27 assessment
process for the city of Oakland Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District and authorizing
the city administrator. To order a preliminary engineers report and we have one speaker that's
signed up to speak. To the staff please go ahead. Good morning council members. Through the chair I'm
Jose Cebuera principal budget and management analyst in the finance department. The city of
Oakland's landscaping and lighting assessment district also known as the lab was established
in 1989 to fund the maintenance of landscaping lighting and related public improvements. It
It operates under the California Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, which governs how
local agencies finance these services.
Under Proposition 218, we can levy the LAD assessment amounts annually, but we cannot
increase the rates without going back to property owners for approval.
The last time the assessment rates were updated was in 1993.
This resolution being presented today initiates the annual process to levy the assessments
for the LAD for fiscal year 2026-27.
action does not increase or approve assessments today, it simply initiates the required process
and technical analysis needed for future council consideration. Specifically, it authorizes
the city administrator to request the start of the corresponding preliminary engineer's
report. This is step one of three in the legally required annual process to levy the assessments.
It initiates the process with the approval of this resolution by ordering the preparation
the preliminary engineer's report. The second step at a future council meeting will present the
engineer's report and City Council will declare the intent to levy the corresponding assessments
and set a public hearing date which will be the third and final step at a subsequent council
meeting which will confirm the report and approve the assessments at that time. The assessments must
be submitted to Alameda County for inclusion on the fiscal year 2026-27 property tax roll by August
We have our consulting assessments engineer, Francisco and Associates, available through
Zoom and we can take any questions that you may have.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
No questions from me.
This comes to us every year and I appreciate the timeliness of bringing this forward.
Colleagues, any questions?
Councilmember Wong.
Thank you.
How much is the tax for this?
the assessments have been completed. This is the this initiates the process so
that the our assessments engineer can analyze and determine what the
assessment rates will be this year. I know that roughly it generates about
$19 million annually. Okay and what's the current rate before we do the new
evaluation. I just couldn't find it in the report. Okay, no worries. I'll follow up
afterwards. I guess my main concern is really just that I've noticed that
there's been some diminishing services on like the street lighting side like
I'll take for example the necklace of lights around Lake Merritt. That was
something that we had wanted to get fixed and urgently so because there's
you know safety implications and whatnot around the park and as I understand it
there's only one lighting engineer who is actually working on these things I
see lights flickering actually the lights are finally on but now they're on
during the daytime too which is like I'm pretty sure they weren't like that
before so I'm just noticing that there has been issues with our lighting
services lately and I keep on hearing from constituents to about street lights
they can't get fixed and it takes months to repair them and I'm wondering if
that's a budget issue given what we've talked about with HR or is this the
positions have been budgeted for we have requisitions for them but we just
haven't filled the positions. Through the chair to Councilmember Wong so the
The LAD pays for both lighting and landscape services across the city.
There are three different zones, and there's different assessment rates within the three
different zones.
If you want to know that sort of as a general way it's set up, so Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3,
there are slightly different assessments that are proxy in that.
What Mr. Segura mentioned earlier on, this tax has not had an increase since 1993.
value and it does not grow year to year. It's the same sort of flat amount every
year. The value of services we're able to purchase for it erodes every year. So we
may have cost increases for staff. Lad also is responsible for paying things
like electricity and water. It keeps up with none of those costs because there
is no CPI escalator in the Lad itself. Lad does pay for lighting. I will note
that. And it pays for those salaries as well, it sounds like. Lighting, it's any of the
operation so it's it can be water power the lighting the repair of it and there
a lot of it is part though is also park maintenance and other things related to
that as well so it is an eroding resource and I would say just for clear
clarity it pays for street lighting traffic signals are a separate topic so
those are two different services street lighting versus traffic signals just in
that space and as we go through your mid-cycle budget process and as you hear
your two next reports on LAAD, because LAAD is a three-part process in order to initiate
every single year, you will get more information on what it does and what it pays for.
Okay.
Okay, great.
And this assessment should actually evaluate what is the level of service that is needed,
and therefore, the assessment that needs to be levied?
It's not how that works, unfortunately.
It is noting what is, because what is eligible, we will go through the process as is noted
under the California Code, but the assessment
that we can levy is capped.
Okay.
Council Member Broughton.
Excellent, thank you so much.
I guess my first comment, just to Council Member Wong,
you should meet with Michael Patterson,
who is kind of over some of the things that you mentioned,
and he'll share some of their staffing challenges.
It's just something to keep in mind.
I had a quick question about the timeliness
of the engineer's report.
I don't believe that I was on finance committee
last year during this time,
and so I did a little bit of research
as far as like when the engineer's report
kind of came to this body,
it looks like it was on the May 6, 2025 agenda.
And so I was curious, I guess, through the chair,
or through the chair to the administration,
will we be able to generate this engineer's report
within, I guess, the next 30 days,
or when is this due?
Beck?
Our current intent is to bring the second report,
which is the intention, on May 12th,
so it would just be one week behind last year's schedule.
And we do have built into the schedule
where we do anticipate that we'll bring all three reports
prior to the fiscal year, including.
Excellent, thank you.
Any public speakers?
Calling in the name that signed up to speak on item number three,
miss Asada Ola Bala.
Does this include traffic lights?
No?
OK.
So the report written identifies that this involves a property tax.
US council members have to, at some point,
evaluate the weight of property tax as it contributes
to the revenues of this city.
there is a imbalance of responsibility
of people who live in this city, who own property,
taking care of providing revenue for this city.
And it's unfair.
So here's another property tax to finance
our city parks, grounds, our landscape mediums,
open space, pools, custodial services.
Now where I have issue is in your race and equity statement,
you say that you provide improvements to all residents
and non-residents parcels.
There is, if anyone would go out and evaluate
how parks look in this district,
how mediums look in this district.
When I say this district, I'm talking about mine,
six and seven, there is no comparison.
You have some areas that are well kept and some are not.
Some are almost, if you go down Bancroft where my church is,
it's ridiculous how the medium looks.
It's ridiculous how we have overgrowth.
We have, is this responsible for cutting trees as well?
No?
Yes, just nod your head, yes.
Okay, I had a tree fall on my car, $700 worth of damage,
one of your trees, okay?
you three years ago so we do not have we have trees that are leaning a going up
Keller and we do not have equity and fairness as it relates to this and you
can't put it on paper that you are doing a where all residents and non partial
residents maintain safe well-kept streets that is not true thank you thank
Thank you for your comments.
Ms. Oluwala, Chair, that concludes
all speakers on this item.
All right, I will entertain a motion.
I'll move the item.
We'll second that.
Thank you, we have a motion made by Councilmember Brown,
seconded by Councilmember Wong,
to approve the recommendations of staff
and to forward this item to the May 5th, 2026,
City Council Agenda on Rural Councilmembers Brown?
Aye.
Unger?
Aye.
Wong?
Aye.
Thank you. The item passes with four ayes to forward this item to the May 5th
2026 City Council agenda on consent. To the to Madam City Clerk for the next three
items with the Budget Advisory Commission members like to make a joint
presentation on all three items or and if so we can read them all in together. If
if BAC members are present.
Thank you.
Okay, we're reading in items four, five, and six together,
just noting that we will require a separate vote on each item.
Item four, receive an informational report
from the Budget Advisory Commission
on the recommendation to amend
the consolidated fiscal policy
to redefine excess real estate transfer tax revenues.
Item five, receive an informational report
from the Budget Advisory Commission assessment
and recommendations of the fiscal year 2025
to 27 city budget process.
And item six, receive an informational report
from the Budget Advisory Commission
on the proposed 2026, $40 million
partial tax measure to support essential city services
and fiscal stability.
And we do have a number of speakers on each item.
Thank you.
And to the commissioners,
do you have PowerPoints for each of these
Or will this be an oral presentation?
I do have a PowerPoint which we use for items four and six.
I think item five, the budget recommendations
are just oral presentation.
Can I send the PowerPoint somewhere to get it uploaded?
Is that K-Top at Oakland CA?
Great, I'll do that right now.
Whenever you're ready.
All right, well, go ahead and get started.
And we'll wait for the presentation to come through.
It's all just more material from the memo,
just pulled out to make it a little bit easier to read.
So I'll be talking first.
I apologize.
Before you begin, would a total of 15 minutes be sufficient, five minutes per I am flexible?
Yes, that's efficient.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
So, my name is Ben.
I am the Finance and Management Liaison from the Budget Advisory Commission.
Thank you for taking the time this morning to hear our recommendations on the amending
the consolidated fiscal policy to refine, redefine excess real estate transfer tax,
our recommendations of the budget process, as well as our recommendations on the previous
discussions around a June 2026, $40 million parcel tax.
Speaking to the first item, item number four, the proposed amendment to the CFP to redefine
excess real estate transfer tax.
A little bit of background material for anybody listening, Oakland levies a transfer tax on
all real estate transactions.
Up to 40% of this transfer tax revenue each year is derived from commercial and multifamily
real estate.
The bottom of page one in the memo, top of page two, you can see a table showing the
year 2019 2020 revenue amounts by say it by transfer tax band so you'll see that
properties under $300,000 the statutory city rate is 1% there about 53 million
dollars worth of sales in that band in FYI 2019-20 and the relative transfer
tax revenue from that year was 54 $540,000 you'll notice that the bulk of
the revenue from the real estate transfer tax comes from properties in the 300,000
million dollar band which generated 46 million dollars in transfer tax in
2019-20, and in the 5 million plus dollar band which is 2.5 percent rate
generated 36 million dollars. The real estate transfer tax is highly volatile,
it varies a lot year to year. Thank you, we can go to slide 3 here. Yeah, highly
volatile year to year due to variability, especially in commercial and multifamily
real estate property sales. Thank you. So you might recall from the last slide,
We had about 46 million in, I want to call it single-family home sales revenue.
And then it was 36 million in multifamily or commercial real estate property transactions.
This is 2019, 2020.
In FY23, 24, we saw a slight downturn in single-family homes to about $39 million, so about $7 million drop.
But the large properties, the $5 million plus,
dropped by almost 10, over $20 million
into $10 million in total revenue.
So 80% of the volatility in real estate transfer tax revenue
is due to changes in high value property sales,
namely commercial real estate, multifamily.
And this happens during economic downturn
because those buildings are worth a lot less.
Following COVID, we have something like a 30%
office vacancy rate.
And so office vacancies are high,
commercial real estate is worth less.
some early apartment rents have not been increasing as much and so those property
values have gone down a lot. The City of Oakland first adopted a real estate
transfer tax policy in June 2009 during the Great Recession when they realized
that that transfer tax revenue was going to was dropping a lot and they
defined any excess transfer tax as any amount greater than 40 million this is
back in 2009. In December 2014 that excess amount was redefined as 15% of
of general purpose funds and in 11 of the 15 years
that followed, the real estate transfer tax
has fallen short of that 15%
of the general purpose fund threshold.
So in most years, the city has no excess
real estate transfer tax available under the current policy
because the current policy is set up in such a way
that what's excess is a really, really high threshold.
So our recommendation is to basically go back
to the style of recommend of policy
that Ridge Oakland first adopted,
which is to have, uh, amend the CFP to define excess real estate transfer tax
as anything greater than $70 million adjusted for inflation.
This recommendation is based on sort of two key considerations. One, as mentioned,
basically all of the real estate transfer tax funds right now are budgeted in the
city's general fund revenue expenditures and programs and plans.
And that means when you have an unexpected shortfall due to a pandemic or just
changes in activities in Oakland, you have to cut programs and services.
And that's never any fun as I'm sure you've all experienced
and it's not a desirable outcome.
It's also a critical equity issue
because people come to rely on those programs
and services that are funded
by this inflated real estate transfer tax revenue.
And then when you cut them back
at times people are most need,
it makes it a lot harder for people to cope with that.
And then the other issue is that there's no excess
of real estate transfer tax available to replenish reserves.
When we draw down reserves in a fiscal emergency,
we need to replenish them when times are good.
And the times are good when real estate transfer tax is high.
And so we really want to be able to use some of that excess higher level of transfer tax,
replenish reserves, build up the reserves, in order to provide the maintenance
and stability during those downturns.
So this chart shows what it would look like under the two scenarios since 2011.
You can see the green line is the actual realized real estate transfer tax revenue.
That's the green solid line.
The orange dashed line is the current consolidated fiscal policy threshold,
to 15% of general purpose fund revenues.
And then the dash and dotted purple line
is the recommended threshold based on our proposal here.
It's slightly higher than was originally adopted in 2009
because I think it was 2017 or 18,
Oakland moved to a tiered transfer tax structure,
so there is more revenue overall available
than was originally available in 2009.
But this approach would help make sure
that revenues are stable,
in line with current budgeted plans and policies,
and then there's excess real estate transfer tax revenue
available to replenish reserves
and build up a healthy fund balance
in order to maintain services during downturns.
I believe the next steps for this
is that we understand that finance is working
on other updates to CFP coming later this year.
So no action is required right now,
but we will expect to work with Finance Department
on this among other proposals to come back
for you for a more consolidated update later in the year.
Happy to take any questions now
or we can wait till the end of the presentations.
Wait till the end.
Sure, sounds great.
Okay.
And then we're gonna go ahead and jump to item six and,
or do you want to, do you want to?
Okay.
We'll jump to item six while I'm up here
and then we'll switch to Larissa
to talk about the budget process overall.
So the next one is recommendations
on the June 2026 $40 million tax measure.
We understand that FMC previously considered
a $40 million parcel tax for the June 2026 ballot
discussed in September and October of 2025.
While Oakland is no longer planning
to put forward a measure on the June 2026 ballot,
there's been a citizens initiative put forward.
These recommendations were prepared in December, and are still relevant for future measures
and other considerations.
So I'll go over them briefly here.
So the recommendations we had for future taxes, which I think apply broadly, are to look at
progressive ways of tiering the tax structure.
So rather than a flat tax that applies to all households equally, look at ways to consider
things like parcel size or improved square footage, or for multifamily properties, number
of units to have different breakdowns for, for example, larger homes or larger multifamily
buildings have a higher tax rate than smaller ones. Since you can't do an actual market
value, this is sort of a proxy for that. Looking at independent oversight, I think
this wasn't discussed in the city's original proposal. This initiative included it and
we would recommend generally looking for an independent oversight approach with any new
tax, either a new or existing commission doing oversight. For civic engagement, we thought
it was especially important for any June measures that are coming out at the same time as the
city's budget to be very aligned with civic engagement around the budget process because
because we imagine that residents are being asked
to pay for a new tax, they're also looking carefully
at the budget coming forward and thinking about
how are these gonna work together,
what's going on here, they're paying a lot of attention.
And then the other suggestion we had was to make sure
that any funding you're using for a given,
that's coming from a given measure,
is also aligned with other goals.
So one example was we considered suggesting
lead-based paint abatement as a fundamental use of funds
for the parcel tax as a safety, health and safety improvement.
We were thinking about whether ADUs
new construction new construction ADUs should be
exempted from the parcel tax to avoid discouraging new housing
construction those kind of considerations we also had a couple of
future considerations for the city look forward overall in terms of either
future bet measures ways to improve the budget overall or other improvements to
the city processes so looking at whether square footage parcel taxes could be
feasible to do in the future more broadly there may be some data updates
required for that you know you need to have improved square footage data from
the assessor's office or locally collected which might be challenging to
collect but maybe worth the investment enable more progressive tax workers in
the future we want to recommend looking at ways to make existing funds more
efficient so we heard an item earlier in this year about I think it was the
children's youth fund and just generally recommend evaluating earmarked funds
and maintenance of effort requirements to ensure those voter approved measures
which may have been from decades ago still aligned with current budget
priorities and community needs and consider ballot measures to go back to
of voters to adjust to those either allocations
or maintain separate requirements where you think
that the city should spend its money differently
without raising new taxes overall.
And then another future consideration here
was to streamline procurement to increase competition
and bidding and reduce costs to the city,
leaving up more money for other opportunities.
And then we had one more general set of considerations
about growing the tax base overall.
We had some concerns that city of Oakland
is a lot of missed opportunities with all the vacancies,
you know, they can store fronts,
not much housing development going on right now.
And so looking at ways to increase economic development
to provide a larger tax base to begin with,
generating more revenue without needing
to raise new tax rates,
looking at ways to relax restrictions on new businesses,
such as through zoning changes,
fast tracking permitting,
investing in neighborhood centers
and business improvement districts,
and then expanding a calendar of only Oakland events
to promote vibrancy, attract visitors,
and reduce tax leakage to other neighboring jurisdictions.
I'll pass it off to my colleague, Larisa,
who will talk about the recommendations of the budget process
And then we'll take any questions.
Thank you.
Good morning.
So my name's Larissa, and I'm a member of BAC,
and also a member of our ad hoc education
and engagement committee.
So just gonna provide a little bit of context
on what I'm doing here today.
As you know, the consolidated fiscal policy mandates
that the BAC provide the city council
city leadership with an assessment and recommendations on our city's budget process.
We give you all feedback.
Evaluate the outreach and information by the city based on ten specific principles.
These principles are on the second page of your memo, the memo in your packets.
And these principles include inclusive design, authentic intent, transparency, inclusiveness
and equity, informed participation, accessible participation, appropriate process, use of
information, building relationships and community capacity, and evaluation.
these are the ten specific principles that we looked at when we assessed the
budget process of the city. So I wanted to let you all know each commissioner
attended at least one budget town hall and several of us attended more than one
town hall. We attended the informational budget forums and several of us also
the budget. And we also hosted a
community meeting a commission
meeting. At the eighty first
avenue library where residents
came and also gave us feedback
on the process. So our
recommendations- reflect that.
Feeding on the budget. And we
also hosted a community meeting
a commission meeting. At the
eighty first avenue library.
Where residents came and also
gave us feedback on the process.
feedback. So overall on the 2527 process was a significant improvement and I have
to share one story about one of our commissioners who came and shared with
us that when they read the interim mayor's budget summary they said that
they were almost moved to tears quote unquote because the summary was really
honest and very direct about our budget deficit and seriously felt like the information in
the budget could be trusted and felt like the city was being very direct about what
was happening.
So that was a huge improvement.
One of our recommendations in the former cycle, the 2325 budget cycle, was to inform residents
of the process prior to the mayor's budget actually being released.
And really, I think this was a significant improvement
because this actually did happen back was able to participate
or partner with the city administrators office as well as spur
and the League of Women Voters and hosted two informational budget forums,
one at the main library and the other at 81st Avenue.
Well attended, well received.
Information was really great, you know, translation,
participation.
There was a lot of participation.
There was a timeline around the budget process.
And more than anything, residents had a lot of questions
about the budget deficit and what was going on.
And there was a history and background
that was offered at those informational forums.
And that was really great.
and the city did a really great job of updating its information on the website and several
staff from finance department as well as the city administrator attended those forums
and were there and answered every question and I think that that really reflected very
well on the city.
So that was really great, was very proud, the back was very proud to be part of that
process and those forums.
So areas of improvement.
So we know that residents are really feeling a lot of, they're increasingly disconnected
from their government, elected representatives, you know, we know that this is true especially
for BIPOC communities, and it's critical that we demonstrate through our actions the residents'
voices are generally being heard and valued.
And I share this, you know, because it's really important that we listen to what residents
sharing with us. So, areas of improvement. Begin community engagement earlier even
though we started the budget process in March and April. We should begin it
earlier. Town halls, the district town halls should be made accessible by
default, provide interpretation by default, offer flexible scheduling. A lot
them are in the evenings really hard for families and seniors to attend. Host
multiple locations per district. Our districts are really large. I know my
district is both in the hills as well as well as the flat lands and it's
really hard sometimes for folks in the flat lands to actually go to the hills
especially if they're transit dependent and vice versa. So think about possibly
hosting multiple town halls per district. Share budget materials in advance so as
residents can come prepared.
Allow direct dialogue between residents and city council members.
So at the town halls, really great work.
They were all consistent, same agenda, everyone knew what to expect.
There were small groups and pair activities, wonderful.
Community building, great.
But not everyone had an opportunity to actually share their own priorities directly with their
city council member.
And so we heard back that residents really wanted to have that direct dialogue with their
elected official.
People felt that there were index cards and, you know, you shuffle through the index cards,
don't want to ask the same question five times.
But from the residents' perspective, they felt like they were being censored.
So, you know, folks want the mic and they want to hear, have their voices heard literally.
So we heard that multiple times.
clearly about how resident input is going to be followed up on use brief
surveys after each event to capture real-time feedback so this could just be
like a postcard with a couple of questions and then lastly we heard quite
a bit feedback about the budget being approved three weeks before the deadline
and understandably this was both you know on one side of the coin it was
was celebrated as a wonderful thing that happened and on the other side of the coin residents
felt like the budget had already been predetermined, didn't feel like they had access to their
elected representatives and had planned on communicating with you all in those three
weeks about their budget priorities, and felt like that opportunity to participate in the
process had been cut short.
So that is that.
Let's see.
So overall, it was really great.
A lot of progress was made in informing residents.
I think our challenge collectively and our goal is to really move beyond informing residents
and really including residents in the budget process
and in budget decisions.
Our ad hoc committee, the engagement and education committee
will be sharing information throughout the year
about the budget.
We're in the mid-year cycle, so no rush.
We're planning another community meeting
at the 81st Avenue Library to get input from residents again
and we're gonna be beginning to work on our survey
We're going to pass it over to
the council if you will.
One moment to the chair to the
presenter, the 15 minutes it's
up, would you like to spend the
time?
Oh, I'm almost done.
But just to, I'm done.
Just to say that, you know, our
work is always done is best when
we do it together and
collectively, and so I'm happy
to take any questions you might
have.
Thank you, firstly.
I want to really appreciate the
effort you put into trying to improve our budgeting process, make information more transparent,
and solicit community feedback is very much appreciated.
One of the things that I wanted to make a point of doing differently last year, and
I really appreciate your feedback, compared to the year before this budget process was
not having the BAC's presentation come on the day of the final vote at the very end
of June, which is what happened the year before.
the last year structuring the process so that BAC members were present at town halls as
well as giving reports to council before the very end of June and being able to have those
written materials as well was something that I certainly found helpful and I believe all
of us, all of us on the budget team right here had found helpful as well.
A couple of questions going, well just commenting on the last item, I appreciate the feedback
and it's very heartening that one of your commissioners felt very, felt that it was
refreshing how honest this process was and I have to give a lot of appreciation to our
finance department, our city administrator for bringing in, for ushering in a new era
of transparency when it comes to our budget realities.
And I think that helped instill a lot more confidence
than in past years, at least since I've been in this role,
about where we are and where we have
to go with the limited funds that we do have.
I also want to appreciate the mayor's office
for helping the whole town halls process
be a little more interactive.
There's with such little time and limited attention
spans of everyone participating, I know we wanted to do so many different things, and
I fully hear that even with limited time, how can we build in more time for direct community
feedback?
I think that's something to consider in the future, or longer town halls, or part ones
and part twos.
Again, I know the finance department primarily that puts on these presentations, and their
time is limited, but I think with limited time and resources, these are all very important
things to consider moving forward in this year's mid-cycle process and
specifically the next year's biennial process where there's typically more
structural town halls in the in the two-year budget process. Going back to
the first part of the presentation with the RATT recommendations, I again I think
this is very valuable feedback in that historic context is very helpful. I did
want to ask without putting our finance director on the spot too much if you
have an opinion on this. Well, A, when is the consolidated fiscal policy coming
back and is the RITT, is changes to excess RITT something that you're
considering? Thank you, chair. We did have a chance to evaluate the BAC's proposal. I
don't we would like through the policy evaluation process to be able to bring
you several options related to RTT but that is definitely a topic we'll want to
look at. I do think ensuring that we are fully funding our rainy day fund which
is funded through this along with providing extra resources to pay down
long-term liabilities is a key space and moving to a flat number might be a
more stable way of predicting that on the future so it's definitely an option
that we'll look at as we go to that. We are looking to do the CFP revision this
fall, along with lots of other ones. So this is a topic I would note for
everyone to be aware of related to R E T. There is a qualified statewide
initiative that would potentially in hamper our ability to collect this
revenue source in general. And so we need to also give consideration as
we're developing a policy. What would our both overall budget pool, but
also our resource for funding our rainy day policy and on fund liabilities
look like in absence of this mechanism in total. So that's part of a broader
that we need to look at.
Thank you.
Colleagues, Council Member Brown.
Excellent, and so to not to go too far off
of what our administrator Bradley was mentioning,
is there a timeline that we would be receiving
some of this feedback?
Again, we're targeting sort of the October time span,
and if this body is interested,
the foundation for what we'll be looking at
are the informational updates
that were brought to this body two years ago.
On updates to the CFP, there were a number of items
that were done on an informational basis.
That is our starting point.
So we're looking at October though.
Excellent, thank you so much.
So through the chair onto our amazing BAC members,
just thank you.
I can't emphasize enough just how much gratitude
that I have for your volunteerism.
I think that this commission is definitely one
that the impact and also the work, it's very high level.
And so I'm just so grateful for all of the work
that you all put into ensuring that both community feedback
comes forward, as well as what are some of the
recommendations that the commission is working on.
And so just really value the feedback.
I just wanted to highlight that I've had
opportunity to kind of take in the budget process both as a community
member as a staffer and then now as an elected official and I think it was
interesting in 2025 keeping in mind that you know that year was just it was such
a unique year right with just leadership within the city of Oakland right and
just the changes that all of us new council members really had to come into
and so even in all of that I feel that the feedback was positive in a way and
also definitely value the recommendations that that you all kind of
are put that community members provided us and then I also just want to give you
know amazing cute kudos and I think I've mentioned this before but kind of what
thank you and thank you so much
that council chair ramachandran
mentioned around just the
support from the office of the
mayor finance department.
The administration in order to
really like a bring us all up to
speed in what was needed and so
can't you know can't thank
everyone enough and I think
that just the feedback that was
mentioned in the report around
ways that we can continue to
I think that that could be a tool that we should utilize as well, because kind of to the reports point around, you know, folks not really feeling comfortable to come out in the evenings, right, and just the difference between different areas, both in the flatlands, downtown, et cetera, really wanting to make sure that we have a truly engaging process, so I really appreciate that feedback for sure.
that feedback for sure and then the one question that I did have I think you
mentioned briefly that there is a community engagement set session coming
to the 81st Avenue library I was curious if you had the time and date for that
we don't have the time or date just yet but we'll definitely let City Council
Thank you so much.
For hunger, then Councillor Wong.
Thank you for this work.
I am also frequently moved to tears when Bradley presents me with his budget numbers.
Some questions about the CFP.
Once we put something in the CFP, how do we, I mean, if we then have to make changes later,
Is that via resolution?
Is that something that looks bad to rating agencies
if we're constantly going back and forth?
That's correct.
So there's two elements to,
there's the CFP itself and changing it
and this consolidated fiscal policy
to not use the acronym too much
is an ordinance that governs your structures,
your budget process, your reserve policies.
And so changing it is an ordinance that requires two readings.
Within the CFP itself,
you have the ability to waive provisions
and that's typically by resolution at the time.
So, changing the CFP, changing your definitions within it,
the kind suggested by the BAC regarding RITT,
is an ordinance change.
And no, you would not want to change your policies
on a frequent basis, which is why we want to look at them
collectively this fall and sort of take one stab at
updating them all across the space, strengthening them,
which can be a buff to us going into the rating process,
can be helpful, and should you choose to waive them
due to circumstance at the time,
the provisions for doing that are spelled out
in the policy itself.
And then, I mean, obviously, I completely agree
with the philosophy of not using one-time revenues
for ongoing expenses.
Is putting that in the CFP just a way
of sort of saving us from our future selves?
I mean, we could do that without putting it in the CFP.
That's, I would say, is an accurate statement
as to why it sits there.
Okay.
I mean, generally, in budget making,
flexibility is more, I mean, from my perspective,
probably from your perspective,
you would like us to be less flexible.
I would prefer us to be able to have some flexibility.
Can you imagine a situation in which
sort of limiting ourselves in this way
ties the hands of budget staff or you?
So depending on the context of how one would change,
if we're speaking specifically around the RATT policy,
as to use the example that was brought up
by our BAC commissioners,
were you to have that staff would have to construct
budgets based upon whether or not policymakers
want to live in accordance with that structure or waive it.
So you do, and we have waived
even the 15% threshold policies.
Like we have gone through the process of waiving them.
I think Mr. Gold mentioned that we were under
the threshold 11 out of 15 years,
but if you look at the four years we were there,
I think in many of those years,
We may have waived the provisions that were tied,
that would have tied our hands in those years too.
So these are two different categories.
As a rule around flexibility regarding both the CFP
and your voter approved measures,
which is in the second record report that BAC give,
the finance department's position
is that you should always have a mechanism
by which to have flexibility should you need it,
because we cannot perfectly predict the future.
So in any revision to the CFP or anything coming forward,
we would imagine that we would recommend a mechanism
by which you could waive its provisions,
but what the provision itself should be
to maximize stability in normal years is a separate question
and that's one we'll want to evaluate
along with the side of the commissioners.
Okay, and then just one sort of request slash challenge
for the Budget Advisory Commission.
You know, in that, one of your final slides
was about growing the economy and ways we can do that
and I would just ask that the more specificity
we can have, the better, because people always come to me
and say, hey, we should grow the economy.
And I say, great, I love it.
But what does that actually mean?
And so I think one way that you could be helpful to us
is as you look at other cities,
if there are policies that you think we can adopt,
i.e. steel, I'm happy to do that.
So the more detail and specificity,
the more helpful the commission will be.
Thank you.
Councilor Robinson.
Yeah, really want to just, you know, echo my colleagues' comments on the amazing job
that you guys have done, really thoughtful recommendations here.
One thing that I had noticed in one of the attachments is the recommendation to explore,
I believe you're saying existing ballot measures to adjust some of the earmarked funds allocations.
And as I understand it, Director Johnson or is it Administrator Johnson?
What's the, okay, Director, as I understand it, we can adjust those fund allocations without
going back to the voters as long as we're not raising taxes, correct?
It depends on the specificity of the ballot measure itself.
So on a legal basis, some of your ballot measures, and I would defer to the city attorney, have
requirements that are built in non-severably to the measures where you cannot adjust them.
Some of them are more flexible.
Some of them it's a matter of interpretation as to what this restrictions of the ballot
measure means.
What I think, though, the BAC is referring to is regarding the maintenance of effort
requirements in those ballot measures.
Most of those would require you to go back to the voters to adjust.
So utilization of resources is a separate question, sort of MOEs.
I think the BAC was speaking about some of the MOE provisions as well.
It's not a little bit little of both got it. Yeah, is that what you all were referring to?
There we go
so
Without making specific recommendations here on the dais we have identified areas which are worth further
Investigation as to whether council wants to maintain the current ordinances and structure or whether it's worth asking the voters a few examples
I believe the 1997 children's fund measures in the charter of item which requires 3% of the general fund
to be set aside for children's related programming.
There are a lot fewer children in Oakland today
than there were in 1997,
and our general fund has grown faster than inflation.
So we are now spending a lot more per child
than we were in 1997,
which is maybe not aligned
with the original intent of the measure.
Another example is the two partial taxes for libraries,
plus the maintenance buffer requirement,
meaning we spend about $50 million a year on libraries.
Other cities like Sacramento and Long Beach,
which are bigger cities,
spend about $25 million a year on libraries.
So we spend more on libraries
than some of the cities a similar size.
And there's some other similar items, I think, like that,
where it's maybe worth considering,
are there ways to deliver similar or better services
at lower cost?
Are the measures that were passed 10, 20, 30 years ago
no longer aligned with what they originally intended to do?
Would the voters like services reallocated within the city
without paying higher taxes as an opportunity
to consider saying, hey, voters, you
proved this tax 20 years ago.
Maybe we should have spent it on this instead of that.
Better meet your goals without changing taxes at all.
I think it's worth discussing and considering this for the future without making any specifications
about anything I just said.
Those are just things we've seen that could suggest there could be opportunities to look
at this further.
Yeah.
And I completely agree.
And those examples are helpful.
And then the other question I had was just around the progressive parcel tax structure.
I know that last year Director Johnson, I did ask about this.
And I think in your report, since I had wanted to know about what a progressive parcel tax
looks like you had broken it down by single-family homes versus multi-family versus non-residential
units and a recommendation, and I was wondering, you know, the square footage-based parcel
tax structure. Is that something that sounds like Berkeley has done that? I think in their
report they mentioned it would just require some technology. Does that match up with your
own assessment of what is required to implement a square footage-based progressive parcel
tax structure. So as we're as it relates to doing a parcel tax allocation on the
basis of square foot, Berkeley does do that. We've gotten some caution from
city attorney around whether or not pursuing that is in is our most secure
mechanism. So I would I would note that probably not for this space to have
that conversation. However, exploring alternate mechanisms that are eligible
within Proposition 13 and 26 for parcel taxes is something we would look at. It
it would require additional information
and potentially additional cost to administer.
So that was one of the things that we would want
to make sure we're aware of and looking at too.
And should we decide on a mechanism to change that,
similar to what Mr. Gold was stating
as it relates to looking at both the spending elements
and MOEs for a prior ballot measures,
it's also a question as to whether or not
you would want to harmonize your prior ballot measures
as well in terms of their collection methodology.
Having desperate collection methodologies
doesn't create sort of additive cost
and enforcement issues across them.
And that's a similar conversation
I would have for you around exemptions
related to the ballot measures and the similar sort of thing.
So that's, I would suggest that if you were gonna have
a conversation around the ideal structure,
there's a legal question,
there's an administrative implementation question,
there's a question of whether or not you wanna harmonize
them both on the collection methodology and the exemptions.
Okay, that is, that's helpful.
Okay, and then one other question I have actually
to the Budget Advisory Commission.
Have you ever seen where in progressive
parcel tax structures, especially,
I think I have as much as I'm a proponent of it,
I also have some worries that, for example,
people living in multi-family unit apartments
that the taxes can be passed on in the form of rents
to tenants, have you seen that happen?
Yeah, so Oakland's rent stabilization ordinance,
I believe, generally precludes the ability of landlords
to raise their rent.
However, due to Costa Hawkins, with vacancy control,
rents return to market basis when people leave.
Additionally, market rate, sorry, non-rent control units,
like new buildings we see in downtown and so forth,
are not such as rent stabilization ordinance.
And so parcel taxes, whether progressive or flat,
likely generally end up being passed along to renters in some way, shape, or form eventually,
whether it's not usually itemized as a worker raise your taxes right now because about new
parts tax was passed, usually even if it's, you know, a few hundred dollars a unit over the course of
a year, it's not a significant increase in rent overall, but they do generally, are considered
generally to affect the market for rents. So yes, that's part of the reason why we ended up a
structured approach, and one of our considerations that we included in the memo was that looking at,
for instance, if you're doing a flat parcel tax, you can structure it so that you have, you know,
a different rate for small one to four unit buildings versus larger let's say 50 plus unit buildings for instance, right?
Which are generally reflective of all the rent control buildings versus more modern market buildings
So that was more for considerations even if it's a flat rate structuring it like that. That's the question. Okay, it does. Thank you
Thank you
public comment and
since we were having three items together if
Depending on the number of items you signed up for you were allotted that amount of time
Calling you the names that signed up for items three. Sorry four five and six
Kevin Dali, I have you signed up for three of the items. You'll get a total of six minutes, Mrs. Sato
Olavala, I have you signed up for three of those items
You'll get a total of six minutes and David boat right? I have you signed up for two of those items
You'll get a total of four minutes in no particular order. You guys can come up to the podium and make your comment
I appreciate the presentation today. There's one issue of tax
It's state tax and income which we haven't been looking up
I brought it up in front of councilmember Wang last week the ILC
that's the gas tax and
As we're moving to more electric vehicles the number of my gallons sold
year-over-year is dropping.
There's a bill, AB 1421, in the State Assembly,
which is looking at the vehicle miles travel tax,
and I think Oakland needs to follow that closely
and find out how to move it forward.
It has another advantage that,
as Waymo is coming into the city,
Waymo has a habit of driving around empty in San Francisco.
There's no way to legally tax a Waymo that's empty as long as it's running on electric
fuel, but this would allow possibly taxing the vehicles as they drive around if we don't
do the network tax on all Uber, Lyft, Waymo-type vehicles, but that requires a vote.
Thanks for looking into that.
David Boatwright, District 4.
I'd just like to say the BAC is a very knowledgeable group.
I go to a lot of these commission and board meetings,
and I've never seen anybody dig into the details like they
have and be able to speak so spontaneously as they have.
So they did a great job.
The only other thing of substance I have to say
these forums before the budget is approved are very very important for
each district and I would support a hundred percent that those are
continued and that there is more interaction as the BAC recommends more
opportunities for the residents to participate in those meetings and get
information before the meeting so they're fully educated when they come to
the meetings. Thank you. So I don't know if you're aware but when people in the
community try to participate at meetings sometimes that participation becomes
very limited and one way it becomes limited is there's a presentation as an
opportunity for questions and answers but that process of questions and answers
can be limited and how that happens is this way. You are required in some cases
to submit your questions ahead of time. If that doesn't happen you are required
to write your questions down on a piece of paper or card and when they do that
you can see people going through the cards picking out the ones they want to
answer and not necessarily just piling them in and at will giving them out
and that selective predatory process needs to be eliminated so if you want
participation by people it should be a fair process and not one where you
control the participation and the the kinds of questions you want to deal with
Now, the question is, resident and citizens, this keeps coming up, you choose to use resident
and replace citizen and you have to qualify what is a resident.
The state of California said you have to live in the state at least a year.
You give out an ID card for residency in Oakland after a couple of weeks.
I'm not going to go into detail, but you are so engaged with illegal immigrants having
an opportunity to participate in this city that you take all kind of shortcuts, including
the school district where they don't allow for background checks for volunteers in their
schools.
what is this ballot measure E as it relates to a citizens initiative? One of
the things is this petition process, somebody's got to take the time to
inform people who are signing these petitions what you should be prepared to
do. One of the things you should be prepared to is to ask them to see the
official top funders sheet that's supposed to be on every petition because
you want to see who is given the money for this petition, and people don't know this.
Another thing is you ask, is this, are you a volunteer or you're being paid?
Another thing is the full text must be available.
When people come up to me for a petition, I ask to see the full text.
They never have it to give it to you, and that's required by state California law.
thing is, Measure E is not a citizens initiative or it could be a citizens initiative if you
determine that being a part of a union can also be classified as a citizens initiative.
And if that's the case, corporations can put on initiatives or they can do citizens initiatives
too.
So Measure E, and I'm surprised this group of people didn't take issue with the union
union funding is completely legit. That's a historical piece that unions fund initiatives.
But to call a union a citizens initiative when people who are in the union are not all
of them are citizens, not all of them are residents of Oakland, so is the definition
of a citizen union initiative? Is that a percentage of your, what is the qualifying? There's something
called the ballot measure qualifying process,
qualification.
What is the qualification for a union
to put a measure on the ballot?
I can't find it anywhere.
But one thing is for sure, everybody in that union
has to be a citizen.
Everybody in that union has to live in Oakland
because that is a crucial piece of what
identifies as a citizen's initiative.
You have used trickology by the unions putting this on the ballot for the 50% plus one requirement
rather than the 66% if you would put it.
This is a city of Oakland measure, a conniving measure, a sneak through measure that y'all
should have addressed.
It's not fair that we continue to have property taxes on the back of how we fund the city
of Oakland and sometimes the budget committee needs to address ways in which other citizens
or residents in this city can take responsibility for creating revenue and not necessarily on
the backs of property owners at this time.
So my time is up, no it's not, but I'm finished.
Thank you for your comments, chair.
That concludes all speakers on three items.
Thank you.
Is there a motion?
Is that sufficient.
Okay.
Sounds good.
Okay.
For item number four, we have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Councilmember
Wong, to receive and file this informational report and committee on roll.
Councilmembers Brown?
Aye.
Unger?
Aye.
Wong?
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandran?
Aye.
the board of directors. And I'm going to ask for a motion to
receive and file this information report in committee.
On item five that was a motion made by councilmember brown
second by councilmember Wong. To receive and file that
information report in committee on roll council members brown.
I hunger. I want I and chair on the chandrin. I thank you item
number five passes with four eyes to receive and file that
information report in committee. And I don't on item number six
to receive and file this information and report
in committee on rural council members Brown.
Aye.
Unger.
Aye.
Wong.
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandran.
Aye.
Thank you, item number six passes with four ayes
to receive and file this information report in committee.
Reading in item number seven,
receive an information report on the results
of the salary survey for city job classifications
earning less than $25 per hour,
and we have two speakers that signed up
to speak on this item.
Thank you, to the staff, please go ahead.
Good morning, Chair and members of the committee.
Jamie Prichit, Principal HR Analyst,
Human Resources Management Department.
Today I'm providing an informational update
on city classifications with at least one salary
step below $25 per hour.
This report is strictly informational
and does not include conclusions or recommendations.
As requested, human resources reviewed
all city classifications and identified 39 active classifications with a minimum rate
below $25 an hour.
These include roles such as crossing guard, library aid, recreation leader, and life guard.
Across these 39 active classifications, the city employs 898 employees.
includes 42 full-time, two permanent part-time, and 854 temporary part-time
employees, most of whom are represented by SEIU local 1021. A large portion of
these temporary employees support seasonal programs, recreational
activities, and trainee level positions where staffing needs may fluctuate
throughout the year. It is also important to note that while all 39
classifications have a minimum salary step below $25 per hour, 28 of them have
a maximum step at or above $25 per hour. This means that although these roles
start below the threshold, a significant portion, approximately 72%,
progress above it with tenure and experience. Typically when a salary study
is performed the focus is on the top of the range and that is because employees
generally spend the most of their tenure at the top of the range. In this case
Council did not specify whether we should focus on the top or the entire
range or the entry step. To ensure we met the intent of the request we
identified classifications that had any step below $25 per hour.
For the market review, the study examined 24 unique titles across 13 agencies based
on external comparisons where available.
Of the 24 titles, 10 had enough external matches to summarize compensation trends, while 14
did not have sufficient matches for meaningful comparisons.
Looking at the salary data overall, we found a mixed picture.
Some classifications fall below market rate at their starting steps.
However, there are also several classifications where Oakland is at or above our peer agencies.
For example, roles such as lifeguard, recreation leader 2, and park attendant compare competitively
or better than the external averages.
Overall, the results show a varied landscape.
This report is intended only to present the data as requested.
Any further analysis would require additional research.
That concludes the informational update, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you.
I will pass it to my colleague, Council Member Brown, in just a second since the two of us
We're especially interested in this item.
$25 an hour is not a living wage in Oakland.
It's not anywhere near that.
And while other cities, corporations,
except nonprofits all need to catch up
to what is a living wage, which is far beyond that,
I think that when it comes to hiring and outcomes
for a number of these positions that
serve key community groups, it is important
that we're able to hire quality folks who can use this
to support themselves as a living.
And I give the example of the issue
that I took with probably my third month into this job
three and a half years ago, and that was Head Start workers.
The fact that you can make more money at Panda Express
than as a Head Start instructor is unacceptable.
And partly, one of the reasons why it's hard to recruit.
I know HR does do continuous recruiting for these Head Start instructor positions, but
I think the fact that we offer such low salaries pretty much minimum wage as the starting salary
shows why we have limited capacity to fully staff up our Head Start program, which is
why they're leading to under-enrollment, despite there being so much need in the community.
I think that there is different arguments for part-time seasonal positions, and I hear
what you're saying, the comparability with other jurisdictions, but it doesn't matter
if you're a library aide, a firefighter trainee, a van driver, or a head start worker, you
deserve to be able to get close to a minimum, to a living wage working with the city of
Oakland and I hope that in our budget process in the next few years we can start to raise
the minimum for all of these positions to at least $25 an hour but certainly more as
the starting threshold.
I appreciate that you did look into comparisons with other jurisdictions but I think the City
of Oakland can do better than the market oftentimes for these positions, because no one can live
off of $17 an hour, and almost no one can live off of $25 either, but we should be setting
an example for jobs that are able to fund people's livelihoods, which for 900 employees
of the city, they're not.
Councilmember Brown.
Excellent.
Thank you so much, chair.
Thank you to the HR department for putting together this comprehensive report.
I'm not remembering the exact item that was before us, where we kind of had this, well,
I had this larger question of how can we get a clear picture of how many employees in our
city are making 25, you know, below 25 an hour.
And so I think that the agenda report that was put together
and everything that was shown, very comprehensive.
And I think it provides us a clear road map
of where we should go as a body.
I know that we are facing some budget challenges,
but similar to what Council Member Ramachandran mentioned,
I think that, I mean, we know 25, you know,
making $25 an hour is really just kind of the standard.
If I had to choose between working at In-N-Out
or being a library aide,
maybe I would choose a library aide, right?
And so I think that it,
oh, and then also I had this thought around like,
ensuring that we're attracting Oaklanders to these roles.
And I think that the best way that we're able to do that
by paying a decent wage and so I hope that you know either if it's all of us
who are on the budget team again or I hope that in the future we can begin to
create a pathway so that all of these positions at minimum are 25 in up. I
think that there's another initiative being led by I think some Oaklanders
around thirty dollars being a livable wage and so I think that we have to
begin to move in move in a much better direction around how much we are you
know paying folks for these amazing jobs that we have within the city of Oakland
thanks so much for providing the data around how many total I think it was a
little over 800 I know this isn't in the report and I hate to put you all on the
on the spot but I like to the way my mind thinks is like in percentages and
so how many total employees do we have in the city of Oakland? Through the chair
we have approximately 5,000 employees. I see and so of that 5,000 a little over
800 are making less than 25 an hour so hopefully we can make some do have some
positive steps to change that so thank you. Councilmember Blanc thank you and
thank you to my colleagues for bringing this agenda to this committee I am just
wondering what what are the steps to actually adjust these is it through the
department heads how do these salaries actually get set. Through the chair the
The conversation about amending compensation is most often held at the bargaining table
through negotiations, and so I would defer to the council and the administration to have
those kinds of conversations and then sort of subsequently direct staff to either provide
research and analysis and make recommendations, or even perhaps enlist the use of an external
consultant for additional survey work.
So there are multiple options ahead of you.
Procedurally, it would come before you as a salary ordinance amendment, which you see
this come from our department periodically to amend the ordinance 12187, but that can
only occur following necessary mandatory bargaining obligations and satisfying any and all sort
of meeting obligations.
Okay.
Thank you.
That's helpful.
And I would say one of the positions or two of the positions rather that really stuck
out to me were the firefighter trainees.
I think it says here the paramedic trainees make around $22.83 and I'm seeing from our
peer cities you know hourly rates of you know $44 or you know upward of $50 to even $60
per hour and then for the trainee $19 per hour versus again like $44 to $50 and were
you able to see like are we hiring like that's a significant difference of magnitudes? Can
you comment on that? It just that one was the biggest delta in my observation.
Sure, through the chair, what we found at many other agencies is that the firefighter
trainees lead into, they're actually a sworn position so they actually come in as a firefighter
and they have that sworn designation where for our particular trainees they are not sworn
until they graduate from the academy and then enter their firefighter probationary positions.
Okay, and so you're pointing out that perhaps a fair comparison is the salary that they
make after the graduate? Potentially or for us to just divide the data so you
can see which ones would be in a sworn capacity versus a non-sworn capacity.
Okay I would like to see that since I at least want to be working with a fair
apples-to-apples comparison. Thank you. We can move to public speakers. Calling in
the names that sign up to speak on item number seven Kevin Dalley and Mississauga
all of all that Kevin Delhi is co-chair of the policy and legislative committee
of the bicyclists pedestrian Advisory Commission we visited Oakland fire
station 17 and to follow up on councilmember Wong's comments we did hear
that the trainees spend a substantial amount of time with low income and that
can be a challenge especially if we want to convince the trainees to stay in
Oakland or move to Oakland and stay there as we continue. Well as we go
through emergencies whether it's fire earthquake or just the day-to-day
emergencies which they deal with all the time. So thanks for looking into it. I'd like to see a
report on all salary that is under the banner of incentive pay. So I know it
exists within the police department that if you I think if you speak a language
other than English you get incentive pay. I know that people who work under the
translation and uh, banner is some kind of incentive pay. So where else do we
have incentive pay? Where we need incentive pay is with our police
department. If you are a police officer living in Oakland, we give you
incentive play. We have to do something to work on or 90% of our police
officers don't live in Oakland. That is a serious safety concern. Any kind of
emergency where you need everybody on board. We got people that live up in
Sacramento. Uh, some even have people that don't even live in the state in
the fire department as well. Incented pay to live in the city. Uh, so I don't
know this overtime issue has to stay on the agenda as far as how we are creating ways
to control overtime. What are the recommendations from staff? We keep getting reports that is
going on, but we haven't had what is a recommendation to control overtime. I haven't seen it, but
And I have seen repeatedly, it's a problem.
But I would like to say that it is unfair that you can work at McDonald's.
And what is it now?
Is it $25 or $30 an hour?
And we had an initiative on the ballot for people who work in our, oh my time's up.
Thank you for your comments.
Okay.
Thank you for your comments Chair.
Chair, that concludes all speakers on this item.
Okay, I will entertain a motion.
And would that be to receive and file?
Yeah, go ahead.
I'll second that.
Sorry, one moment.
Sorry, we have a motion made by Councilmember Brown,
seconded by Councilmember Wong,
to receive and file this information report and committee
on roll Councilmembers Brown.
Aye.
Unger.
Aye.
Wong.
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandran.
Aye.
Thank you, item number seven passes with four ayes
to receive and file this information report in committee.
Now reading in item number eight,
receive an information report from the city administrator
or their designee on the special revenue collection project
including hiring and activating the work
to bring in additional revenue from non-filed businesses
and we have three speakers that sign up to speak.
Good morning, Nicole Welch, revenue and tax administrator.
I will bring to you an informational report
in response to a request from Council Member Brown
and Ramachandran, Chair Ramachandran,
regarding the statistical data that supports
the special revenue enhancement collections.
As of the date, we are on target to bring in delinquencies.
However, going to the report page two,
in January 20th, 2026, we brought 2,269 accounts
for property which resulted in liens of 5,583,524 dollars and ten cents.
We have also engaged with out front media with digital and static billboards to inform
the residents of Oakland about their obligation to file and pay Oakland business tax.
This was specifically targeted towards the business tax renewal.
And then we've actually pivoted to landlords advising them of their obligation if they are renting out their property to register and pay Oakland Business Tax.
We had followed that effort up with sending out 75,000 postcards.
I believe that a lot of you have probably received that informing you as a PSA that if you are renting your property in Oakland,
you are required to have a business tax license.
We are currently on target for the delinquency,
which notices will be going out on May 5th
for property owners, advising them that
we are now at the delinquency part,
and then it will be followed up for non-property accounts
that will be coming around June.
The reason why those dates are not here
is because we are dependent upon our vendor
to solidify those times and those dates,
but those are on target that it's actually happening.
And that completes my report.
Thank you so much, Administrator Welch.
I really appreciate the deep dive
that you've all taken in the past year
to get money owed to us from business owners.
I've seen, you know, I regularly complain
about the lack of marketing and outreach,
but I have to say, I've seen quite a lot of the message,
pay your business taxes out there.
And I greatly appreciate that.
And I had a quick question.
I see the amount that's been leaned
for property-related business taxes.
How is the other side of collections going for non-property?
We have actually wrapped in,
because of the timeline in December,
we opened up the business tax renewal on December 10th, 2025.
We rolled in the delinquencies
for the previous years into this
so that we can do it in an all-encompassing process.
So that will begin in June.
So right now, we're at the process of,
I would call it a term of dialing for dollars.
So we're actually calling property owners
and business owners and advising them
that they need to, if they are still operating,
pay their business tax or close it out.
We have seen with our efforts,
I would draw your attention to page three,
that with our outreach,
We have received an increase, a triple increase
in property owners who have registered their properties.
So we've gone up significantly from one fiscal year
to the next fiscal year, so that is actually increasing.
We have actually gone out, and this will be part
of the next report as a task force
within this week's two, Council Member Wang's concern
about businesses who are operating.
We went out as a task force with the ABAT unit,
the state board equalization.
I believe they have another name.
But we are also the Alameda County Department of Health.
We went out last Thursday to inform, educate, and also,
in some cases, cite business owners who
had been warned previously.
So we are actively in the community,
and that is where we're at right now.
Great.
A quick question and a comment.
So, as of, if I remember the timeline correctly,
as of March 15th, 16th businesses are delinquent.
So, or March 2nd, I forgot, okay.
And then they can apply for an extension
till the end of March, or something like that?
If you are going to request an extension,
you would have needed to done that before March 2nd.
The extension date was April 15th.
That's when you would have to have filed.
We sent out reminder, emails, postcards, telephone calls
to all of the affected businesses
who did have an extension.
Fortunately, at that time, when I did speak to you in November,
there were only 59 businesses that requested an extension.
So the number has decreased significantly.
And the reason why is because there is an ability
to actually renew online.
Great, I appreciate that.
And having these notices go out so quickly compared to
in years prior it'd be a months long process
is much appreciated to really show
we're firm on collection of taxes owed.
And I just wanna point out the numbers in table two,
the rental applications going from 288 to 900
in this past fiscal year, just compared to two years ago.
That's not the number of property owners,
all of a sudden, sudden tripling.
This is clearly people registering and listening
and consuming information that's being presented of.
We need to, we need to start paying,
we need to register as a business and start paying,
and that's substantial, and I look forward to the revenue
that that's gonna help generate for the city, so thank you.
Council Member Brown.
Excellent, I'll be brief.
Thank you so much for the written report,
and just really appreciative of the ability
to track the progress here and so just wanted to express that.
And then I guess on that note, can you share when the next update will come to us on this?
I know you gave us a good timeline of notices going out, May, June.
When can we expect some more like follow-up on how the progress is going on this?
I believe that it would, through the chair,
it would be wonder your direction
of when you would like the next report to come.
Okay, excellent.
That sounds good.
And so I guess to the chair on this item,
I guess I have two notes.
Can we, if we're able to bring this back again,
can we change the title, ensuring that I'm also
kind of a co-author on that
instead of former council member Kaplan?
And then maybe we can have this come to us in the fall.
We can go to the next item if
that seems most appropriate.
And through the chairman
recommendation at this time
would be to receive and file
this report and then schedule a
new.
Report as needed in the fall or
put that on the pending list for
a new item.
Just to close out the prior
iteration of this version of
the information report.
We can also update the sponsors
at rules- but at this point.
item. Okay sounds good, thank you. I would be supportive of both of those things
when this comes back to two rules. Yes. We'd be happy to work with you guys on the
title for the update report and timing so that we can get it appropriately
agendized at the right time. Great, thank you. Thank you.
Councilman Wong. Hi, I would just request in the next upcoming report because just
reading this I see that we have the total value of the liens that we also
see the Delta an additional revenue being collected so that would be super
helpful but also want to commend you on the work seriously and carrying this out
we will have in any of the revenue that would be recognized will be in the third
quarter revenue and expenditure report so I did not want to deflect away from
from that report that will be coming to you in May.
Okay, okay, whatever notes can be added within that report just on what difference you're
seeing as a result of these efforts would be great.
And then just so I understand this, I see the single family residential being noted.
Is this essentially properties that are being rented out for the purpose, or just rented
single family residential?
is what that is. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. Um, we can go to the public speakers.
Calling the names that signed up to speak on item number eight, David Boatwright, Asada
Olawala, and Kevin Dally. This concept of looking at additional revenues is really important.
So I just want to say we got one of those postcards and the first thing that came out
about mouth is who's gonna voluntarily admit if they haven't been doing it in
the first place. They're just gonna say, oh now I got the card I'm gonna go ahead
and admit that I'm not paying my business tax and I know people are not
paying not for any other reason except they just can't pay. They just don't
have the money. So additional revenues, I'm gonna give you an example of
additional revenue. There's something in the state of California called the 2
plus one rule, it's the occupancy rule that you have to follow based on the fact it has
to do with the number of people living in a residential setting can create if not minimized
health and safety issues, health for the person's health, codes, violations and so forth.
We are not enforcing any type of residential occupancy and it is an issue and it comes
out even with the amount of illegal dumping that you see on the streets. Most of those
are kitchen items that people don't have. They have so many people living in a house
that they don't have room to put their waste in a can so they throw it out. Another occupancy
additional revenue process, you got so many illegal vendors out on the street who haven't
obtained the proper business license. If it's food vending, they don't have the health license.
They are violating the sidewalks.
That's a fine.
You got a lot of ways that you can create license plates in the front of the car.
After the first warning, that's a penalty from $190 to $200 and go check out the Teslas.
None of them have license plates in the front or very few of them.
My time.
Oh, I did it good.
I stopped.
I was looking at the clock so you wouldn't have to say it.
I do appreciate that you guys are working on getting other landlords to pay their taxes.
I've managed to do it for a few decades now.
It's not that bad, but the website does need to be improved a bit.
It sort of looks like it's from 20 years ago, and it is a little bit difficult to figure
out how to modify things I had to call in to figure out whether I needed to make some
modifications. Then I want to move on to the penalties and fees for fire inspections, which
are still not being collected. I know the city auditor last week said that there is
a movement to collect the fees, but the City has an Acela portal that lets me look at all
types of things, permits, fees for fire inspections, whether or not they pass. I looked at two
local CVSs that I've been trying to get them to fix violations for about five or six years
Now, I can see they still owe hundreds of dollars.
No, not tons of money, but if I can see the fees,
I hope that the city administrator can see the fees
as well and get them paid.
Even better would be to get the violations corrected
whether or not it charges additional fees.
fire exits have not been opened in five, six years.
It's a potential danger.
So it's not just $500 fees.
It's also risk of people's debt if there is a fire.
Thanks.
David Bowright.
On the executive summary for the report
associated with this item,
there is a reference to hiring the annuitant.
And I must have missed it.
There was no discussion of whether that position
has been filled or what it was,
but I would sure appreciate it if that could be
explained a little bit better
and why it has to be an annuity and not a new hire.
I guess I have experience,
but I'd like to hear why that term was used, thanks.
Thank you for your comments.
Sure, that concludes all speakers on item eight.
Okay, I will make a motion to receive and file,
that we will schedule a new item at rules to come back in the fall. Thank you. That was a motion made by Chair
Ramachandran, seconded by Councilmember Brown. To receive and file this
informational report in committee on roll, Councilmembers Brown? Aye. Unger? Aye. Wong? Aye. And Chair Ramachandran? Aye. Thank you. Item number 8 passes with four
to receive and file this information and report in committee.
Moving on to open forum, and we have three speakers
that signed up, David Boatwright, Asada Ola Bala,
and Kevin Dali.
So money is important, and how we spend the money is important.
And we're making decisions about spending money
that I don't think we're being fair.
We're being political about spending money.
In other words, you have your political reasons
reasons to spend money. Democracy dollars. Democracy dollars originally was created based
on a model in Seattle where citizens would be able to create or have access to funding
supporting of their candidates. You had a group of citizens and residents who came to
meetings and pushed for not being citizens but being residents. That meant more money
had to be spent. And you're in that predicament now. Not a good choice. Why? Politically,
you want to push the narrative that we are not about citizenship, we are about residency
and everybody being accommodated. Just happened last week, you're having to give up, I think,
$6 million to the Lake Merritt large owner
because the property wasn't maintained.
We're losing money.
We're not getting the deposit back.
We have other issues where having to do with our homelessness.
The Lake Merritt tiny homes, the West Oakland tiny homes,
all of them had to be destroyed because the consortium
of the East Bay Management Group didn't do their job.
And I've asked you to look into that.
We have this issue with the tree, 2021, 2022 violation.
We just weigh in on a fine in 2026
and we still haven't worked that out.
That's money we haven't gotten
because staff didn't do their job.
The only way that came forward was with planning department
when a developmental plan was applied for they notified.
Thank you for your comments, Ms. Ollabala.
at the park this weekend I was
personally hit by the lack of
hours and the lack of funding
for the parking enforcement
call center. It parking
enforcement call center well
this is affected the ability
for my mother in logic get
around my neighborhood in lower
glenview in district four- the
call center is only open Monday
doesn't open again until next Monday. So good news lots of curb cuts in my
neighborhood now so we can get the wheelchair when when my mother-in-law
needs it off of the sidewalk and onto the street. Bad news is there's cars
parked blocking the curb cuts. So on Friday evening I reported the problem to
see ClickFix and was informed, which I knew of course, that the call center
would be back operating on Monday.
So from Friday evening to Monday morning, there was no, no one
handling the call center.
If I wanted to report that my driveway was blocked by a parked car.
See ClickFix encouraged me to call the police non-emergency number, but if
it's only a pedestrian being blocked that doesn't warrant it I know I could
call it but I also know it probably wouldn't be handled so I encourage let's
fund the call center parking funding is parking policy let's also keep it at
out dot if we can thanks David boat right grants this city lives by grants
it looks like other than property taxes and it's amazing that there aren't any
more post appraisals done of any of these grants regardless of how many
dollars are associated with them and I think that's something that this council
needs to look into and establish some post-appraisal requirements for all these grants that are
going out. It's tens of millions of dollars at least a year. And I can only remember one
post-appraisal that was done and that was done by the city auditor and it didn't turn
out well for the person who received the grant. We're going to live and die by grants and
I hope we don't die, but we need to do something about this uncontrolled issuing of grants
to many many different organizations in the city thank you thank you for your
comments share that concludes all speakers on open forum thank you
everyone the meetings adjourned