Good afternoon and welcome to the City Council meeting of Tuesday, June 2nd.
Before I call roll against speaker card instructions, we will have translation instructions from
Mr. Misa.
Mr. Misa, please unmute yourself and give the translation instructions.
Yes, certainly.
We will have selection interpretation and selection. This is done. Thank you.
Thank you, before I call roll, I will give speaker card instructions.
If you'd like to speak on any agenda item, you must fill out a speaker's card before
the item is called for discussion or two hours after the start of this meeting.
This meeting was called to order at 3.32, so your last opportunity to turn in the speaker's
card will be at 5.32 or before the item is called for discussion, whichever comes first.
To fill out a speaker's card, you can get one at the front table and turn it into the
has passed as they would do 24
hours.
From the start of this
meeting.
All roll today.
Councilmember brown.
Present.
Councilmember feist.
Excuse councilmember gayo.
Present.
Councilmember houston.
Excused.
Councilmember ramachandran.
Present.
Councilmember Unger.
Here.
Councilmember Wong.
Aye.
Earp.
Here.
Excuse me.
Here.
Here.
the council. I'm sorry. Here is.
discussion of the agenda.
The speaker's speaking time will be reduced as well- for any
agenda item normally it's eight minutes it will be five minutes
and we're going to ask the presentations to be.
Brief as well- sorry about that.
Yes in five.
Thank you for that now going to item three modifications to the
agenda and procedural items yes because of.
at the beginning of the agenda and then after that 5.5
and then we will continue in the regular order
of the agenda after that.
So noted changing the order of the agenda,
we will start with item 5.2.
Reading item 5.2 into record,
adopt a resolution submitting to the voters
at the November 3rd,
2026 General Municipal Election,
a measure that would amend the Oakland City Charter
to among other things,
make the mayor the city's chief executive officer
Responsible for managing city affairs empower the council to confirm the appointments of the directors of finance
Human resources public works and transportation and power the council to create an independent budget and legislative and out analyst office
To provide the council fiscal and policy analysis that is objective and nonpartisan
Affirm council members right to request information and relay constituent concerns and city officials duties to respond properly
Empower the council to hold legislative hearings and issue subpoenas
creating a mayoral veto with a
Line item budget veto and council power to override any veto
require council members to work full-time and not engage in outside employment and power the public ethics commission to align the mayor and
Council member salaries with those of comparable excuse me comparable full-time
public officials and
require the publication of ordinances within 15 days of passage and
Directing the city clerk to take any and all actions necessary under law
To submit this measure to the voters at the election and making the appropriate CEQA findings
You have about 18 speakers on this item
Do we have a very brief?
presentation
While we're waiting on a presentation to the council members and to the public
by charter we have to hear any charter amendments twice and so this would be
the first time we're hearing this and the action item would be to continue
this to the next meeting not an up or down vote it would be a vote to continue
this to the next meeting. Is the mayor's office planning to make a presentation?
We're trying to get them now. Okay good afternoon. First let me thank you
council president and members of this body and to all of our residents thank
you for being here I'm here to present on item not was five two is this item
five one hours we still five two item five two we moved it to the beginning
of the agenda okay yeah okay which is the proposed ballot measure to reform
Oakland City Charter and I want to thank the rules committee for moving this
proposal to the full City Council now Oakland as I said earlier it's at a
turning point and the status quo needs to change. Residents across our city are
asking three fundamental questions about their government. Who is responsible when
something goes wrong? Who has the authority to act? And who should voters
hold accountable at the ballot box? Again, as I mentioned in the Rules Committee,
our residents do not have patience for a government that cannot figure out where
where the buck stops or why the delivery of core services is lacking.
The Charter Reform proposal before you today is designed to answer those questions very
clearly for any mayor, any city council, and any future administration.
That is why I announced Charter Reform in my first 100 days.
Now before I begin to discuss the substance of this proposal, I'd like to address several
points directly, because this is really important to cut through all of the misinformation that
has been out there.
First of all, the Charter Reform Working Group recommendations, they're not a power grab,
as described by those who have promoted misinformation.
Their proposals, preserves, checks and balances, this hours, the one we're presenting, while
creating clear authority and accountability and helping to ensure the delivery of critical
core services.
The council will retain full legislative authority, budget authority, deliver on key constituent
services, oversight authority, confirmation authority, and the ability to override a marrow
veto by two-thirds vote.
What changes is that Oakland residents have a clear understanding of who is responsible
to deliver solutions and who the public should hold accountable when government succeeds
or, excuse me, falls short.
I also want to address the attempts to undermine the credibility and integrity of the Charter
Reform Working Group itself.
Those attacks really are unfair, they're inaccurate, and they do a disservice to the people who
who dedicated countless hours and months to this effort.
The working group was convened and facilitated
by the League of Women Voters of Oakland and SPUR,
and included a broad cross-section of Oakland voices,
labor leaders, former city officials, public servants,
members of the business community, small businesses,
policy experts, civic leaders, and longtime Oakland residents.
These individuals brought different perspectives
and viewpoints to the table, engaging in months
of serious analysis and public engagement
before arriving at their recommendations.
Now regardless of where one stands on these proposals,
the integrity of the working group's process
and the commitment of those participants
should be respected and not undermined.
I also stated at this Rules Committee,
but I wanted, at the Rules Committee,
but I wanted once again to speak about the tone
and the rhetoric of parts of the public conversation.
Reasonable people can disagree about governance structures.
That is a healthy part of our democracy.
But some of the rhetoric that we have
seen in recent weeks and months has really crossed a line.
There's a long history in this country
of describing black leaders, particularly black women,
leaders seeking executive authority or structural reform
as dangerous or unqualified.
We should be honest enough to recognize
when rhetoric begins to echo those patterns,
Oakland should and would have serious
and substantive debates
without personal attacks about governance.
That's what we should do.
Governance, reform, charter reform,
without referring and resorting to language
that attempts to demonize leadership.
We're trying to do the work of solving problems
and moving the city forward.
There have also been accusations
that this process was rushed, which is not accurate.
Over six months, the working group
conducted more than 60 interviews,
held 14 meetings in every council district,
and engaged more than 750 Oakland residents.
This was a transparent, community-driven process
grounded in public engagement and expertise.
And I want to thank the working group, the League of Women
voters of Oakland, spur city workers, every council member,
and every resident who contributed to it.
And I also want to recognize that reasonable people can
disagree about governance structures.
The working group examines cities operating
under strong mayor systems and cities operating
under council manager systems and other hybrid forms
of systems.
Every governance structure involves trade-offs.
But after months of research and public engagement,
The working group concluded that Oakland's challenges require clearer executive leadership,
stronger fiscal coordination, and a governance structure where residents can clearly identify
who is responsible for implementation and citywide outcomes.
Across districts, neighborhoods, and stakeholder groups, residents express frustration with
a system where responsibility is often unclear and accountability is difficult to assign.
These recommendations are a direct response to these concerns.
Now, when I became mayor, I already knew there was confusion about roles and authority inside
Oakland's government because I had experienced it firsthand also.
Even while serving in Congress after securing funds for Oakland, there was uncertainty inside
City Hall what to do, who I needed to communicate with, to coordinate and follow up.
Now as mayor, I see clearly how the structural ambiguity affects our ability to deliver for
Too often it's unclear where the buck stops, who is responsible for operational decisions,
and who voters should ultimately hold accountable for results.
Over time, that confusion erodes trust in government itself and makes it much harder
for council members to effectively represent their constituents.
So the working group had three goals only, and that is a very narrow framework which
they looked at, to clarify roles and responsibilities of elected officials, to strengthen financial
management systems, and to improve accountability and transparency.
And that was a very narrow scope of their work.
The working group had intentionally given a focus scope and its recommendations reflects
months of research, deliberation, and public input within that framework.
As this measure moves forward, it's important to remain faithful to those recommendations,
the measure beyond the working group scope, risks undermining the extensive public engagement
that informed these proposals, creating more confusion for voters, and shifting the conversation
away from the core governance questions which residents were asked to consider.
If there are additional charter changes that this body wishes to consider in the future,
there will be opportunities to do so.
But this measure should remain focused on the community-driven process that brought
us here today.
So let me briefly explain what's actually in the measure before you.
The mayor serves as the chief executive accountable for ensuring effective city operations and
service delivery.
This charter language also allows flexibility for future mayors to determine how they lead,
delegate managed responsibilities, and surround themselves with people who have expertise
in specific areas, including the delivery of city services.
Different mayors can be flexible and can bring in specific
and needed expertise to ensure a professionally run city.
But the principle remains the same.
The buck always stops with the mayor.
That's the elected person at the head of the city.
The council will retain full legislative authority,
budget approval power, and meaningful oversight,
while also being empowered to be much more effective
advocates for their districts and to ensure that services are actually delivered to their
constituents and communities.
The mayor would have a general veto and a targeted budget line item veto.
The council retains the authority to override by a two-thirds super majority.
The authority is designed to create a more balanced budget process and stronger fiscal
discipline.
It encourages collaboration and negotiation between the executive and legislative branches
while preserving the Council's ability to override a veto when sufficient consensus
exists.
A permanent independent office to strengthen the Council's fiscal analysis and policy research
and oversight capacity is included.
The intent is to create flexibility within the charter that allows the Council to establish
the structure of this office while preserving the independence necessary for it to provide
objective fiscal and legislative analysis.
This office is specifically designed to strengthen the Council's oversight role, not weaken it.
A targeted confirmation process for senior department heads within the Office of Finance,
Human Resources, the Department of Transportation, and the Office of Public Works.
approval of these directors reserves meaningful council oversight while avoiding prolonged
vacancies.
The charter would formally recognize council service as a full-time job service, public
service, and align compensation through the Public Ethics Commission as a public service
is so public service, excuse me, is accessible to working people from all backgrounds.
Section 218 Reform.
The former Section 218 impeded council members within the delivery of constituent services
and included a misdemeanor, mind you, a misdemeanor provision that many residents were not even
aware of.
The new section is designed to strengthen constituent service functions and improve
responsiveness for residents seeking help from their elected representatives.
Council members would have clear communication channels with city departments while preserving
prohibitions against directing staff on administrative matters.
It's also important to clarify what does not change under this proposal.
The city administrator remains a central part of Oakland's governance structure and would
continue providing professional management expertise while operating
within a clear governance structure and would continue to manage the finance and
human resources department and under the current system quite frankly the mayor
would it's the same as now would nominate a city administrator subject to
council confirmation and major contracts would continue to require council
approval. Council oversight is in fact strengthened through confirmation authority over department
directors, including finance, human resources, department of transportation, and office
of public works. Two of these departments are under the city administrator's HR and
finance and DOT and OOPW are two of the largest departments that city infrastructure relies
and finds itself under its jurisdiction.
These are the departments that deal
with the city's infrastructure.
I also wanna be clear that no governance structure
eliminates the possibility of potential misconduct.
However, the working group's recommendation
preserves existing safeguards,
including the Public Ethics Commission,
the city auditor, transparency laws,
recall provisions, council oversight authority,
and independent police oversight.
We have an additional three minutes.
Thank you very much.
The council oversight authority
and independent police oversight authority would remain.
The police commission's appointment structure
and authority would remain unchanged,
preserving independent civilian oversight of policing
while strengthening accountability for city operations.
Let me address the concern that this proposal weakens the Council.
It does not.
This measure strengthens the Council's institutional role through independent oversight tools,
legislative authority, budget authority, and clear constituent service functions.
Council members are empowered to serve as strong advocates for their districts while
retaining full power and meaningful oversight authority.
A strong executive and strong city council are not competing ideas.
They are complementary parts of a balanced and accountable government.
Our current charter blends elements of a strong mayor system and a council manager system
in a way that diffuses authority and obscures responsibility.
Too often this hybrid structure creates confusion, weakens accountability, and contributes to
a vicious cycle where residents struggled to get the core services that they deserved.
Replacing one hybrid with another would only continue those same problems.
Residents already expect the mayor to have authority to act, and the council to legislate,
provide oversight, and deliver services to their constituents.
Too often, our structure does not match these expectations.
The proposal before you does not impose a new form of government today.
It simply allows the voters of Oakland to decide what type of government they want.
I urge you not to take away Oakland's residents' opportunities to weigh in and to provide voters
the opportunity to vote on this measure.
The question before us today is not whether every member of this council would have reached
the same conclusion as the working group.
The question is whether we will respect the integrity of a many months long public process
and allow Oakland voters to consider the recommendations
that emerged from it.
I believe that we should.
Now, I've spent my entire career fighting
for democratic accountability, transparency,
civil rights, and checks and balances.
This proposal is not about concentrating power
in the hands of any one elected official.
It's about structural change,
clarifying responsibility so the public knows
who is accountable, when action is needed,
and how government can more effectively deliver
constituent services.
And ultimately, this decision will not
be made by one mayor, one city council.
It will be made by the voters, mind you, the voters of Oakland.
So I want to close here where I began with those three
questions.
Oakland residents are asking their government,
who is responsible when something goes wrong?
Who has the authority to act?
And who should voters hold accountable at the ballot box?
hundreds of Oaklanders participated in this process because they want a government where those questions have clear answers where
responsibility is
understandable
Oversight is meaningful and accountability is visible
they want a government that is responsive to constituents and
Structured in a way that allows both the mayor and the council members to effectively deliver results for our communities for our town
this proposal is designed to answer those questions more clearly and I
Respectfully asked this body to move the measure forward and allow Oakland voters to make the final decision
Thank you again for your support and thank you for giving me a chance to be with you. Thank you mayor
Are there any amendments coming from your office?
Are there any amendments coming from your office?
Good afternoon council Preston Kilgore deputy chief staff the mayor Barbara Lee
Yes, so the mayor intends to move amendments not at this meeting but the following meeting
we're still waiting we're working with the city attorney to draft some language that we'll be sharing but
For this meeting one to share verbally with you all what those are
So if you go to section 218 a
The requests that we've received is to remove section 218 a which is each department under the mayor's or city administrators jurisdiction
shall maintain at least one designated council liaison for council inquiries and the mayor or city administrator shall ensure coordination
The next one that we've been requested to amend is in section 218 D add not
Add not have the power to and so that the following language reads
Council members and their staff shall not have the power to
Direct give orders to or attempt to coerce any department head or any other subordinate of the city under the jurisdiction of the mayor
to the administrator or other appointed
or elected officers in respect to any administrative action.
And the last one comes from the Public Ethics Commission
that was unanimously voted on two weeks ago.
And this one is revising the new language,
the new language in section 603C
to clarify that the Public Ethics Commission
has the option to seek the assistance
of the city administrator and or outside consultants
at its discretion, but it's not obligated to do so.
And the thinking around that one is that
we wanna ensure the independence of the ethics commission.
So don't want them to have to rely on the city administrator,
but to have that ability to make that decision themselves.
And again, so I just wanna read these into the record.
We are working with the city attorney to draft them
and we'll bring those formally to you at the next meeting.
Thank you so much.
And is the public ethics commission here?
Can you run the clock for two minutes, please?
Thank you.
I'm Suzanne Doran, executive director
of the Public Ethics Commission.
Good afternoon, council members and Mayor Lee.
Under City Charter 603H,
the Public Ethics Commission must review
and have the opportunity to comment
on any amendments to laws the commission has the power
to enforce before they can become law.
So pursuant to that duty, we met on May 20th
to review and provide comment on the amendments
proposed by Mayor Lee to sections 202, 218, 300, and 603.
form a letter from the chair convening the commission's comments and suggested
amendments to the language that is included in your agenda materials but
I'll give a brief summary of the commission's position and I'm happy to
answer any questions. So the commission voted unanimously to take the following
positions on elected official salaries. The commission supports the proposed
charter amendments to sections 202, 300 and 603 with the following amendments.
one of the first one items that
the commission would like it that the salary setting for all
elected officials occur in the same year so that the P. E. C.
duty of setting the mayor's salary and the revised method for
setting the salary of city council member would take effect
in twenty twenty eight the same year a salary setting for the
city attorney and city auditor and secondly that the new
option to seek the assistance of the city administrator and or outside
consultants as discretion but is not obligated to do so. The commission also
wanted me to convey a suggestion that City Council consider an amendment that
salary setting for all elected officials occur every four years rather than
biennially both to further depoliticize the salary setting process and also to
and we can serve staff resources.
So secondly, on section 218,
that's currently non-interpreting.
Your time is up.
Oh, sorry.
Okay.
Can you wrap it up in 30 seconds, please?
Okay, very quickly, in the revised section 218,
there's three additions there.
The way it's written currently,
in its entirety, it would come under
our enforcement authority.
The commission believes that the,
we're not against the three additions.
We're trying to see if we can
define the role of council but we don't think it should fall
within our enforcement.
Authority we don't think that's properly within the role of an
ethics commission.
So we're requesting that our enforcement be maintained only
to the new section two eighteen D.
But a B and C not be included as part of our enforcement role.
Thank you so much.
With that we're going to go to the public speakers and then
we'll have council member comments and just reminding
I think we have five minutes.
We said five minutes.
Hopefully it's more around four minutes.
Calling in the public speakers as I call your name, please approach the podium in any order.
Please state your name for the record before beginning.
I will call the names in, I mean, we will take the speakers in chambers first and then
move on to the Zoom speakers immediately after.
If you have time seated to you, the person must be in the room or on Zoom and just note
if you do cede your time, you are giving up your opportunity to speak.
Calvin Daly, Nancy Falk, Steven Falk, David Boatwright,
Mindy Petunik, Gerald Petunik, Liz Hartke,
Cynthia Duggan O'Malley, Gayle Wallace, Brad Morgan,
Ben Gould, Nicole Netich, Richard Fuentes,
Barbara Laffite-Oluwale, Helen Hutchinson,
Jane Esposito, Mr. Hazard, Pamela Drake, Corey Cook,
In any order and the council president has reduced the time to one minute
David boat, right
Given the recall of a recent mayor a strong mayor charter gives too much power to a single person therefore I encourage
The council to vote against the strong mayor charter
I believe a strong council overseeing a city administrator can both provide adequate
accountability and
Through including the mayor and the council multiple benefits can be achieved
Those benefits are a city-wide elected official the mayor would be the council's leader
the city needs a mayor that is participating in city management and
Legislation having a mayor and council working together can lead to better and more efficient outcomes
My perspective is that we don't need a veto
Avito again puts too much power in one person's hands and
I don't agree that the public ethics committee should be moved under the mayor
Kevin dally my first choice is council manager, but strong second choice is a strong mayor
with some small amendments
the mayor was
kind enough to say that the council has the right to
that the charter of transportation and the duty to approve directors of transportation and public works but that is not actually what the charter amendment says I suggest that the charter be changed to reflect that that article six section two. Subsection B have three and four that specify that the director of transportation and the director of public works are among the directors that must be approved by council.
The city attorney, state, whether the council can specify departments had up including say
transportation and whether the city attorney, oh sorry, city administrator or mayor's allowed
to change that without input from the council just as the city administrator had tried to
merge public courts and transportation about a year ago without council approval.
that it's not going to work
but I would like to know that
since-
Thank you Mr. Dowley your time
is up.
Thank you.
Hi I'm Mindy Petronek, candidate
for Oakland Mayor and it's sad
that we've come to this point
that we do need a charter
reform.
I'm a hundred percent for a
charter reform but a strong
mayor is not going to work.
It's not going to work for
Oakland.
We needed to have a situation
where the mayor was part of the
city council into liberation
with you all.
Because that would produce a
it would actually create a situation where we wouldn't have everything so separated and decarpentalized,
where people don't see, what they don't see is the city working together as a whole for the people of Oakland.
And this is about the people of Oakland.
And if we're going to actually make it clear what's at stake in this charter reform,
people need to be much better educated to what is actually at stake.
So this is where I think I would call on all of you
To really think about what would have been better for this city and I don't think it's a strong mayor. Thank you
Yes, this is Gerald patching up. I'm gonna quote my old friend from Chicago
Harold Washington
Who would say this process is clearly?
reprehensible and the way you know it is
if you're going to have a commission, it should have been chartered through the city council.
It should have had input, public hearings, not a mayor's thing which avoided the Brown Act,
let the sunshine in, and had recommendations by the mayor for the mayor of the mayor.
That ain't sunshine has nothing to do with race, color, creed.
No sunshine is no sunshine.
And that is reprehensible.
We don't need of and by and for the same person.
We need a discussion of the entire city count.
Thank you.
So your time is up.
Hi, my name, my name is Liz Hartgun.
I like to cede my time to Gail Wallace.
Good afternoon.
My name is Gail Wallace, and I'm speaking on behalf
of the League of Women Voters of Oakland.
First I want to thank Mayor Lee for prioritizing
the charter in the first 100 days of her administration
and asking the league to co-facilitate.
I also want to acknowledge the many, many people
who participated and brought insight, curiosity,
and generosity to this process.
Of course, those people included the working group members
who produced a report that is unique
in outlining Oakland's history, our challenges,
and the ways in which we could do better
by giving Oakland officials defined jobs
with clear authority.
Your support was also key in organizing meetings
in every one of your council districts.
You've heard the number 750 participants.
The number is impressive,
but the reality was even more so.
People understand we can do better.
They were ready to take on the esoteric topic
of charter reform to find out how.
They listened, they shared experiences and they debated in the most constructive ways.
While some favored one model and others the alternative, they mostly agreed on the problem
and the need to pick one of the two nationally recognized ways of moving forward.
Referring this measure to the ballot will allow Oaklanders to make a choice.
The legislation offers a clear option that, if approved, would result in an internally
coherent model of municipal government, which Oakland has lacked for more than 20 years.
This legislation will not deliver the sun and the moon.
Oakland has many challenges that will be addressed in a myriad of ways.
What it does address is one foundational issue clearly.
It would allow voters to vote decisively.
We strongly urge you to allow this process that Mayor Lee initiated to come to fruition.
Let's hear from Oaklanders how they want their government to work.
Please move this forward.
My name is Brad Morgan.
I'm in district four.
And I just want to say I strongly support charter reform.
I, Mayor Lee, is clearly well-intentioned, has high integrity, and I trust Mayor Lee.
Order in the chamber.
Yeah.
But I don't know if I trust every mayor to come after this.
And I don't think we can build a system dependent
on a single mayor.
I think a better path is a council management form
of government with a strong mayor with that.
I'm worried because Oakland voters have rejected
strong mayor systems in the past that could come again.
And we do need reform.
I think everybody agrees to that.
I do urge you to put something on the ballot in November.
I prefer the city council with an empowered mayor,
but something is better than nothing in this
as long as there are the appropriate checks and balances.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Cynthia O'Malley
and I've lived in Oakland for 47 years.
I'm one of the hundreds of residents
who participated in the process of charter reform.
I'm speaking in favor of the charter reform ballot measure.
The process has been transparent, thorough, and clear.
I believe the meetings have been conducted with integrity.
I respectfully request the Council Act
to move the charter reform measure to the November ballot
for the Oakland voters to decide.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
My name is Helen Hutchison, and I'm a longtime resident of Oakland.
I support this proposal, moving it forward to the ballot.
It's sensible.
It's based on established best practices and to listening to Oaklanders about who we are
and what we need.
The public ethics commission proposal changes also make sense.
They're really small tweaks that will make an already strong proposal even stronger.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Council.
My name is Nicole Nettich.
I'm here today representing SPUR.
We had the great privilege of helping co-facilitate
this process with the League of Women Voters.
And I want to thank the mayor for organizing this,
as well as all of you for helping
to participate in bringing people to engage
in this really important topic.
I'm also here, respectfully asking the council
to move this measure forward and allow voters
to decide on the outcome of this.
Oakland residents deserve the chance
to vote on a governance structure
that would make their government more legible
and more accountable to the people that it serves.
A lot of people engaged in this process.
Every governance model carries both risks and benefits,
and the working group really looked at both of those.
What was recommended and what was moved forward,
a strong mayor system with an equally strong council
balances power between both branches
and most closely aligns with what Oakland residents expect
of their city government.
We need a decisive mayor.
We need somebody.
Hi, my name is Corey Cook.
I'm a political scientist for more than 30 years.
I've researched, taught, and written about urban politics,
local government, and political reform.
During that time, my role has been to provide context,
explain trade-offs, and separate what the evidence shows
from the claims of advocates.
In debates about political reform,
people often cherry-pick evidence.
They blur trade-offs, and they sometimes speak
as though they are perfect solutions, and they're not.
There's no perfect voting system,
no perfect form of government,
no perfect institutional design,
every institutional reform,
and every institutional choice involves trade-offs.
I've never endorsed a candidate,
I've never endorsed a ballot measure in my career,
but I think it's important to speak plainly
about what the empirical evidence says.
After months of study, public engagement,
expert consultation, and reviewing decades of research,
of which I was a member reached a clear and unanimous conclusion. Oakland's current system
is a fragmented hybrid that blurs responsibility and weakens accountability. The evidence points
to a balanced system.
Good afternoon. My name is Ben Gould and today I'm speaking as an individual and a member
of the Oakland Charter Reform Project. We recommend that you reject this proposal and
consider a council manager from our government instead. Giving future mayors the authority
to hire, fire, and oversee virtually every department head in the city is a huge risk
for Oakland.
Most Oakland mayors historically have had little to no experience managing a large organization
like the city.
Even under Jerry Brown, the city departments have been appointed and overseen by an experienced
and professional city manager.
This proposal would relegate the council to just passing laws and adopting a budget with
no formal authority to ensure that your constituents get the services they deserve.
If you do not believe this proposal is in the best interest of your constituents, we
recommend you should vote against it and put your opposition on the record.
If you still want to give the voters a chance separately, you can bring it back for reconsideration
later.
There's plenty of time.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
My name is Barbara Lafitte Oluwole, and I'm representing Faith in Action East Bay.
And I'm here because I love Oakland, and I want a city government that actually works
for me and our residents.
now when something goes wrong in Oakland, it's hard to know who is really responsible
or who to call on to get it fixed.
Services are too often delayed or inconsistent, and it's easy for people in power to pass
the buck.
Oaklanders deserve better.
This charter reform proposal is about clear accountability.
It aligns power with responsibility so that the leaders, voters who choose have the power
And have the tools to fix problems
and can be held accountable if they don't.
It's not about anyone or mayor,
any one mayor or any one council member,
it's about building a structure that will work
for future leaders and future generations.
This measure was shaped with residents
through one of the most extensive charter outreach processes
in our city.
Thank you, ma'am, your time is up.
Okay, wake up, Council President.
My name is Pamela Drake, I'm with the Wellstone Club.
And I gotta say, the Wellstone Club
completely supports our Mayor, Barbara Lee.
We're thrilled that she's our Mayor.
We have not, however, taken a vote on this issue,
and I have particular concerns about it.
I feel that any Mayor, as Mayor as good as Barbara Lee
in terms of political ability to rouse people
and make people understand what the problems are
and what the good solutions are,
that Mayor should be seen on the Council.
every time the council convenes.
People need to see their mayor,
they need to see their mayor deliberating,
and they need to see their mayor
going through negotiations in public
with the rest of the council
and coming up with solutions so they know
how their mayor is engaged and how their mayor thinks.
They don't need to have a mayor
who's sitting in the room going over
who's doing what shift and who's gonna head up a project.
That's not a mayor's job.
mayor's job is to be a political leader not thank you miss Drake if your name
was calling you're in chambers or on zoom please approach the podium if you're
on zoom please raise your hand so I can easily identify you bad news do not go
forward with this Oakland is a business and it requires your CEO to have
academic, education, and professional experience.
That person is supposed to be neutral,
do not have political interests.
A strong mayor would be very partisan.
And whoever that mayor is gains that favor
with that group of partisan individuals.
you need a professional person that has academic education
and city administrations that knows all about departments
and financing and everything.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard, your time is up.
Moving to the Zoom speakers, Nancy Falk.
We have her in person.
Buenos dardes, my name is Richard Fuentes.
I'm an executive board member and pack chair of Council 57,
community. I have the opportunity
to represent 35,000 ask me
members our members work here
in Oakland at East Bay parks
East Bay regional parks AC
transit at part. As all us G.
Just to name a few. I'm a member
of the working group and I could
tell you that we heard from our
residents we heard from members
of the public that they want to
hold somebody responsible when
the potholes not being filled.
We're going to move to the
second option now is a
Republican.
Maga supporter that is the
third option the third option
is supported by Republicans not
by brown people not by black
people not by working people so
I urge you to please put this
matter.
In front of the voters and
allow the voters an opportunity
to make a decision so they could
hold somebody accountable for
our city services to be
speakers, Nancy Falk you are first. Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. My name is Nancy Falk. I'm a proud Oaklander,
a co-founder of the Oakland Charter Reform Project, a board member of Walk Oakland, Bike
Oakland, and a retired Kaiser Permanente executive. Thank you very much for considering a proposal
to reform Oakland's city charter. I'm grateful that there's public deliberation of the issue.
I'm disappointed though that we've essentially missed the opportunity to bring the proven
best practice for high performing cities to Oakland during this calendar year.
We missed the opportunity to bring the highest performing option to Oakland when leaders
opted not to consider a council manager system to bring forward to the voters.
It is truly a missed opportunity, in my view.
I'll continue to be a proud Oaklander.
I'll continue to believe that Oakland
can be a high-performing, safe, and vibrant city.
And I'll continue to hope
that we can absolutely make Oakland better.
Thanks for listening.
Thank you for your comments.
Moving to the next speaker, Steven Falk.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comment.
Council members, members of the public,
my name is Steven Falk,
co-founder of the Oakland Charter Reform Project.
I will use my time today simply to say thank you.
I'm grateful to the council for your service to the public.
You work hard and it shows.
Over the last 18 months, each of you carved time
out of your busy schedule to consider our proposal
for a government led and supervised by the city council,
not by the mayor alone.
And I am confident that you understand the matter
before you today. The gravity of this decision, the likelihood that the system you choose,
if approved by voters, will last for years or decades, and the fact that any charter
amendment will affect not just you, but all who succeed you on the dais. And so please
accept my best wishes now as you make your choice today. And again, thank you. It has
been good getting.
Thank you for your comments.
Blair Beekman, you are next.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Hi, Blair Beekman, I hope I can,
I have a lot to say on this item.
It's my belief that, you know, I've been,
I've lived in San Jose and, you know, the entire,
the large majority of the East side of San Jose
and San Jose itself voted against the strong mayor
and wanted, you know, city manager council
as a participatory process with community.
And so Strong Mayor serves money.
And that's simple as that.
I think we're trying to understand in San Diego
what good governance means.
And that IPA system that you want to install here,
I don't think quite manages and organizes
day-to-day government tasks
that you're trying to work towards.
That's what's really needed here in Oakland.
And I don't know if the IPA position you're creating
will necessarily do that.
And I think it needs to be more regularly questioned.
Yeah, I'm really for the city council process
and that we can create ideas that can work that way
and we don't have to be afraid of that.
Thank you for your comments, Jane Esposito,
are you in the chambers?
If you wish to speak, please approach the podium
or raise your hand.
Otherwise at this time, all names have been called
for this item.
Thank you so much to everybody who came out to comment.
As I stated before, this is the first opportunity
and I'm happy to hear this charter amendment.
There needs to be two hearings so about today by council
would mean to move this board to a second hearing.
With that, I'll open up to council member questions.
No questions.
Council member Unger.
So you know, it's no secret that I've been working on
putting together a strong council manager ballot measure
and I was pretty happy with the work that I did
and the product we produced in conjunction
with the city attorney, but quite frankly,
fail to muster enough support on the council to bring it to the voters, and that's on me.
And while I am perfectly comfortable with futility, I'm not a big fan of the knowingly
futile gesture, and I'm not going to bring forward a measure that's destined to fail
just so I can say that I did it. I've got other windmills that I prefer to tilt at,
and I think that we need charter reform, but a failed effort here would set the project
back. So I still have strong reservations about the strong mayor system. We all pay
lip service to the fact that the job of the council is legislation and budgeting and that
the actual job of getting stuff done is under the purview of the administration.
But the reality is that what our constituents want from us, 90% of the email that I get,
is to perform constituent services, fix that pothole, get me a stop sign, make that dog
stop barking.
So when the Charter Commission interviewed me, I told them that the main thing I wanted
as a council member was the greater ability
to perform constituent services.
What they brought me back was a plan that reduced my ability
to perform constituent services.
So that didn't feel awesome.
You know, currently we can come at constituent services sort
of indirectly, inefficiently, in a kind of orthogonal way via budget
and legislation.
It's not great, but it's what we've got.
But this proposal diminishes the already minimal power
that we have as council members.
under this new plan the mayor who will now directly control the city administrator and
that offices entire sort of get it done staff would also be able to control budgeting and
legislation with just a minority of the council.
I want to say that again, instead of a majority of the council making decisions, under a strong
mayor a minority of the council could make those decisions.
And look, I want to agree with the mayor that this, none of this is a power grab, nobody
here is Trump, nobody here is acting in bad faith.
This is a pure good faith policy disagreement,
and I appreciate all of the interaction I've had
with people both for and against.
And of course, none of this is a slight
against our current mayor,
who I think is the very model of a modern major mayor.
And I don't think the public should need
to have intimate knowledge of the org chart, right?
They wanna call their council member to get stuff done.
And I believe in the competence of our professional staff.
career, long-term, non-political, professional staff.
The council members under strong mayor
would continue to be the face of futility,
even greater futility than we already are,
and will essentially become shields
for all of the failures of the administration.
If council members lose primacy on budgeting,
lose primacy on legislation,
lose even more juice on constituent services
than what is a council member even for
than to act as a punching bag to absorb bad vibes,
and I'm pretty good at taking a punch,
but I don't know why anybody would want that job.
So, you know, if you're keeping score at home,
yes, I would prefer a strong council manager system.
If strong mayor is where we end up,
if that's where this council and this electorate
ends up sending us, I will work hard to optimize that system
and make it the best it can be for all Oaklanders.
But I just wanna say this, you know,
for every complicated question,
there is an easy answer that's usually very neat and tidy
and also wrong.
And anyone who thinks that strong mayor
or strong council manager is the panacea
for what ails us is deluding themselves.
So bad personnel and bad budgeting
can ruin the best systems.
I'm excited about the personnel we have now,
I'm cautiously optimistic about the budget we have now,
but we're gonna need a lot more than charter reform
to make the city run the way that we all hope it should.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Unger.
Council Member Gayle.
Thank you and thank you to all of you
for the information and the time in the community.
I was there at the meeting when this item
was being presented, being discussed,
but I just want to make it very clear
and get to the point that I'm in favor
of a strong city council, city manager form of government.
I support a city council, city manager form of government.
I was here when Jerry Brown took it to the voter
and became the mayor form of government.
And we've had some challenge from then to today
in terms of delivering the services
that we need to deliver to the community.
Now, if you look at the cities in California,
97% of the cities in California
have a city council, city manager form of government.
In the Bay Area, where we live in,
In the Bay Area, all the cities except San Francisco
have a city council, city manager form of government.
And the only reason, one of the reasons why San Francisco,
is since San Francisco is a city and county.
We're a city under the Alameda County.
And so I value the recommendations
that are being presented on both sides of the issue.
But I was here when Jerry Brown,
I worked for Jerry Brown as manager of Parks and Recreation.
I saw what happened in terms of the change
when at one time the mayor sit there
at every meeting the council had, but we worked together.
And I still remember the directors
of Public Works Transportation,
including me that managed parks,
would sit there with every council member once a month
to hear from you, to take on the issues
that impacted your district, your community.
And so I think that in saying that I can go on,
but in saying that I am a strong supporter
of a city council, city manager type of government
and to deliver the service to the city
and have control of the future and the budget.
But most of all, be able to have the cooperation
from the city manager and our city public works directors
And so forth and have the mayor sit at every meeting and we work together
To move this city forward. Thank you
Thank you. Thank you councilmember Gallo councilmember fife. I
Want to thank the individuals
Who made themselves available to meet with us around charter reform?
It's one of the most important things that I believe needs to happen in this city
So I want to not only thank the Charter Reform Committee, but most of all the League and
SPUR and the team that did these multiple community meetings to get input on this measure.
As Councilmember Unger stated, the majority of the obstacles that I've run into over
the last six years have been constituent services, and I always feel like a terrible legislator
when I have to tell constituents,
I can't make sure that gets done.
That is not my responsibility.
In actuality, it's a violation of the charter.
If I tell city staff to go pick up that illegal dumping
in front of your church,
or in front of your community center,
or the host of things that constituents say,
and it's just my perspective at this particular time,
although I actually was one of the individuals
that recruited Mayor Lee to run,
I think she is one of the best mayors this city has ever had, and I'm deeply grateful
for your leadership, Mayor Lee.
I believe that we are coming out of some deep challenges in the city, and we don't have
the trust right now to invest in a single leader because of all of the ups and downs
that Oakland has faced, and to further concentrate power in the hands of one individual is the
the perception that a lot of Oaklanders have right now.
So then we are, then once again, fighting an uphill battle
about trust in local government with this ballot measure.
It's obvious that residents agree
that we need charter reform,
and some individuals have expressed
a desire for a strong mayor.
And I want reform, I know I want that to happen,
but I'm also deeply concerned about giving away
some of our powers in order to get things done
in the city of Oakland.
If we're gonna place charter reform in the ballot,
I think it's important that we give people options
because there are other options in the state of California
that are working and I think that a council manager model
and a strong mayor model would allow people to choose
from multiple options and that would be the ideal,
you know you're talking about
where are we going to go
because I believe- opportunity
to have in the things for
people to choose from because.
We we know democracy is not
simple but it's the system that
we've all committed to and as
such we need to empower voters
by placing options on the ballot
that is my perspective. Thank
you. Thank you councilmember
five councilmember ramachandran.
Thank you- I too want to express
initiating this incredibly important effort
that has been discussed for quite a while,
but she actually put the time and resources
forward to make a thoughtful process happen.
I have a lot of respect for the working group
and for countless volunteer hours that you put in as well.
There is widespread agreement
that what we have now isn't working.
But in my perspective,
echoing what some of my colleagues just said,
when it comes to the issue of service delivery,
of core constituent service delivery,
my personal belief is that the council manager system
would be better to be able to do that.
Like Mayor Lee said in her opening remarks,
reasonable minds can disagree.
We are living life in Oakland in the flesh.
This is not a political science textbook.
This is not a theoretical experiment.
And this is a decision that could very seriously impact 440,000 lives here in Oakland, and
I don't take it lightly.
I am grateful that this conversation has begun, and I think we have a ways to go to get something
on the ballot.
So today I will not be supporting this proposal.
Thank you, Councilmember Ramachandran.
Councilmember Wall.
So I've only been in office for, well, one year in one week.
And I will say that my blunt assessment of our city services is that it is dysfunctional
and we can all agree that, you know, Oaklanders deserve better.
Like, we cannot even deliver the most basic of services.
We are challenged as a city.
And I think because the current system more closely mimics the council manager form of
government and I didn't, I was actually, I write very skeptical around the strong
mayor form of government based off of some of my own, I would just say
run-ins honestly even with the city administration where we had
disagreements. I have come to the to the conclusion that we do need the strong
mayor form of government. I think we need to empower a mayor to be a real
change maker and to break through red tape and the bureaucracy and we need to
empower them to make change and yes there is always the chance that there
could be a really problematic person that we vote into office but we cannot
legislate for the worst case scenario we should put in guardrails but I also am
concerned that we are then going to just calcify our existing system I mean I
think we can all agree that what we have right now is dysfunction. And I think if we allow
the current system to calcify in the power vacuum that currently exists, we are not going
to see improvements to our service delivery. And I think given all the work that was done,
we should have some version of this proposal to go before the voters. I do want to see
some enhancements, though, some further guardrails for the worst case scenario. What I see in
the most fallibility in the strong mayor proposal is the potential for a mayor to hire incompetent
and unqualified friends to become those department heads. I want to thank the mayor and her team
for incorporating some of my suggestions, which allows council to essentially confirm
a number of the appointments, which include human resources, the Department of Transportation,
public works, as well as finance, and that was based off of my own research when New
Orleans did a charter amendment, and they did a peer review around 25 strong mayor cities
that showed that out of 20 of those cities, it was actually common practice to allow council
then to confirm those appointments, which allows us, it first of all allows transparency.
The other thing that allows for, though, is for counsel to vet, ensure that these department
heads, because we've all seen it for ourselves, department heads that don't feel any accountability
to us, and I'd like to change that and make sure that through that vetting process, they
feel like we as elected officials are the boss, okay, the collective boss.
So I see some good stuff in this proposal that it will shift the power away from unelected
bureaucrats towards us wholesale as elected officials because I think there
needs to be that we hear the complaints all the time from our constituents and
I think that's just something for us to think about so I just wanted to put my
defense of the strong mayor proposal strong mayor with some amendments I'll
be working on to introduce to in the second reading thank you councilmember
of a long Council member Houston through the chair as you know I've been ten toes
down with Mayor Barbara Lee from day one this 218 is is a problem for me the
things that I've done and I've accomplished in 15 months I've been
office under strong mayor wouldn't have happened I've been threatened with the
and section two 18 many times
I want to ask the city attorney
or staff of the mayor what's the difference
between the two 18 now and the two 18 then?
I mean that you're proposing.
I have a question.
Councilmember?
Yeah, so your question on section two 18,
a lot of the language currently in the charter
um, the intent from the mayor, charter reform working group and the mayor was to make it
very clear around what, um, council can do.
And so one of the things that is in the, um, in the language, um, if you remember is that,
uh, that, um, if a council reaches out to a certain department or director and kind
of overstep certain bounds that, um, there could be kind of certain penalties included
in that.
I wanted to take that out and have to be very clear of like, here is the things that council
can do with respect to working with city departments.
So we actually worked with council member Unger
to include some language related to ensuring that council,
we're not telling council you can't talk to city departments
or city staff, et cetera.
But saying that you can talk to all staff
and coordinate with them around the various priorities
that you're working on.
And then the last piece is we did wanna include
the non-interference clause.
That's something that the Charter Reform Working Group,
when they looked at cities across the state and the country,
is something that's pretty uniform in the charge
to protect city workers from interference.
But that was the thinking of it.
So through the chair, today,
there was something in my district
for the last eight, nine years that I had done
and I had removed because it was a crime
against my community and it's a public health
and safety issue.
And if something comes up,
they might say I did a 218 on that.
That said, what, a misdemeanor?
Yeah.
Councilmember, thank you for that question.
We, in essence, repeal section 218.
We eliminated a council member charge of a misdemeanor,
if, in fact, you actually asked for something to be done,
a service to be performed in your district.
That has been taken out.
We put in more language and more revisions.
heard Councilmember Unger's suggestions that Councilmembers can affirmatively talk to departments
and the only provision that's held, which is important for most cities, is no coercion
in terms of attempting to be an executive to coerce and demand that a city administrator
do something the demand the coercion.
But in terms of any type of contact with the city
administrator to ask for services to be delivered in
your district we as being a misdemeanor that has been
taken out totally and section two eighteen has been
completely revised.
Through the chair thank you mayor so so I think that if
we were able to hire and fire the city administrator
it'd give the power to city council
to be able to move these issues
that council member five, council member Wang
had mentioned about not able to get things done
in our community, because it's difficult.
I mean it's a few times that some of the staff
and called me and said, Ken, what can I do for you?
I said, man, if I tell you, I'm gonna get a 218, right?
So I believe a strong manager, strong city council
is in the options like what council member Fife
had just said to give the public options.
Because I don't want to hold anything up
that you're doing, Madam Mayor,
because you put a lot of work in it.
I believe in you as my leader.
But I think to give the public an option would be better
because they can make a choice if they wanted
and you're ready to do a strong
mayor or a strong council manager form of government.
I have a couple of more things to say
but I'll let my council member Brown I'll see my speak.
Are you sitting your time.
No no no no no see them I'm so you you have two minutes
and thirty seconds okay but I'm a let council member Brown
speak but you're not sitting your time I'm not sitting my
time okay.
And in terms of what you said council member Houston thank
about myself personally. This is about a structural change that would give residents the understanding
and clarity about who where the buck stops. Also I have worked with councilmember Unger
to strengthen city councils roles responsibilities oversight and the ability to confirm or not
So that's kind of a way to
confirm a variety of positions
that currently are not in the
charter in terms of the key
department heads that I know
that you would want to be able
to confirm or not.
And so I just want to be clear
that this is not about myself.
This is or the type of mayor
that you would want to see
is that there is accountability, transparency, the delivery of services, and a mayor, someone
has to be responsible for the overall direction of the city.
The city manager slash administrator is a professional person who is managing the operations
of the city.
The city, under strong mayor, the mayor makes sure that the city administrator and the departments
are doing their job.
of the state having a job and
that's the role of a strong
merit to have the administrator
the city department heads do
their job.
Another hybrid in Oakland would
create more confusion for
residents in terms of who's
responsible for what and so the
residents decided and the
reason I'm here again today is
asking for a vote just to get
it to the voters to make their
I'm gonna say this for myself everybody's sitting on this dice and everybody in this
artist audience we believe in you so if we can make it a strong mayor and then when you
decide not to run then it comes back to us that's good so but what I'm saying is because
we believe in you but what about that next person councilmember he's nearly let the democracy
works okay when people vote for who they want is there and I still got him another minute
So it's not personal.
Council member Houston, are you complete?
Yeah, I'm looking at the clock.
You had about one minute left.
Okay, all right.
Council member Brown and then Council member Wong,
I think you have about two minutes left.
Excellent, well, first off,
I do wanna just start by thanking everyone
that was a part of the mayor's working group,
the league, SPUR, and as you all know,
when we came and you all came and presented in rules,
I had a lot of feedback about the proposal.
And so I just really wanna thank the mayor and Preston
for working really closely with myself
and also Council Member Unger,
because both of us were working on the alternative,
the council manager.
But I think it is important to note
that a lot of the changes that we were interested in having
are actually reflected in a lot of 218.
And so I just wanted to share,
just in case, Council Member Houston,
you weren't able to kind of see some of the things
that actually I feel like most of the council
was talking about of what it's like
to try to get the constituent services done within the city.
And so in 218B, it specifically says
that council members and their designated staff
may communicate directly to the mayor,
the city administrator depart heads of departments and you know follow up on
service requests and then in C and section C it also specifically says
that there's see states shall provide timely and reasonable responses to
counseling inquiries constituent service requests and shall provide council
members with information necessary to perform constituent services and
functions right and then as the mayor mentioned removes misdemeanor altogether
right so that whole section has been appealed and so I think one of the
public commenters mentioned the goal here isn't to provide the Sun and the
moon even though maybe that's what we want but in this moment I feel that one
of the most reasonable things that we can do is put the item in front of the
voters so that they have the opportunity to decide what form of
government that they want to move forward with. I also want to thank the
mayor and the team for also considering around citywide representation and how
crucial that is and removing that from the recommendations as well and so I'll
you know I'll make the motion to move this item to the next council meeting I
how I believe that's what it would be, right?
Thank you.
And I'll second it, Council Member Wong.
I just wanted to address too this idea
around hiring and firing a city administrator
and us losing our power because I also initially thought,
you know, that's an important piece of power,
but I think my conclusion,
and I think you have all seen it for yourselves.
Okay, I want to surface some of the dysfunction
that we have all seen collectively in our own experiences
and in interacting with some of these departments
is that the dysfunction goes beyond just the top guy.
You could get rid of the city administrator,
but we have department heads
who are overseeing multimillion dollars, right?
And so I think the accountability needs to extend
to those individuals as well.
And that's how I see the system could potentially give us more authority to do that, and why
I think it's important.
We even know of some department heads that I will remain unnamed where our city administrators
say they can't control them.
They can't get them to come along.
So that's all I'm saying, okay.
I'm going to leave it at that, because I see Council President has given me a face.
But it's true.
It's true.
dysfunction that all of us are witnessing all the time so I just think
there is I know that there was a lot of work embedded in this proposal and I
think unless we have to counter which I'm open to putting both on but I think
we should leave it to the voters to vote on the strong mayor proposal so that's
all I wanted to took that I wanted to address and we've also seen okay how
professional city administrators can are fallible themselves right just because
they're professional doesn't mean that they can't also be flawed human beings
so that's all I'm saying thank you councilmember Wong councilman
Houston you want the rest of your minute I want to I want to say through the
chair you said somebody told the city administrator that they're not gonna do
it they need to be fired that's what needs to happen so that's where the
leadership comes in place you have to be bold you have to have courage and you
have to do the right thing this in the best interest of the community that
wouldn't happen under my watch somebody told me as city administrator that they
not going to do something they're gone so that's why the buck has to stop
somewhere and it has to stop with the person who's been elected to be the head
of the city who people democratically elect with councils consent and you know
input and also it's important to recognize that and I want to conclude
by just saying with the input of several council members this is a strong mayor
strong City Council and we would not mislead the public or diminish the role
you should be aware that the
role of city council members are I would not come here saying
that we have increased the authority of city council
members to interact and deliver services.
To their constituents.
If in fact there were not true.
And you can read it in the charter is a very.
In many ways.
Academic kind of.
Document but the set sections that of we're talking about in
terms of the role of elected officials finances
And it's been a very very
narrowly focused sections have
been written in a way and the
community weighed in.
Input from quite over seven
hundred and fifty residents to
really go through this and in
fact it does enhance city
council members authority to
deliver services oversight
council members and and and the
mayor.
In public trying to make
decisions where no one knows
where the buck stops and so it's
very important that the council
have their authority.
To override vetoes the
legislative authority the
authority authority to deliver
services of the mayor is the the
person who executes.
The agenda of the council
the agenda of the council with professional staff and expertise that
is responsive to both the mayor and the city council. Thank you mayor council
member Fife and then we'll go to a vote. And I'll make this quick council
president Jenkins I just had some clarifying questions regarding the
independent budget legislative and legislative analyst if I could get a
couple answers we are currently in the mid cycle budget process and I know this
analyst is not intended for this particular cycle but for upcoming budget
cycles I want to understand how would this position with their subsequent
staff impact council staffing levels and budgeting and would that the the cost of
these additional staff persons come out of the general purpose fund how how are
we envisioning or how are you envisioning this independent budget and
ledge analyst being funded and operating and who is who would lead the process
would it be a city administrators office the mayor's office the council the
councilmen the council would lead this because it's an independent analyst
Which the council would lead but Preston will give you the details on the thank you
Thank you council member five president-couver deputy chief staff to mayor Barbara Lee
Yes
So your question in the in the charter section on the budget legislative analysts the intent was to create some flexibility
with the how council envisions the budget legislative analyst in the existing language it allows counsel to
assuming the measure passes and is on the ballot,
to draft legislation to create that office
in the way that reflects their vision for it.
We wanted to keep that language somewhat broad
so that we're not tying council's hands on the back end
to how they want to frame it and create it.
Within the charter section,
one of the items that is actually exempt from the veto
is the creation of that budget legislative analyst office
and the hiring of that one position that's included.
any other positions that that the council would want to include would have to be
negotiated in future budget processes. But I do want to say that council does
have a, it's part of the charter language. There's a budget line on Embido,
but that can be overridden by a majority of council or size,
a super majority of council.
And so if there was a wish to include additional staff at a future date,
that's something that could be negotiated through the budget process going
forward.
But in terms of bringing on this position, if it's led by the council,
then we are, you know, held by the Brown Act.
So would it come from then the council president
that would have a group of council members working with him
and then come to council?
What is the process about how you envision it rolling out?
Yeah, I think the response to that council member fight
is that it's really up to council in terms of figuring out
how they would want to lead that process,
if that's something that the council would wish
to lead through the president's office.
The language is very flexible to allow you to be nimble
and how you would move that process forward.
OK.
Well, I think I was given two more minutes to speak.
So I'm probably at 30 seconds.
I'll just end by saying that I have been coming to this chamber
for over a decade before I was an elected official.
On many of those occasions, I see some people in the audience
that were here with me shutting it down because
of our lack of ability to get things done in this city.
And now being on this side of the dais,
it is much harder than I thought,
than when I was over there.
And that makes absolutely no sense.
That in 20 years, what it takes to get things done
for the city in a way that benefits the city
is so challenging.
And so whatever it takes that we can do
as elected officials, I want to be a part of that process.
And so I am fine to put this in front of the voters
because I think the voters deserve an opportunity to choose.
And my perspective is that a council manager
form of government would best fit the city,
but this is not my decision to make.
It is the Oakland voters
and that's what I'm comfortable moving today.
Thank you.
And as a reminder to all the council members of vote today
is to move this to the next council meeting.
So.
Madam Clerk.
There is a motion by Councilmember Brown, second by Councilmember Jenkins to continue
this item to the next City Council meeting, which will be June 16th.
Councilmember Brown.
Aye.
Councilmember Fyfe.
Aye.
Councilmember Gallo.
I am for a City Council City Manager, former of government.
My answer is no.
No?
Thank you.
Councilmember Houston.
I had a question.
Okay.
I really did because let me tell you why.
Through the share to the parliamentarian.
We're in the vote, so your discussion time has passed.
So, let's start the vote over.
Councilmember Houston, you gotta get your questions in
beforehand.
Yeah, so we can make revisions, we can add some things
to this, it's just moving it to the next meeting
and then we can add some changes or some small revisions,
correct?
on brown act requirements we've been discussing with a couple of council members input into
the charter and revisions amendments based on the requirements of this body in terms
of the brown act is moving to include ideas and amendments based on however many limits
We have do we have.
And we also we have some time frames OK going.
So to add to what the mayor said there's a limit to how many council members can work
with the mayor's office on revisions because of the brown act but any any council member
can work with our office if they want to introduce their own proposed revisions.
So we will start the vote over you complete.
before we start the vote over because I know you're dying to know through the chair if you are submitting amendments to this item they
Were due to my office Thursday
June 11th by 4 p.m. Going to the vote councilmember Brown. I councilmember five. I councilmember Gallo
No, councilmember Houston. I'll move it. I
Mean, yeah, I councilmember Ramachandra. No councilmember Unger. No councilmember Wong. I
And councilmember Jenkins motion passes with a vote of five ayes three nos
councilmember dial
in Ramachandran
As we are still taking items out of order going to item five point five
Noting after item five point five. We will return to the regular order of the agenda
I know five point five adopts a resolution waiving advertising and
Competitive beating and authorizing the city administrator to increase the construction contract change order
for the east Oakland art center project with CWS construction group from 25 percent to 56 percent of
The original contract amount of one million seven hundred eighty five thousand dollars for a total contract amount not to exceed two million
seven hundred and eighty four thousand six hundred dollars and you have one speaker on this item I
Think thank you so much. Maybe just two minutes. Does that work? Thank you
All right, good afternoon council. My name is Tess Kavanagh public works project manager for the East Oakland Art Center formerly DACA
And with that in council district 6
We are here today to request City Council approval to increase the construction contract change order amount
for the East Oakland Art Center project from
1,785,000 to 2 million seven hundred eighty four six hundred
During construction, the project suffered an incidence
of major vandalism, which generated a significant change
order which is causing this request today.
This change order increase will fund replacement
of stolen HVAC and kitchen equipment, repair
of damaged interior finishes, partitions, and ceilings,
replacement of removed electrical conduit, contract time extension,
and enhance security measures during the remaining construction period.
There were a few questions that came up during committee review, which I'll provide some
responses for.
The CWS construction contract meets our city's 50% local and small local business enterprise
requirements and the change order work that was incorporated also includes or also meets
but the plan changes with the
50% requirement, the city team is also pursuing an insurance
claim to reimburse the city for the damages caused, so depending
on how that goes, the city funds that go into this change order
will be reimbursed. That concludes my presentation. I'm
happy to answer any questions.
Excellent. Thank you so much. Colleagues, any questions?
Councilmember Houston. Yes, through the chair, I'd like to
director Garland for
Inquiring about that insurance. Let's see if they can cover it instead of the city
Having a cover that and bringing that change order up to 50 over 50 percent. So I appreciate that. So I like that. Thank you
Excellent colleagues any further questions on this one or we can go to the public speakers
Thank you
Mr. Hazard for item five point five
The public speaker is passing for this item
councilmember Houston
right on five point five moved by councilmember Houston seconded by
councilmember Ramachandran to approve the staff recommendation council member
five is excused councilmember Gallo aye council member Houston aye council
Councilmember one and councilmember Brown motion passes with a vote of six
ayes to excuse Jenkins and going back to the regular order of the agenda that
will take us back to item 5.1 excuse me no item 4.1. Item 4.1
councilmember. I'm gonna need a
and Houston I will now read the item conducts a public hearing and upon
conclusion adopt a resolution adopting the 26 to 2031 Oakland local hazard
mitigation plan as an amendment to the safety element of the Oakland general
plan and adopting the appropriate sequel findings and there's one speaker on this
item excellent thank you so much will five minutes work that would be great
thank you excellent thank you good evening members of City Council my name
is Veronica Cole I'm an emergency planning coordinator with the Oakland
Fire Department if k-top could load our presentation that would be appreciated
great I'm here to talk to you about our 2026 local hazard mitigation plan I'm
joined by members of our steering committee who have done great work to
help to put together this plan and guide it to reduce risk and increase resilience
Once equitably, the mission of the City of Oakland local hazard mitigation plan is to
establish and promote a comprehensive mitigation strategy and efforts to protect the whole
community and environment from identified natural and human-caused hazards.
The local hazard mitigation plan has been developed in collaboration with city staff
from multiple departments, neighboring jurisdictions, community members, and other stakeholders.
It includes profiles of the hazards that are likely to impact Oakland, and also includes
mitigation strategy for steps to take to reduce the impact of hazards. An updated plan is required
to access certain types of pre and post-disaster funding. Here you'll see an image of the City of
Oakland local hazard mitigation plan with the city landscape and city logo. New in the current,
they have the 2026 to 2031 LHMP that's different than the prior one, and this is a partial list.
We have emission goals, objectives, and actions that have been revised with a stronger emphasis
and equity, updated hazard profiles and capabilities analysis with new equity analysis content.
Climate change considerations are now incorporated into the hazard profiles instead of being
a standalone hazard.
And we've updated a risk ranking methodology to account for resident displacement, impacts
of the economy, environment, and transportation.
Using this risk ranking, we've ranked hazards in Oakland as follows.
At a high level, we have earthquake, severe weather, and wildfire.
Medium we have drought, flood, landslide, and sea level rise.
And at a low level, we have dam failure in Tsunami, Saish.
And in case you're wondering, a Saish is a sloshing of water and it contained bodies
such as Lake Merritt or San Francisco Bay.
The LHMP has close to 75 mitigation actions, the final number is 72, that have been developed
by city departments in the Port of Oakland.
It includes an annual maintenance plan that will track Oakland's progress on these actions
which will progress the city towards defined mitigation goals and objectives.
FEMA, CAL FIRE, USEDA, and state climate adaptation grants may supplement city resources for these
projects.
Here you'll see a map of Oakland with equity priority communities and zones of liquefaction
susceptibility interlaid.
In this version of the LHMP, we're including equity analysis and mapping, and to do so
we're using the environmental justice communities that have been defined in the environmental
justice component of the element of the general plan, and we have that cross-referencing.
We conducted robust community and stakeholder outreach for this effort.
It was expanded from our efforts in 2021 that obviously were limited due to the pandemic.
We conducted average to over, to approximately 300 individuals through presentations and
forums for public comment.
We held multilingual in person meetings at trusted locations in equity priority communities,
including West Oakland, Chinatown, Downtown, Fruitvale, and East Oakland.
We conducted online community forums during our public comment period, and we held a multilingual
public survey that received 131 responses and maintained a website and email interest
list.
I want to talk a little bit about AB 2140 compliance.
This requires that the general plan safety element to adopt the LHMP.
If we're compliant with AB 2140, additional post-disaster funding related to federal
public assistance may be available, but note that this is not guaranteed.
As an example, a typical local cost share if federal public assistance is activated
is 25%.
After the California Disaster Assistance Act, or CDAA, the state can pay up to 18.75% of
this cost share.
And if we're fully compliant with AB 2140, the state is allowed to pay the remaining
cost share, which could bring Oakland's cost share to 0%.
I have a timeline here, but we have an update.
On May 1st, we did submit to Cal OES, I'm sorry, Cal OES submitted the LGMP to FEMA.
And this time we've received a FEMA approval pending
adoption letter, so we do have that.
On May 20th we've been to the Planning Commission.
We visited and presented to the Public Safety Committee
on May 26th and we're here tonight to talk to you
on June 2nd.
On an ongoing basis we're going to be implementing
these mitigation actions and we'll hold our first
annual update and progress report process in the spring
or summer of 2027.
And there's a website here to learn more,
www.oklandca.gov slash Oakland Hazard Plan.
This concludes my presentation.
Excellent. Thank you so much for the update.
Colleagues, any questions?
Excellent. And we can hear from the public speaker.
As a kind name, please approach the podium in any order.
Please state your name for the record.
Please raise your hand on Zoom so I can easily identify you
if you submitted a card for this item. I have one speaker Juan Carlos Hernandez and I believe he's
on Zoom. Mr. Hernandez please unmute yourself and begin your comments. Good afternoon my name
is Juan Carlos Hernandez. I'm an attorney with Arms Davis Law in San Francisco. I'm here today
on behalf of my client Jose Gloria Reyes. Mr. Reyes is a local construction worker who works
in the city of Oakland. His vehicle was hit by an Oakland fire department truck in October of last
here requiring over $20,000 in repairs. In February, my firm sent a public entity claim
to the city attorney's office. Inside the public entity claim we included a police report
which found Oakland Fire Department to be at fault as well as repair bills. Four months have
passed since we submitted the public entity claim with no response. Our firm is being forced to
pursue civil litigation where damages and liability is clear. In fact, I have a complaint ready to be
filed in Superior Court. The city will spend time and precious tax money
defending a claim that they will lose. Before this I ask the City Council and
the City Attorney's Office to make this right. Thank you. Thank you for your
comments. That was the only speaker for this item. Excellent. Thank you so much.
Councilmember Wong. I'll just say since this came through the Public Safety
Committee, thank you for your work on this since I know that this work will
And that's also to close the
hearing as well.
Excellent, thank you so much
councilmember Unger.
Second.
Through the chair to the
parliamentarian, I'm not sure if
you caught the public speaker.
What was that?
Or if there's anyone that can
share with me, the litigation
claim that was just made?
Through the chair to
councilmember five, I did hear
that you were listening to the
public speaker, but I'm not sure
if you caught the public speaker
in the public speaker.
What was that?
Or if there's anyone that can
share with me the litigation
claim that was just made?
Through the chair to
councilmember five, I did hear
just made through the chair to council member five I did hear the comment but
I don't have information on that claim so so it's nothing that the city has
received to date that you are aware of about whatever was just stated oh is it
related to this item it didn't sound like it that it was I didn't catch the
full comment that's why I'm asking I know I'm not aware of how it was related
to that to the item thank you excellent Councilmember Gallo okay excellent so we
motion. I have a motion in a
I need a motion to open the public hearing. Second. The motion by Councilmember Gallo second by Councilmember five to open the public hearing Councilmember.
I also remember guy. I also remember Houston. Councilmember. Councilmember Rama Chandra. I also remember under my house remember Wong. I also remember Brown. I motion passes with a vote of seven eyes.
I will now read the item into record.
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion,
adopt an ordinance, amending ordinance number 13848,
which adopted the fiscal year 25 through 26
master fee schedule as amended
to establish, modify and delete fees
and penalties assessed by the city of Oakland
for fiscal year 26 through 27.
I don't have any speakers on this item.
Excellent, thank you so much.
I'm all five minutes work.
Excellent, thank you so much.
and I'm sure you'll make it work.
Good afternoon, my name is Chuck Maurer,
I'm a principal revenue analyst in the revenue bureau
with the finance department.
First off, I wanna say a quick thank you
to Jonathan Lau and Jose Secura,
two of my other team members who worked on coordinating
and putting together the departmental submissions
for the MFS update here.
If Ktop could put up the PowerPoint presentation,
and I will quickly go through the different slides here,
Thank you very much here the following item presented recommends the City Council conducted public hearing and upon conclusion to adopt an ordinance to admit and the master fee schedule ordinance 1-3-8-4-8 for fiscal year
26-27 public outreach was conducted via newspaper 10 days in advance of this hearing so the master fee schedule for a 26-27 documents fees and charges imposed by the city to recover cuts costs
providing services. The proposed amendment amends the 25-26 MFS
includes new fees, deleted fees, and fee increases. The following departments
decided that the year fees were not going to be changed in for this 26-27
master fee schedule cycle. These are the fees that these were the departments
that decided that their fees were going to be changes needed to be made to their fees here.
The departments were directed to include a 3% increase to defray some of the increases
in healthcare workers comp and OPEB expenses that the city incurred for the next fiscal year.
So the next following slides are just kind of some highlights of some of the fee changes
that were made in the master fee schedule.
The complete changes in the fees can be found in your packet here.
So some of the, some of these are just some highlighted fees here.
So for example, animal services added administrative citation, collection, referral fee.
The city attorney did increase their neighborhood law attorney fees by about 43% pursuant to
the finance department.
Through their ordinance city clerk did reduce.
It's a election some election filing fees.
The finance department- move the excess litter fee from the
finance department over to public works- the fire
department did put on a new plan check processing fee for
planning permits.
And they made a reduction in engine company inspection and
the city of Detroit. And in the
state of Detroit they set up they- modestly increase the swimming fees to better align with the what's being charged in neighboring cities. And a public works did crease some fees based upon some benefits overhead as well as adding a creek protection permit fee.
fees were unchanged this year and planning a building decreased did
increase some fees due to system improvements over the past year.
Information and technology a lot of the fees haven't been charged in years so
they've just discontinued their fees that they're that they've charged.
And OPDOT did increase some parking fees above that 3%.
And Workplace Performance Standards removed two fees
as the funding changed the internal service funds.
At this point here, we have representatives
from the different departments here.
We have some different, sorry Brad,
we have representatives from different departments.
So if you guys have specific questions
the department. And I do want to
of your attachment under the nuisance enforcement unit item G overtime service fee for reinspection
after failing secondary inspection for one the cannabis officer and two the special activity
permit inspector they currently is 550 and 447 per hour they should read is 550 and 447
per incident so I want to make sure that that's understood that's a technical question we'd
like to make and read into the record now thank you.
Yeah I think that's a question
so I do have a question.
Excellent thank you so much.
And are you complete yes I'm
complete thank you perfect I do
have a couple questions if I was
just to start it off.
I'm so the first question that
I had if someone can explain a
little bit more about the
transfer of the excess letter
fee into public works.
Sure no problem and through the
chair I would like to I guess
bring up someone from finance
I will defer to the acting city administrator. Yes, so the excess litter fee program is being rolled into
public works overall strategy around
Illegal dumping so it's being moved from our office to opw excellent
But no shifts and changes to the fee itself because that actually requires us to go to the voters. I believe correct. Okay, perfect
Thank you. And then the other question. I just kind of want to raise this as a flag
Which is under the OPRYD and increasing the fees
For swimming specifically for our seniors. I just wanted to get some more clarity around that increase
Sure, no problem and through the chair. I would like to bring up a representatives on OPRD, which would be today
Which would be?
Let's
Excellent, thank you
And so I believe that I brought this question of last time when the master fee schedule came
and then may perhaps it was explained that when the seniors come to
Any to receive any kind of resource within the city of Oakland?
Is it true that if they're paying the membership fee, maybe they're not paying this additional fee
Maybe you can add clarity because I guess I'm just concerned with the cost going up
So it depends on the on the facility depends on the facility that they attend if they for example
They're in the sports a stockman Sports Center Larry Reed Sports Center
They're
Swimming it's already included in their membership
Okay, if they go to an outdoor facility, there are different
memberships and
So it depends on the amount of laps they're gonna they're purchasing through the membership
I see and so is the only swimming center that has a membership the one in district seven in comparison to the other pools
So that membership is for the whole
Facility it is in the district seven and includes not just the pool
But again the whole facility which has weight room and other amenities
I see and then do you have some insight into why we decided to increase the fee?
just to
match our neighbor cities and also the city the fees have now been increased in the past decade and
the cost of
maintenance
Thank you so much. I also believe that we increased the fee during the last last year
So just maybe double check right. Yeah, I guess I was looking at the master fee schedules side by side
And that's how came out with the whole rationale that hasn't been increased. Okay, but we can double check. Okay, excellent
Well, I I see that most of my colleagues Mike's are on and so if you want to double check on that one
Just to double check because I thought that last year I asked the same questions and I kind of had the same flag
Yeah about the increase and so we'll start with councilmember gayo councilmember Unger and then councilmember Wong
Councilmember Gallo councilmember Ramachandran Unger and then wall. Thank you. The question that I have has it is regarding animal services
If there's a representative here
Certainly, I appreciate that the development and the growth this has occurred and
For the members of the public the majority 3% increase in fees. What does that apply to?
Sure. No problem through the chair. I'd like to bring up Joe de Vries for animal services to answer your question. Thank you
And I was just notified that Joe DeVries from Animal Services is not here right now.
Sure.
Through the Chair, to Councilmember Morgaio, the 3% increases are generally to cover the
standard cost increases that we saw between the prior fiscal year and the current fiscal
year.
We do this retrospectively one year back.
And so those are being applied to a series of fees across the board in the city, and
so that's a general increase you would see to keep up with the cost of providing services
across the city.
the increase in animal services is not due to any particular item or
Increase if it's at simply the 3% number simply to call the cost of doing business to help us with our staffing
He said we have staffing supplies materials, etc. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor gallo and then council member ramachandran
Thank you
What led to the forty something percent increase for the neighborhood?
In the course of litigation
to
Account for their increased billing rate like what's what's that increase for sure and at this point through the chair
I would like to defer to the city attorneys representative for the master fee schedule
Yes through the charity councilmember on trying to what's your question about the neighborhood lock or yeah increase. Yes. This is pursuant to
An update in the salary ordinance. So this was this increase was already adopted by counsel by prior ordinance
So we're simply updating the fees to make it consistent with that. Okay. Thank you
And then the new fee around Creek protection. Can you explain that one?
Yes, I'd like to defer to the department who has his feet
Good afternoon, Tom Morgan Public Works
The addition of this Creek protection fee is for level 3 and level 4 reviews of Creek protection permits
because previously there were
There was no fee for the public works part of the review of the plans
Thank you. Just to clarify
Someone would need to apply for this Creek protection permit if they're voluntarily doing Creek restoration
No, it's part of the
construction
Thank you, and then my last question is around street parking. There's a number of
parking proposal
Modest increases to various things, but what about is there any proposal to meet our parking on the street?
Through the chair, I'd like to defer the department that brought up the
King make sure you're speaking into the mic. Yeah, I beg your pardon. You make yeah, let's make sure you don't mount
I work with the OT I specifically work with the off-street parking program
And I think your question is about rates for parking garages no meter parking on the street
I don't think I can answer that actually
What was your question? Oh perhaps I can was there an increase from the street meter part. I don't believe there's an increase. No, okay
Thank you. That's it
Excellent. Thank you so much councilmember Unger
This might be the same department before you go too far. I have a question about
Towing of stolen vehicles
we've had some some complaints about folks who are asked to pay inordinate fees for their stolen vehicles to beat after their toad is
sort of the adding insult injury fee at somebody who
Had bought a motorcycle for $1,500 and was charged
$1,500 for towing or $500 to abandon it
Sure, no problem
To the chair. Could you give me just a second to see what department that I should bring up to actually be able to
Answer that fee for a sec
Fake in the mean. Did you have more questions councilmember Unger or does that one? Okay
Well while we look for a representative, maybe councilmember long did was your hand up
Yeah, thank you
I think it's less of a well
I the question directed at finance in general because this cuts across
number of the departments. I do have some concerns just in general about the
fee schedule. I have been getting a number of emails and complaints about
some of the high cost of these fees, and my own experience, I'll just say, is I had
worked with the Department of Transportation, and I do see that work
being reflected in this, but then that to me shows that there is opportunities to
to lower fees.
So colleagues, just for your awareness,
within the Department of Transportation,
we have a fee that was the encroachment permit.
So essentially, given some of the crimes
that we've experienced here in the city of Oakland,
especially crimes by which people drive cars
into storefronts and then it costs a lot of money,
there were a number of small businesses
that were interested in storefront hardening,
essentially putting in like a planter box,
something like that in the front.
And the fee for that, if you look at it,
is actually around $1,994,
but we had worked with the Department of Transportation
to actually create something called like a minor encroachment,
bringing down the collective fee down to like $400,
which, you know, for a small business
that is challenged with all the costs
of running a small business,
I know we have, you know, we have restrictions, right?
We have to buy state law and do cost recovery,
but that was to me an example
of where there are opportunities
to create minor versions of the permits
and lower fees for the businesses and residents.
And for so many of the things,
whether it's building housing,
and I hear about thousands of dollars out the door,
not for the construction costs,
but for all the fees that are added,
I just think that they're,
I want to push the departments overall
to look at these fee schedules,
look at really, are we lowering this
to the most that we can?
And yeah, I just wanted to see
if that was part of the directive
that was given to departments or not really.
It was more of a,
we're going to index this based off of CPI.
Right, what they were directed to do
is if they see any of this,
And because of the increases to things like O&M, you know, PG&E is up a lot.
You know, everything's costing a little bit more.
The fringe benefits, our healthcare, we looked at those fees and said, well, you know, we
need to bring them up a little so we can capture those fees.
And we're not, you know, these fees are just purely for cost recovery.
We're not trying to make a profit off of them, but we're just trying to recover those fees.
because our fees, you know, we didn't have a...
We didn't have a coal increase last year,
so there was no fees on there.
That because of inflation, as we all see,
and those sorts of things.
And, you know, that there was a decision in finance,
and Brad could probably thresh it out a little bit more
to raise it up, to capture, like, that OMM,
those fringe, those healthcare,
that just naturally goes up each year.
And I understand that, but I think what I'm pointing out
is that, for example, this new minor encroachment permit,
the department realized that reflected the actual staff time,
that we were to allow a small business
to put in a planter box.
It wasn't going to cost the $2,000
that we would have otherwise charged them.
So there's other things like the cost
of putting up an event in a park.
I was helping a nonprofit look at San Antonio Park.
It was like $381 to have this event.
Every food truck on top of that is another $381.
It really adds up.
And I just, I want to push departments in general
to do that same sort of opportunity searching
that Oak Dot did.
And I don't know if I see that reflected in this document.
So I have to respond broadly to your question
around that Council Member Wong.
The direction in general as regards to master fees schedule
is to ensure that we're Prop 26 compliant,
which means that we have to charge fees
that are within the reasonable cost
of the provision of the service.
There is inherently some level of aggregation
that has to happen in that process.
As departments go through and reevaluate programs,
it will often reevaluate fees directly,
but that normally comes in hand in hand
with programmatic looks at the specific operation.
The departments don't have the internal capacity
to reevaluate all of their services and programs,
collectively, every single master fee cycle.
So the specific fees that you see being changed often
by more or less than the amounts noted
are often have had that analysis,
and that's typically what you see.
For the broad set of fees,
normally we would see a broader increase in those amounts
to capture the full cost of providing our services,
which is consistent with our roadmap to fiscal health
and our effort to ensure that we have full cost recovery
for all city expenses to the extent possible.
one and I believe there was an
outstanding question.
There was an outstanding
question I have a Jonathan
right there trying to take a
look for the towing they
specifically to towing fees.
Thank you and to the chair to
councilmember under the tofis
that were mentioned are
actually not city fees there's
fees that are actually related
to our towing vendor and the
appropriate point to address
those if there is concern is in
the re negotiation of our tow
contract so they're not
supposed to be.
negotiation of our tow contract. So they're not city fees, they're the vendor
that sees selected fees and the tow and contract is the place to address them.
Does that come up? I do not know off the top of my head but I think it's relatively
soon. Cool, thank you. Excellent, thank you all so much and then I just wanted to
follow up on my question about the fees for the swimming and if it was annual
like last year did we increase the fees for the swimming pools for our
seniors and then this year we're also doing the same because that was the
statement that was made. Right I think and I I'll defer once again to OPRD to
see if their memory had they have additional information on that. Thank you
for your patience. So after checking the notes the fees were increased three
years ago. And so with the current fees we're looking about less than $3 for a
30 swing pass for seniors and in addition to that currently the East
Oakland's library the Sports Center it's in taking insurance programs such as
as silver sneakers, one sign pass, and silver and a fade,
we help the seniors subsidize their memberships
and the times they go on to the sports and sector swings.
Excellent, thank you for that update.
And then I also heard that there was a subsidy
I believe that was provided through Kaiser,
but there was some issues in trying to move that forward.
So hopefully.
So that is the one pass.
Okay.
That is the one pass.
And so it's participating.
And if the seniors want to move that service
to any other pool, we will have to open up
the whole process that it took awhile to,
but there is zero lining, yes.
Okay, excellent.
Okay, thank you so much for that update.
Councilmember Wong.
Thank you, sorry.
This is a question for Oak Dot.
I noticed some substantial increases
in some of the parking garage fees
And I think we've collectively gotten a lot of questions
around our parking policies and the increases in the fees
such as the removal of Sunday free parking.
And I know that we have challenges with the budget,
but it looks like these are being driven
by our garage operators.
Can we hear more about why we're doing that?
It just, we're competing with Walnut Creek,
who you go over there and you get completely free parking.
And so I would love to just hear more about this.
Right, and through the chair,
I'd like to defer to the departmental representative.
Good evening, Jamie Parks, assistant director with DOT.
Thank you for the question.
In general, the parking garage rate changes
are increasing the maximum
to provide additional flexibility
to work with the operators.
In most cases, the actual amounts charged
will be lower than that.
But we have not increased the maximum fees in several years.
And so it's keeping up with the market to to give us flexibility to set the rates
Sorry it does and then I have a question for planning and building which is just there are some extremely high fees under planning and
building in the
Thousands and and we know that we can always engage in the departments and larger discussions as well
And a lot of these items come through CD
and so I welcome partnering with you with any of the questions around like with the
Departments that are kind of under that committee. So planning and building economic and workforce development
as well as HCD
Just in case but they're here. Okay
Right, and I'd like to deferred through the chair. I'd like to defer to the departmental representative
through the chair
Alba Mereda assistant department assistant director for planning and building
Thank you. Yeah, so there are a couple of fees in here, especially for like rezoning
Where it it's upwards of thousands of dollars why why is that which fee in particular?
I mean
Give me a moment while I pull it up. I mean, these are just very obscure things
They're very obscure, but in collective what I hear is from people who are trying to build out, like create more housing,
you know, create new businesses, is that these fees become a lot.
And so I'll give an example where it's like this zoning condition of approval compliance.
I have no clue what this means.
We're actually bringing that down.
Okay.
And there are a number of fees, I believe it was Council Member Ramachandra that brought
up the question, we are constantly looking at our fees and improving our processes and
seeing how we can bring them down.
If you look at our recommendations, there are a number of fees that we're bringing down
because we have made some process improvements that has allowed us to bring them down.
Okay, that's good. What is this planned final question? Then I know we need to move on plan to unit development. This is
$25,000 what is that about which one is that I know this is not a substantial increase?
But why is it just so high to begin with?
Applications on the under the Oakland zoning regulations planned unit development
preliminary
$25,000 so our fees are
directly related to the cost
That we have to encourage to provide the service so we did a fee study where we had an independent
Consultant that came in and did the fee studies
So what the fees that you see are reflected on that?
Study that they did and I can send that over to you
I think we brought that to council right before you joined us so I'll get that to you so you can take a look at it
you have a motion.
Excellent thank you so much okay
thank you and so I believe we
have no public comment on this
item so I'll make a motion to go
ahead and to close the hearing
and move this item just need a
second.
Thank you.
Oh with the amendment.
This honor was moved by
councilmember Brown second by
councilmember guy to close the
All in favor say aye.
This is voted in the affirmative the final passage will be June 16th councilmember Brown I'm sorry not councilmember Brown councilmember five aye councilmember Gallo I also member Houston I also member from councilmember Ramachandran councilmember
councilmember Wong no in councilmember Brown I noting council president Jenkins
is excused motion passes with a vote of six eyes one excused Jenkins one no Wong
and again final passage for this item will be June 16 going to item 4.3 I need
a motion to open the public hearing so moved the motion by councilmember Brown
seconded by councilmember Gallo to open the public hearing
Councilmember five aye councilmember Gallo. I
Councilmember Houston. I
Also member Ramachandran. I
Councilmember under I
Remember Wong I Councilmember Brown. I
Motion passes with the vote of seven eyes one excused Jenkins. I will now read the item
conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion adopted resolution confirming
the Oakland Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District fiscal year
26 to 27 engineers report and the leavening of assessments
And I don't have any speakers on this item. Excellent. Thank you so much. We'll hear from staff on this
And I believe we've well, I think we've heard this maybe a couple times. So maybe just two minutes on this sure. Yeah
Good afternoon council members and members of the public through the chair
I am Jose Segura assistant revenue tax administrator with the finance department
Today I am presenting a resolution to confirm the fiscal year 2026-27 engineers report for
the City of Oakland's Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District, commonly known as the
LAD, and to levy the fiscal year 2026-27 corresponding assessments.
The LAD is authorized under California Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, which allows local
governments to fund the maintenance of public landscaping and lighting improvements.
This resolution of confirmation in today's public hearing represents the third and final
to administer the annual
assessments.
For fiscal year 2026-27 there
are no changes to district
boundaries.
There are no changes to
assessment rates.
The lab does not include an
annual inflationary adjustment.
So any increase in assessment
rates would require voter
approval.
As a result annual assessments
for single family residential
properties will remain at $102.64
a year.
For fiscal year 2026-27 there
are no changes to district
boundaries.
and $1.99 in zone one.
And $111.54 in zone two as shown on table nine of the report.
The total assessment revenue is estimated
at approximately 18.75 million.
And our assessment engineer from Franciscan Associates is also
available via Zoom and we are available
to take any questions, thank you.
Excellent, thank you so much.
Colleagues, any questions?
Councilmember Fyfe and then Councilmember Gallo.
Just really quickly, is there an annual escalator in our lab?
no it will require for to go back to the voters in order to escalate so it hasn't
increased since nineteen ninety three
fiscally united reinforce the last time that there was an increase in the rates
i make a motion to approve staff's recommendation
it is that same motion to
approve the resolution and close the public hearing
the emotion by councilmember guy or sing by councilmember browns close the
public hearing and adopt the resolution
councilmember five aye councilmember guy aye councilmember Houston aye also member Rama Chandra aye also member under aye
Councilmember Wong aye councilmember Brown aye
Noting that councilmember Jenkins is excused the motion passes with a vote of seven ayes
Believe that was your final public hearing moving to the non consent portion of this agenda starting with item five point one
Adopt an ordinance authorizing a fiscal year 26 through 27 increase in the rate of property tax imposed
by excuse me by voter approved measures and fixing the rate of property tax and loving a tax on real and
personal property in the city of open for fiscal year 26 to 27 for the emergency medical services retention acts of
1997 measure in the paramedic services act of
measure in the library services retention and enhancement Act measure see
The Oakland community violence reduction act emergency response act of 2024 measure in in the 2018
Oakland public library
Preservation Act measure D the 2020 Oakland parks and recreation preservation
the reduction litter reduction in homelessness support Act measure Q the Children's Initiative act of 2018 measure a
the twenty twenty two open zoo animal care education improvement ordinance measure why and the wildfire prevention financing act of
2024
Measure in and you have two speakers
Excellent. Thank you so much for bringing this item
Will five minutes be enough or do you need more? It's on that. Okay. Thank you
Good afternoon again through the chair council members members of the public. I am Jose say what assistant revenue tax admin is it?
the finance department. The proposed ordinance implements the annual cost of living adjustments
for voter approved local measures for fiscal year 2026-27. Under the Oakland City Charter,
ordinances are considered over two readings at separate city council meetings. So today's
action constitutes the first reading of the proposed ordinance. The proposed rate adjustments
on the measure and corresponding provisions approved by the voters.
The measures are expected to generate approximately $186.6 million in total revenue across all
nine measures in fiscal year 2026-27, including approximately $9.4 million in additional revenue
attributable to the annual rate adjustments.
Intributable to the annual rate adjustments
Franciscoan associates was assisted in preparing the calculations for this rate increases
It's also available via zoom and we are available to take any questions. Thank you
Excellent. Thank you so much
Colleagues any questions on this item councilman regai. Oh, yes for the public's information
These are rates that have been approved by the voter
Correct. So through the chair. So each measure has a certain escalator that that was
Authorized or approved by at the time that the measures were voted on by the public. So because that allows the
annual potential annual increases
We are not required to go back to the board and the funds that will be allocated will be allocated to
Specifically what the measures call for exactly. Yeah, they are restricted for that for those purposes. Thank you
Thank You councilmember guy Oh councilmember Wong
Hi, thank you for this item. I
Have I have some concerns
so
The way that I read some of this report is that the council has the authority to raise these taxes
Like up to like there were some where we're raising them in the proposal like five to six percent and that basically that was the max
And so instead of, we were basically using that discretion to take the max in this set,
correct?
In this particular year, yes, that is correct.
So because we are living in high inflationary times, often times over the last couple years,
the rate increases have come close or at the maximum allowed.
In some cases, it's capped at 5%.
in other cases is based on CPI or the per capital income in the region.
And so because we are living in high inflationary times, the rates are essentially being at
the maximum level in this current period, but it's not always the case.
In other years, it could be lower, and it typically ranges between 2% and 5% usually.
Right. And so what was missing in the report for me was whether we're actually spending
down all of these measures. It was, for example, measure Q as I understood it, although the
last time I talked to Director Garland, maybe the money was being spent, is that there was
a lot of money that we're collecting and then we're not actually spending them. And then
we're going to raise the taxes on folks. So I just, I need assurances that for every single
one of these measures. Look, I'm someone who is a proponent of taxation as long as
we're going to give people the services that they deserve, but I'm not going to be a proponent
of raising taxes if there is not a demonstrated need. And so that is something that I need
to see at the second reading of this is to see what is in reserves for each of this.
is it being completely spent down?
Is it actually needed in order for me to vote for this?
So.
Sure, thank you.
So through the chair,
so this is more on the expenditure side.
So I'm not sure if Dr. Johnson can, maybe.
The chair to Councilor Wong.
Brad Johnson, Director of Finance.
So I will note that these expenditure,
these revenue increases are included in your proposed budget.
I note that your budget document contains the details
of both the fund balances and proposed spending plans
for all these measures,
which is the space where you would see any of that detail.
So it's, we typically have not included that
in each of these reports because they're tailored
to the space of the revenue raising of the measure
per the muni code and the text of these measures.
However, the budgetary space is where we would look at
one, usage of the funds, two,
expenditure of the fund balance and those funds
should it exist for any particular purpose.
and noting the introductory and projected spending
on any of these funding sources.
And then I guess while we have you Brad,
I know that sometimes depending on the fund,
it boils down to project delivery
and then that is one of the main reasons
why things can move slower.
It is absolutely true.
There are a number of these funding sources
where we will see funds committed
over a multiple year time span.
We may have a maintenance project
that operates across fiscal years.
So we may not have spent all the money in one year
and it's because it's moved into next year
to complete that project.
You may see the same thing with investments
in large materials and supplies in our libraries
and other similar things.
So it's not uncommon that you'll see multi-year spending
through the carrier forward process
that eventually result in a full spend.
Excellent, thank you so much.
Council Member Wong.
So in reading the budget document
than comparing it to these tables,
how can we know if there may be a situation
like you just mentioned,
if it looks like there's remaining funds
and you're saying it may not reflect
that we actually do need to nonetheless
raise the rates on this?
So I would say as a general rule,
you would wanna see whether or not you're seeing,
one, does the particular measure have a positive fund balance
or negative fund balance to begin with?
That would be your first clue.
And then two, from the beginning end,
is that fund balance rising, falling or staying the same?
That would be the first clue I would give to it.
I would note that as a rule,
the largest cost of most of these measures
is personnel costs and then secondary utilities.
I'm gonna give you one specific example
because you mentioned Measure Q.
Measure Q's largest component about two thirds
of it is spent on park maintenance.
The other major source of parks maintenance funding
is the LAD, which is the item you just approved
on your agenda, and we noted talking to council member,
as council member Fife asked, does not have a CPI.
And so one of the things that you see happening
in Measure Q is Measure Q is actually absorbing
a lot of the fact that the services provided by the LAD
do not, are not able to be maintained by the LAD
because the LAD has not been increased
in its rate since 1993.
And so that kind of interplay exists
across multiples of these measures.
When we're looking at your budget process,
that has to consider all of these services collectively,
and often you see a service effort funded
in multiple spaces in order to provide
its current level of service.
No, and I completely agree.
I wanna make sure that the services
that we need the funding, but I'm like,
I don't know, is the zoo struggling, for example?
These are the things that I question,
but I will look at the budget book
for the next time we have this item.
I'm happy to engage with you more with questions offline.
the public hearing. Okay so we're
with the vote of eight ayes going to item 5.3 as we've already dispensed with item 5.2.
We see the information report from the chair of Oakland Mayor's Commission on Persons with
Disabilities regarding their status and recent activities.
I have three speakers on this item.
Thank you.
Thank you for coming to see us.
Can you put four minutes on the clock?
Hi, I am Anwar Prabhudia, I chair Oakland's Commission on People with Disabilities joining
in the chamber are our Vice Chair Fatima Aare
and our AA Programs Division Head Anh Nguyen.
In case we haven't met before,
the Commission on People with Disabilities
is a city commission established in 1980
to serve and address issues of people with disabilities.
We're an 11-member body of volunteers
with domain expertise on people with disabilities
across all fields, many fields.
And while our report details our many accomplishments
and correspondences over the last year
on giving feedback into those projects
all the way up through long range planning
and working with outside groups,
I am here today to address some of the challenges
that we also bring up in the report,
chiefly on the staffing of our ADA Programs Division.
That division right now has two full-time employees.
According to a report we commissioned
from an outside consultant, Michael Baker International.
In 2016, as part of our transition plan,
we clearly need at least four employees
for the division to be properly staffed.
We have tried to fund those positions in the past,
but that funding was frozen and even within the past year,
those positions were moved elsewhere
and essentially eliminated,
meaning that we have gone backwards
in funding our services for people
disabilities in Oakland. To talk about how critical that is, I can give some personal
examples of how this has impacted me recently. Just last week, trying to walk to a friend's
house on the sidewalk, I ran headfirst into some improperly parked construction equipment.
An eminently avoidable problem struck my head, which is still injured, was stunned from the
physical trauma bleeding on the street with no one around, and feeling shocked,
frustrated, and humiliated at my inability to just walk around my own
city. This is a regular occurrence for me and for many other Oaklanders. In our
outreach for the general plan, we heard from Oaklanders in wheelchairs that a
full 25% of the trips that they attempt to make end in failure, that they just
have to turn back after starting because of some unexpected obstruction or
construction or things like that. These are issues that are imminently
avoidable and that our division is built to prevent if it's properly staffed.
The fact that it is not properly staffed also has massive financial implications.
A quick look at the city attorney's annual reports demonstrates
It's three to $18 million that we're paying per year
in litigations and settlements on infrastructure alone,
that is not including the massive landmark
current settlement that we reached in the past year,
nor the ongoing Smith litigation and who knows what else,
other like sidewalk and trip and falls
and things that are constantly happening.
Mitigating even one of those lawsuits from staff,
from hiring additional staff would cover their salary
for anywhere from one to 20 years, by itself not including the other critical services
that they provide. A failure to do so, on the other hand, after we have been publicly
addressing it for the past decade is a demonstration of insincerity on this matter to Oakland's
disabilities and even to the courts. I'm happy to provide further details on the architecture
associate and the program analysts that we're asking to have funded, along with any other
services that we as a commission or as the IDEA programs division provide, and ask any
other questions about our work if you have them, but I am asking to have the council
move forward to work with the city administrator's office and the finance department to find
funding for these two FTEs.
We also recommend working in the past.
We have tried to get that money exclusively from DOT as that used to be where the IDEA
program's division was placed but given that they have a city wide so your
report time is up okay we asked to fund it using cost sharing method that draws
from all departments thank you and I'm happy to take any questions thank you so
much let's go to the public speakers first as I call your name please approach
the podium in any order please state excuse me please state your name for the
record before beginning if you're on zoom please raise your hands so I can
identify you, Kevin Dally, Blair Bleakman, and Samuel Renzi. Kevin Dally, I appreciate
the report Mr. Rudy gave and want to encourage the hiring. Remember, the city approved not
that long ago an ADA consent decree. It agreed that we would provide access for persons with
disabilities. As part of that, you know, now we're going through the budget. This is the
time to consider it when the budget comes back before council.
The other positions that we need is to unfreeze the parking enforcement dispatch positions,
which have been frozen for years, and we'd ticket the people that are parked on the sidewalks.
And we need to add extra positions for evenings and for weekends.
It is difficult to get around right now, uh, for many persons with disabilities.
Thanks.
Hello.
My name is Jimmy Ramy.
I'm with the National Homeless Union Mental Health Outreach for Independent Living.
HUD got you.
As long as you're taking care of the people, they said the disability people is dumb.
This is already funded.
We have $5.8 billion.
Donnie told me anything else I need, I can get for the people.
I'm working in Chicago right now.
I'm working seven days working in Chicago.
We have 58,000 plus middle-aged homeless
running around Chicago right now.
I had to go there in January.
It's 10 degrees, two degrees.
A man in a 60-year-old died frozen there.
We're in the house.
You know, he keeps moving on high.
So we have a problem in this country.
And so Joe Biden is sitting right on your side.
Donald Trump is fine.
He's not going to touch it.
You think he's not?
And you have to do it, okay.
Because this is serious, you have all these people homeless in this country.
It don't make no sense.
Take care of your American people first.
So you got that, brother.
Send your hood.
And Scott Turner, he's turning over.
He's coming over.
He's not just coming over.
He's going over to the home.
Thank you, Mr. Raimi.
Your time is up.
Moving to the Zoom speaker.
Blair Beekman, please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Hi.
Thank you.
Blair Beekman.
Thanks for the presentation.
It's really important for myself to understand
how there can be a bringing together of mobility issues,
bicycle issues and tech accountability.
I think all of those groups working together
can do something really interesting
for the future of the city.
Kevin Dally, he works with bicycle issues a lot
and he has a really nice language
when he works on his bicycle issues
to also know how to mention, you know,
the tech needs involved and how to address the tech needs in that process.
It's really nice to hear and mobility can be doing the same thing and
it's an all boats can rise kind of thing that I think it
builds the ideas of sustainability really well,
that it's nice to see these kind of things
grow together over the next few years and good luck,
how we can be doing that in Oakland in the coming years. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Beekman for your comments that was the last speaker. Councilman
Maguio. Yes I'll make a motion to approve staff's recommendation. To receive
a father's report. Is there a second? There is a motion by Councilmember
Maguio second by Councilmember Wong to receive and file this report. Councilmember Brown. Aye. Councilmember Fyfe. Aye. Councilmember
motion to approve the motion.
public safety planning and oversight commission.
You have four speakers on this item.
So I'm making a motion to actually continue this item
to the next meeting.
I think given that today is literally the day that,
we haven't found out the results of Measure E,
and I think that's important to know
what are the results of that in order to contemplate
this four year community violence reduction plan,
given that Measure E is gonna be determinative
in terms of how much funding
we will get in the general fund.
So.
Okay, so the parliament's hearing.
So did you guys hear?
I am making a motion to continue the item
to the next full city council meeting.
And the reason I am doing that
is because this is a critical spending plan
that determines how we spend around 45 to $47 million a year.
I think it is important that we know the results
of this vote on measure E as part of our vote
on the spending plan.
Council member, council member Brown.
Excellent, I think just for the entire body's awareness,
we had a very robust conversation
in public safety on the item.
And so I guess just for clarification
so that everyone understands like what the steps are,
I guess through the chair to the parliamentarian,
can you explain kind of the goal that is at hand
with this particular proposal today?
Yes, through the chair to Council Member Brown,
Measure NN, which was adopted by the voters,
provides that or requires this plan that's before you
and it requires the council to approve or reject the plan.
And there is a requirement to spend measure and funds
in accordance with the plan after it's adopted by council.
Excellent.
Thank you.
Council Member Gallo.
I'm sorry, I don't.
You turned your mic on.
And so Council Member Wong, is your idea for us
to hear the report, hear public comment,
but then continue the item?
It's fine, I thought you wanted to in our offline to,
but we can go ahead and hear the report.
But yeah, I think for us as a council
to make informed decisions,
we should wait until after measure E
as we know the results of that.
So we still have to hear public comment on this?
Okay, yeah, of course, that makes sense,
then let's do that.
Okay, so let's hear, Ms. Felicia.
Thank you so much.
Good afternoon, Council President Jenkins and members
of the Council, Felicia Verdon, assistant to the city
administrator.
The today's presentation, the chair and the vice chair
are here to make the presentation,
and they have been waiting for the past few hours
to present this item to the council.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
that item.
And then you're going to take
Good evening, House members and to all the community members who are here, thank you
so much for the opportunity to present.
We do have slides, so I'm gonna ask K-Top to share our slides real brief.
My name is Ioana Chukla, I'm the former chair of the OpSpok, the Oklahoma Public Safety Planning
and Oversight Commission, and with me are the current Chair, Julia Owens, and the current
Vice Chair, Carrie Gutierrez, as well as Deputy Chief Tedesco, as well as Chief Josie, as
as well as Chief Covington, and the Bright Research Group,
who are amazing strategic planning partners,
Brightstar, Olson, and Lauren Cardozo.
We are here tonight to present, very briefly,
our plan to all of you,
and since we have such a short period of time,
I'm gonna ask that we just go to the next slide.
I'm gonna provide a brief overview
of what Measure NN mandates,
and just to highlight the Measure NN
is completely separate and independent from Measure E.
Measure NN has specific language
mandating the creation of this plan,
and we hope that you consider this plan for that purpose.
Measure and then was approved in 2024
by over 71% of voters.
It has three specific objectives,
to reduce homicides, robberies, carjackings, break-ins,
domestic violence, and gun-related violence.
Number two, to improve emergency response times,
as well as the quality of the response.
Number three, to reduce the incidence of human trafficking,
including the sexual exploitation of minors.
It raises 45 to 47 million in annual funding per year,
divided between the Oakland Fire Department,
police services, violence prevention services,
and it created our commission
in order to provide oversight of NN funds,
develop a community violence reduction plan,
and track progress towards that plan.
Accountability to the community is our mission
and our DNA as a commission,
and our vision is an Oakland in which
everybody can thrive and feel safe.
Before we get into the process of developing the CVRP,
I would like to call Brightstar to the mic
to do some table setting.
Good evening, Brightstar Olson with Bright Research Group.
We were the strategic planning consultant selected
to facilitate and develop the community violence
reduction plan.
I do want to set a little context about the CBRP
and what it is and isn't.
Measure and legislation mandates that the commission
oversee the development of this plan,
of the community violence reduction plan.
It provides a strategic roadmap for how the city aims
to reduce violence over a four-year period.
It establishes measurable goals
and provides a framework for evaluation and monitoring
based on the performance metrics for each strategy.
A separate evaluation plan will be developed
and implemented after the plan is approved.
The legislation requires that the plan include
and reflect department priority spending plans
and lay out the major bets for achieving the goals
measure. It is important to note the CVRP is not making budget allocations. It in
no way supersedes the Council's authority or the city's existing
processes for budgeting. The plan also does not direct programming or
implementation. That is within the purview of departments. With regards to
achieving the minimum OPD staffing levels, NN requires that OPD develop a
Separate plan annually and that this plan be approved by council. This is also separate from the CB RP
the Commission per the legislation is charged with developing the community violence reduction plan in
Collaboration with the three main agencies that receive funding the city departments are then responsible for operationally this
operationalizing this plan
Can we go to the next slide?
So here you can see on this slide
Strategy and sort of broad strategic approach for your impact goals for reducing violence and improving emergency response is what this plan contains
operations happens elsewhere
And budgeting happens elsewhere
Let's see
we will include the budgets as an addendum to the plan because the legislation requires that we
include a four-year budget for how NN funds will be spent,
but that doesn't quite align
with your budgeting timeline and process.
Let's see.
So if you go, can we go to the next slide?
I think there's a forward, there we go.
So you're gonna hear about 12 strategies tonight.
These are the kind of major bets
that the departments have prioritized
to achieve significant gains
in reducing violence in our city.
And so the question before you tonight is,
does this make sense?
Do these need to be our major bets and do you endorse these?
The question is not how resources will be spent.
If you, as a council, have specific priorities
for how NN resources are spent,
that is addressed through the regular budgeting process.
It's important to note that not all strategies
are funded each year.
Some are one-time expenses, and that is handled elsewhere.
Okay?
Your time has expired.
Can we wrap up the next minute?
30 seconds, two minutes.
Kingsbury, okay, a couple more minutes.
All right, just about four minutes on the clock.
Okay, he's gonna do it.
We have about four minutes, you said?
Thank you so much, Councilor.
Eight minutes.
Eight minutes, okay, thank you so much.
Thank you so much for that time.
So for the language of the measure,
the four-year violence reduction plan
had to describe community needs,
set specific goals and strategies,
and lay out outcome metrics
related to those goals and strategies.
And so how did we go about developing this plan?
We met extensively with the Oakland Police Department,
the Fire Department, Department of Violence Prevention
to set our goals and strategies.
We consulted with the city agencies,
with the department, with the Finance Department,
Department of Race and Equity with the city attorney's office,
with the mayor's office, because we
wanted to make sure that we were soliciting feedback
from everybody who's impacted by this plan
and wanted to make sure that we're following and complying
with city processes.
We also held focus groups with CBOs
specializing in gender-based violence and human trafficking
and the Department of Violence Prevention, Direct Practice,
and program officers, as well as the measure and end
coalition.
In March, we refined our strategies with departments
and then drafted the plan that's before you.
In April, we held five community listening sessions,
one online and four in person in West Oakland,
at the Fruitvale, in D.P. Stokeland, and at City Hall.
And in May, we revised the plan, including feedback
from many stakeholders, including some of you.
We're here today to present the final plan
and just wanna stress for everybody
who's present here today
that per the language of the measure,
City Council can vote to approve or reject the plan,
but not modified it, and also for the legislation,
the plan has to go into effect July 1st.
We received guidance from the city attorney's office
that unless this plan is approved and adopted by June 30th,
which is only at the end of this month,
the measure and end funds will not be dispersed
to those three departments.
And as you know, through Department of Violence Prevention,
there are many community-based organizations
that are also relying on those funds,
as well as all the strategies that we have been using
to keep Oakland safe for a while.
these funds will be stopped until a plan is adopted.
And as Brightstar said, your vote today for approval
sets the broad strategic roadmap
for violence prevention in the city.
It does not limit your authority
to work with the departments and set specific activities
or budget allocations as long as those fit
within the overall umbrella of the plan.
And I think that's really critical to remember
because you still have all the authority
city council members with a budgeting process with the continuous collaboration with departments
with the procurement processes, etc.
And with that, I'm going to pass it to Vice Chair Gutierrez.
Thank you so much, Ioana, and good evening, council members.
My name is Keri Gutierrez, and I have the honor of serving as the vice chair of this
commission.
It's important that we start with a brief snapshot of violence and crime in the city
of Oakland.
commission has reviewed the publicly available data on crime over the last
ten years in Oakland to better understand the state of the problem in
the city and the community needs the CVRP seeks to address. So what we're
seeing right here is that although the plan itself goes into much more detail
this slide should slide on the current state of violence in Oakland. After a
significant spike in violence that began in 2020, Oakland has experienced a
the steep decline in violent crime since 2023.
In fact, in 2025, the homicide count in Oakland
was the lowest the city ever had.
Although this is a promising trend
that the CBRP seeks to sustain,
the plan was also developed with the understanding
that violence still persists, that gender-based violence,
including commercial sexual exploitation,
is a visible crisis in our city,
impacts community and that
violence disproportionately
affects communities of color
and residents in east and west
Oakland.
Although the CBRP cannot do it
all, the strategies laid out in
this plan are designed to
sustain and build on the
momentum that the city has made
in violence reduction,
accelerate improvement in areas
requiring greater investment,
and ensure reductions in crime
and violence are experienced
It's not working, thank you so much.
Okay, so now we're gonna share with you
the CVRPs four-year community violence reduction goals,
and an overview of the 12 strategies
designed to achieve these goals.
So starting with the first goal.
Reduce homicides and non-fatal shootings
annually by 10% through 2030.
The second, reduce domestic violence,
sexual assault, and commercial sexual exploitation crimes
by 10% by 2030.
Three, it's to improve clearance rates
for violent crimes named under Measure NN,
including homicides, robberies, carjackings,
domestic violence, and gun-related violence
by 10% by 2030.
Four, it's to improve feelings of safety, resilience,
and reduce trauma among people served
through direct services funded by Measure NN by 2030.
Five, it's to improve 911 answering speeds
such that 90% of all 911 calls are answered within 15 seconds by 2030.
Six, improve OPD response times to meet the state average of five minutes for violent
crimes by 2030.
And lastly, seven, to maintain a sworn police force of at least 700 police personnel and
at least 480 firefighters by 2030.
I'd now like to pass it to Chair Julia.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
my name is Julia Owens and I have the honor of chair of serving as the chair
for this Commission. May we have more time or how much time do we have left? I
just have one more section for y'all and a couple comments by the chief.
A minute and 45 seconds. Oh my, okay. I'll talk fast. Okay. These strategies represent
the commitment the departments have made to reducing violence and improving 911
response. They are a set of strategies that will be implemented by the three
departments working towards achieving the minimum staffing levels required by
the measure. These are the set of strategies that will be implemented
while working towards achieving minimum staffing and this represents the
commitments of the departments over the next four years. The majority of funding
is allocated to strategies one through four which are direct interventions for
people impacted by violence led by DVP and OPD. Strategy one supports direct
wraparound services for people at highest risk of gun violence including
outreach, hospital based intervention, and life coaching. Services supported
under this strategy are provided by DVP staff and CBO grantees. Strategy 2
supports OPD's implementation of ceasefire, the city's focus deterrent
strategy. It funds sworn personnel to conduct enforcement operations and
collaboration to reduce street group and network related shootings and homicides,
decrease recidivism and incarceration for individuals engaged in violence and
strengthen the trust between communities and public safety partners. Strategy 3
funds development of crime reduction teams within OPD. CRTs operate as a
cross-functional resource within OPD, leading complex high-risk operations and
providing essential support to ceasefire. The Special Victims Unit, homicide
robbery, and local and federal task force. Strategy 4 supports the provision of
of direct services to survivors of domestic violence
or commercial sexual exploitation.
Similar to the CVI strategies or services in Strategy 1,
these direct services are provided by DVP staff
and CBO grantees.
Strategies 5 through 9 strengthen Oakland's
public safety systems.
Strategy 5 supports multi-pronged recruitment
and retention efforts to achieve and maintain
the minimum staffing levels of sworn
and non-sworn personnel, including 911 dispatch
required by measure NN to improve 911 response. OPD is responsible for
developing an effective staffing plan separate from the CVRP development that
is to be adopted by the city during the biannual or mid-cycle budget process.
Strategy 6 supports activities designed to foster and sustain trust between OPD
and the residents of Oakland which may include community engagement activities,
communication efforts, and internal practices that strengthen transparency.
Strategy 7 supports increased capacity to pursue grants and new funding opportunities
that align with measure-NN objectives.
Strategy 8 supports capacity building and training for the ecosystem of nonprofit providers
and DVP staff providing community violence intervention and gender-based violence services.
Strategy 9 supports OPD's efforts to increase enforcement and strengthen collaboration with
other agencies in order to interrupt commercial sexual exploitation, including the sexual
exploitation of minors. Strategies 10 through 12 focus on improving emergency
response. Strategy 10 invests in efforts to improve the quality and efficiency of
Oakland's alternative response programs in an effort to support these critical
services and free up bandwidth of the 911 response. I have two more strategies
I'll be done real quick. Strategy 11 expands capacity for emergency response
through staffing personnel and training, supports partnership activities with
Oakland youth and residents in order to enhance and expand Oakland's capacity to
respond to emergencies finally strategy 12 funds equipment upgrades for OFD and
OPD including dispatch and that improve the speed quality and equity of 9-1
response and protect the health and well-being of Oakland's first responders
thank you for listening to our presentation on the CPRP I want to
reiterate that a vote for approval of this plan is a vote in support of these
strategies and goals?
No, continue.
Strategies and goals as the high level roadmap
to reduce violence in Oakland over the next four years.
Know that if you vote for approval of this plan,
you are not changing any of the budgeting procurement
or other financial processes that the city already has.
Departments still need to develop their budgets
and spending plans with the help of the finance department.
The plan simply sets a strategic roadmap
for the kinds of impactful innovations or initiatives
measure nn dollars will support over the next four years once again measure nn
requires that City Council approve or reject the CBRP in its entirety by June
30th we have received guidance from the city attorney's office that funds may not
be dispersed without approved community violence reduction plan. Oakland has made
great progress in community safety and about to approve this plan ensures that
these vital efforts continue uninterrupted. Thank you so much we're
gonna go to the public speakers first and then we'll go to the council members
with time. As I call your name who's supposed to podium in any order please
state your name for the record before beginning if you were on Zoom please
raise your hand so I can easily identify you. Blair Beekman, Dr. Petway, Demoria
Truc Evans and John Jones III in any order please and again if you're on
Zoom please raise your hand so I can easily identify you. In public my name is
Dr. Nicole Petway, director of Reentry and Community Violence Intervention Programs with
BOSS, Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency, an organization that has been providing Oakland
and Alameda County services for over 50 years.
I'm here regarding the 26 to 2030 Community Violence Reduction Plan and the recommendation
to award $38.1 million in violence prevention funding.
While 21 organizations were recommended for funding,
BOSS was not included.
And communities most impacted by violence, particularly
deep East Oakland and East Oakland,
appear underrepresented.
Oakland voters approved measure and end
with the expectation that resources
would reach neighborhoods with the greatest, uh, excuse me,
with the greatest need.
before this plan
uh...
possibly
inside after that what your time is that
and i see
okay thank you
these communities continue to experience some of the highest rates of violence in
the city
raising concerns about whether the funding recommendation aligned with the
city's goals
of equity and community impact
boss respectfully request that the council directed department of violence
prevention to provide a geographic equity analysis identifying which Oakland neighborhoods
and zip codes are being served and which are not.
The East Oakland and East Oakland deserve transparency, equity, and meaningful investment.
Thank you.
Before the next speaker comes, I want to be clear that this is about the spending plan
or measure-in-in, not the allocation of funding by Department of Violence Prevention.
I believe that will come June 9th to the public safety committee on Craig chair and vice chair June 9th to the public safety committee
Thank you
Through the chair. My name is John Jones the third
I want to urge you all to please address this item and vote on today because to your point chair
This is about the strategy and I just want to say a lot of work went into this
So I definitely want to thank all the members of the oversight body those who are here as well as Commissioner
when and Commissioner Dixon and also all the departments
that were involved right there Chief Joshi,
Chief Covington and even Deputy Chief Tedesco back there.
Probably didn't think I was gonna say thank you
but I was following I want to thank you all
and I just want to say this real quickly.
The backdrop to this there was a lot of stuff
that was going on right.
We had this historic recall.
It wasn't the smoothest process
but I just want to encourage us
because we go get another opportunity right.
This is a four year plan so I don't want people to,
I want to urge people to not get caught up in the details,
don't get too weedy because we have an opportunity to make things tight but the
end of the day I just want us to find ways to continue to restore faith and
trust and I'm going on this no I want to thank you all for the amazing job you
all are doing I had a chance to share that with the mayor I want to share that
with you all because again thank you for what you doing thank you very thank you
for your comments moving to our only zone speaker who submitted a card
I wanted to make sure that
we're all on the same page.
If you have a question for
Blaire Beekman, please unmute
yourself and begin your
comments.
All right, thank you.
In one minute to try to
summarize what I was
understanding from the Public
Safety Committee a week or two
ago on this subject.
I think we all had a good
learning experience how NN is
actually starting to really
function in Oakland.
Thank you for that.
I thought it was going to come
today for a bit of amendment
that could help and then along.
As a committee process, it has a lot of strength
that works on its own separate from council.
And it was my understanding that council
would make recommendations today.
I hope I can hear that.
And then it can be brought back after the Measure E things
for better clarification is my thinking.
And also at the Public Safety Council President Houston
brought up accountability issues with T1 spending.
I'm understanding that T1 can actually be,
it's really difficult.
There's a lot of failure rate in T1 to begin with.
So accountability may be difficult.
Thank you for your comments Mr. Beekman.
That was the last speaker for item 5.4.
Okay, so we'll go to the council members in the queue.
I agree with council member Wong
and I thank the committee for working on this.
You guys have worked diligently,
worked with community, worked with council members.
You guys have gone up and beyond to communicate and ask council members for input in supporting
council member Wong.
I don't see a harm in waiting.
I realize that no funds can be allocated until we accept or reject.
We have no place in modifying this, but I have no problem in waiting, although we realize
Alameda County is very slow when it comes to counting votes and they might not be done
until next month.
So we have to take that into consideration as well.
Did you want to speak again?
Yeah.
Thank you, Council President.
Yeah, and I want to thank you guys, by the way,
for your work, truly.
I know it's been, you know, you guys are volunteers
and it's been a labor of love and a lot of engagement
with the department heads.
But, you know, I also see my job as City Council
to absolutely hold any spending plan to the highest,
highest of standards, right?
And my evaluation is that this spending plan is a B,
I wanna just reach it to A plus.
And it's not just at you.
If you haven't seen how I conduct myself,
I'm just someone who enacts rigor
and I wanna see that across the board
because I think our residents deserve that.
So when it comes to this spending plan,
part of the reason that I had concerns
is because there were spending allocations like ranges
that are presented in the attachment
that were not part of the presentation that we just saw.
And yes, while this spending plan
is not a line budget allocation,
I actually think it's at this area in these ranges
where it is council is most appropriate to weigh in.
Because to be honest, we all have,
We've gone through the budget process.
Council ultimately tinkers at the edges
of what the mayor and what the departments put forward.
We don't do large wholesale,
and we also do not have the expertise
to really provide line-level changes to their budgets, right?
Do we know if it should be a supervisor two
versus a supervisor one that should be in the budget?
We don't.
We are actually not the subject matter experts,
but where we should be weighing in
is the big picture goals, what are the priorities
for the spending that we wanna use,
given that we raised, we raised taxes,
I know it was also a continuation of the Measure Z funding,
but this is where I think it is actually most appropriate
for Council to weigh in and look at it critically
with a critical lens and say,
does this speak to what your residents expected
when they voted on this parcel tax?
And for me, one of the key things that I don't see reflected in this, it doesn't have its
own strategy and its own spending range, is an allocation to really address the 911 dispatch
issue because 911 dispatch is an issue.
It was one of the core things that people have brought up in the reason that they voted
for this, and I know that it's embedded in it.
But it's weakened because it does not have its own spending range identified.
And so when it comes to budgeting decisions, as we all know in the city, when you don't
have a public document that makes a commitment, that's the thing that's going to get the least
amount of priority.
So this is why I am scrutinizing this.
I also think that given, again, that we haven't seen measure E, we haven't seen the results,
And that may change how we may want to spend this public safety measure.
And the other thing I will note too, I already spoke with the city attorney and finance.
They are going to be able to fund some of the strategies in this with general fund.
So it can be done, I don't know if Director Johnson wants to speak to that, but it's not
going to hold up.
we don't vote on this today.
Thank you councilmember you
have a minute left.
You want to use the rest of your
minute.
I will reserve my minute for
another comment okay there's
some back and forth so but
that's what I have got you have
fifty seconds left.
Councilmember Houston and
councilmember I'm Chandra and
councilmember guy through the
chair I don't want to I'm on the
vice chair of public safety
she's the chair and I don't want
to override.
that I don't want to, I don't
want to get the chair of public
safety, she's the chair and I
don't want to override the
chair.
I wanted to get from the
parliamentarian, how would this
hold this up?
And I'm saying this in open
right now, every one of my
council members just got that
e-mail from the police.
That's my district.
That's my district that's
starving, that's dying, we're
killing each other because of
what?
No opportunity.
that's weapons of war and drugs of destruction in my district I need my
tier two I made tier ones addressed because those are the ones that are
actually committing these crimes and they're doing it in a desperate way I
want to ask the parliamentarian how would this slow would this hurt anything
or slow anything up if we if we took my council member on Wang's recommendation
with this hurt anything okay so what I can say is the measure provides the
council has been stated council may approve or reject the plan but not
modify the measure also provides that if council rejects the plan it will return
it to the Commission with specific recommended changes and then the
Commission will submit a new plan to the council which the council can then
accept or reject but not modify and then so you have to go through the process
So I would like to go back to
the process until there's a
plan the council must adopt a
plan before actually spending.
Any of the measure and revenue
okay so to the chair is there
something that you wanted to add
to this council member Wang.
To make some changes some it's
so you can be happy about this
because I want I need this for
my community.
My community has died.
Hold on hold on.
My community is dying.
are there any other questions
that I would like to hear from
the council members if we could
get some pictures.
You got wars of destruction like
that you got you got you got on.
Do you did you see those pictures.
Look okay I'm just saying okay
now that's not this it's not a
debate I hear you so you have
some recommendations you would
like them to see right and you
want okay.
I got.
Councilmember Ramachandran and
and then we'll go councilmember.
you were incredibly thorough with your outreach,
consulting, not just council members,
but community groups, subject matter experts.
You were very communicative, which doesn't always happen
in these community-led processes.
Now, for the course of almost four years,
I've seen some good ones and some awful ones,
and you guys really did a great job as far as outreach goes,
so thank you for that.
The one thing, I want to just start with the thing
that strikes me as really important and often overlooked,
the way that you have tried to weave domestic violence
as a lens to view various issues.
I spent the first 10 years of my career
working with survivors of domestic violence
in different capacities,
including many of the orgs here in Oakland.
And this is, when we think about violence prevention,
it's so often overlooked.
I mean, last year we had,
the city of Oakland had five
domestic violence related homicides.
And that is an increase from, I believe, to the year before.
In all over Alameda County, DV-related homicides
are increasing, and we're not talking as much about it.
So as far as DV prevention, survivor trauma-informed
support, all the things that your report mentions,
I just want to appreciate that you're
incorporating that lens.
I overall think that this hits upon a lot of core issues
when it comes to violence prevention holistically.
And I think that just at the end of the day,
there are strategies, there are recommendations,
but the amount of money that goes to OPD, OFD
and violence prevention is set in stone.
OPD should be getting about 23 million a year.
violence prevention 17 million, fire about 3 million.
So I do think that this framework,
personally I think it's a great framework.
But at the end of the day, if there are colleagues
who are concerned with OPD needing to get more money
or less money, that's already written in stone.
So I don't see a problem with passing this today
because it hits on many issues.
I mean, I can only talk about domestic violence
because that's my own background of work.
but for all of the issues where I'm not subject matter
experts, you've talked to those subject matter experts
on gun violence and all these other things,
so I feel comfortable passing this today.
Thank you, Council Member Ramachandran, Gail Din.
Just in one, two, there it goes, son.
I wanna thank you for the information,
and certainly when it comes to violence prevention,
one of the priority that has to be clearly
not just talked about or planned out
is the human trafficking and the prostitution's occurring.
Young women, you go right now, any day,
any time in your district, 16 girls, young girls,
not only on the sidewalk, on the corners,
but on the middle of the street.
You and I see them, the police see them,
the fire people see them, and we allow that to continue.
Meanwhile, we sit around here at council talking,
talking about the problem,
making excuses for the problem.
And we had these young girls out there with people,
adults, the pimps and all that other right on the sidewalk.
And we're just talking about it.
So we lived through this in the past,
where they used to be up there by the Kaiser and MacArthur.
We kicked them out of there.
They came to Fruitvale or in East Oakland.
We kicked them out of High Street in that area.
in Fruitvale, they went to this other district now.
But they're all, so we just keep, you know,
doing a lot of talking about it.
But meanwhile, I think, you know, we would certainly,
and the Chief Yoshi understands that very well,
knows that experience, but we need to, you know,
quit talking about it and get the cooperation
of law enforcement to address it.
And, because there's no excuse or reason
for Oakland to allow that behavior
because you don't see that in Alameda,
you don't see it in San Leandro,
you don't see it in another city,
but hell, go to Oakland,
you can dump trash and do whatever you want to.
But most of what the saddest thing
is seeing those young women out on the street.
And so certainly we would need your direction
and cooperation, getting law enforcement to do their job.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Gail.
Council Member Brown, then five.
Council Member Fife, do you wanna go first?
Because you were waiting.
I'm polite of you, I have been waiting for a long time.
I'm not sure why the Council President
is treating me like this today.
But I would like to...
And does it to the Vice Chair of Public Safety?
I don't know.
I just wanted to make a motion
to adopt staff's recommendation to move this item forward.
I think this team has done an amazing job under all kinds of obstacles.
It's been extremely thorough.
I started feeling bad because I wasn't returning their phone calls, and I had to tell folks
that no, they were doing a really, really good job, and we are not debating the particular
allocations tonight.
So I want to make sure that when this comes to public safety, that we invite other council
council member's who want to share and have some
additional commentary on this item to come to the future public safety committee meeting
for additional discussion but in terms of what we're tasked with today I'm making a
motion to move this forward.
So councilmember something just very procedural if you can I'm going to second council member
well I'm going to second councilmember Wong's if you can make a substitute motion so if you
motion.
You can make a substitute motion.
Is there a second?
Oh.
So, she made the motion.
Did Councilmember Wong make a motion?
She made the first motion to continue.
I'm gonna second that, right?
And you can make a second.
I apologize, I forgot about that.
It felt like it was 12 hours ago.
You could, I'm sorry, I waited so long.
You can make a substitute motion though.
Are you doing that?
I will make a substitute motion
to adopt staff's recommendations.
Okay, is there a second to?
Okay, Councilmember Brown,
in Houston, then Wong.
Excellent.
Just wanna echo what council member Fife uplifted.
Thank you all so much for all of the hard work.
We know that just the establishment of this committee
was taking place at a very challenging time
and all of you stepped up and was able to come up
with this very, in my opinion, I think a very robust plan.
I'm a part of the conversation that we had in public safety.
My notes are a little wonky
And so, I believe it's on page six of the report,
it does state that not all spending strategies
will be the same in each year.
And so there is some flexibility, right,
as it relates to the departments.
And then as was mentioned already,
as far as the dollar amount is not going to shift and change,
it's already in stone.
How much OPD, OFD, DVP will receive.
And keeping in mind that most of the dollars
that the DVP receives actually will be going out the door
to community-based organizations, right?
So, and that was my second to Councilmember Fife's motion.
Councilmember Ramachandran already seconded
but you're in the queue.
I have another.
Councilmember Houston.
So through the chair,
Councilmember Wang is the chair of Public Safety.
And I agree with everything they're saying,
but she's the chair and I wanna respect that
as her being the chair.
I'm the vice chair of the Public Safety.
We don't come to nobody else's chair, their committees,
and tell them what to do.
I'm a follower.
Even though I want to do it the way I want to move it,
she's the chair of it.
I'm going to respect what she said.
So do you still want to move it?
You want to hold it?
So make a substitute motion and I'll second it.
There's no second substitute motion.
So it's.
And can I also, I want to make comment.
My issue to be clear, colleagues,
is not the statutory allocations.
That is statute.
I'm not here to debate that.
Actually, the component of the spending
that I have the most concerns around
is actually the OPD spending.
It really is.
I don't think that what I see reflected in this department,
like, do you think Oaklanders feel satisfied
with OPD's level of service?
This is where I think this is our role
to push the department.
Especially, I will say, when it comes to things
like recruitment and retention because I'll give an example.
I was reflecting on the conversation that we had
in public safety on some of the recruitment conversations
that we had and the OPD recruiter.
What did they, their major recommendation
is they needed a website.
And I'm sorry, in reflection, they don't need a website.
We can get a student from Laney College
to design a website for like, you know, 10K a pop.
I'm somewhat exaggerating.
But what I need to see in this plan
is I want to push the department to be more innovative.
And to really, because I don't see that people
are satisfied outside.
People are calling 911.
I experienced that myself last week.
I was on hold for five minutes.
That's unacceptable.
So I am just asking that we do our due diligence as a body
to say, this is a great starting point.
I just want to see, though, that we do our due diligence
as a body to say, how can we make this even better?
Because are people out those doors getting the services
that they deserve?
They don't.
They're not.
We've heard it from our communities.
Mucho violencia.
I mean it.
The communities, I don't get emotional often.
But the communities out there really deserve better.
And so I'm asking that us as a body,
we do our oversight role into OPD to push them to do better.
And we actually get the safety that this city deserves.
That's all I'm asking for.
And I think we need to know whether Measure E,
like we need to know the full picture.
And so I'm asking Russ for us to delay
and to really deliberate.
That's it.
Thank you.
Council Member Ramachandra.
Thank you.
To my, through the chair, to my colleague, Council Member Wong,
I hear your frustrations, but respectfully,
this is under $50 million we're talking about
and we have a $2 billion budget.
There are a lot of other ways that I do believe this,
that we, as the current council
and current administration and current mayor,
are trying to address some of the things you're talking about.
To me, this is passing a framework.
Not saying how much money OPD needs to spend on recruitment
or how much money should go into human trafficking.
Those are very valid issues that we can't address
through this one measure alone that's less than $50 million.
It's a framework that I think is holistic
in a way that we've not always been thoughtful
as a city in addressing violence prevention.
And I give this body a lot of credit, as well as Chief Joshi,
who's been doing an excellent job as well,
to think intersectionally.
But there are so many other sources of funding
and efforts ongoing.
We're not there yet.
We're nowhere near where we need to be
to address 911 issues.
But there's a lot of other efforts going on.
60% of our general fund goes towards public safety.
There's a lot of other things going on
that we have to improve.
But I don't think that takes away from what this body has
to present a plan that hits on some major points.
So, Council Member Molong, I'll let you have the last word,
then we will vote on Council Member Fyfe's substance emotion.
$50 million a year is plenty to do some things of substance,
it really is, and the taxpayers entrusted us,
they entrusted us to spend this money as wisely as possible.
We're seeing the pushback with Measure E, we are.
And to me that says, it's not that I endorse Measure E.
I want to see the money come into the city,
but I also think that we need to show scrutiny
into the spending and that we hold our departments
at the highest standard.
That's all I am saying.
And that absolutely includes OPD.
I want to see the department to be more creative.
I've seen a lack of innovation at times.
I really think this department could do better.
And so, anyways, that is where I stand, and I've made myself clear as to why I want to
see this to be moved after Measure E until we know the results, and then we can have
a discussion whether we vote it down or not, even though I've telegraphed clearly where
I stand.
Thank you, Councilmember.
We're going to go to a vote.
And what- she has a second.
the motion to approve the staff.
jinkin in supporting my colleague no motion passes with a vote of five ayes
three noes thank you guys for all your work moving to item 5.6 as we've already dispensed with
item 5.5 adopt an ordinance authorizing the borrowing of funds and the issuance of sale
of 26 through 27 tax and revenue anticipation notes in a principal amount not to exceed 200
dollars payable from revenue received for or accrued to the General Fund of the
City during the fiscal year 26 or 27 and approving certain related matters. Brad can
you get this done in four minutes? Thank you Council President I'll get it done
in far less than that. This is the second reading of an ordinance that you've
already adopted. We had a poll that rules to go back to non-consent because per
government code you have to adopt anything related to borrowing money in
in on your non-content agenda versus your content agenda.
This is the same report provided you last time.
This allows us to short-term borrowing
to pre-fund some of our obligations
and hopefully save us some money.
I would ask your approval.
I am complete.
Gail.
I'm gonna approve the item.
Second.
Public speaker.
Mr. Hazard for item 5.6.
The public speaker has passed.
Let's go to a vote.
motion is seconded by councilmember gail seconded by councilmember ramachandran approval this item will be for final passage councilmember brown aye councilmember five councilmember gail aye councilmember houston aye councilmember ramachandran aye councilmember unger aye councilmember wong aye and chair jinkin aye motion passes with a vote of eight ayes going to your consent calendar members of the public those are all of items that I have.
those are all of item 6 item 6.1 approval of the draft minutes from the
meeting of May 19th I'm 6.2 a declaration of a local emergency due to
the AIDS epidemic item 6.3 a declaration of a local cannabis emergency item 6.4
a resolution for a declaration of a local emergency on homelessness item 6.6
and ordinance for easement at 260 Oak Street item six point seven a resolution renaming the
intersection at 99th Avenue to Arthur E. Thompson way I'm six point eight a resolution for the city
auditor appointments of the cannabis regulatory Commission item six point nine a resolution for
district two appointments of the budget Advisory Commission Adam six point ten a resolution for
the district for appointment to the budget Advisory Commission item 6.11 a
resolution for appointments to the Library Commission items 6.12
appointments to the privacy Advisory Commission item 6.13 a resolution
recognizing May 2026 as AAN HPI Heritage Month and 6.14 a resolution for
claim of BCAL LMP properties item six point fifteen a resolution in support
of Senate bill 1095 to expose data to portion deportation centers item six
point sixteen had multiple pieces of legislation regarding the City of Oakland
investment policy for fiscal years 26 or 27 I'm six point seventeen a resolution
for collaborative and clean creeks agreement.
Item 6.18 included multiple pieces of legislation
regarding a construction contract award
to SJM Warsaw Construction Co, LLC,
and professional services agreement PSA amendment
to Shah Kawasaki Architects
for the Lincoln Recreation Center Project.
Item 6.19 included multiple pieces of legislation
to accept and appropriate fiscal year 26-27 external funds.
Item 6.20 also included multiple pieces of legislation
regarding the sub-regional shoreline adaptation plan
for grant funding.
Item 5.21, an information report for the annual housing
program's information report for fiscal year 25-26.
Item 6.2 resolution for approval of new WIOA services
contract for fiscal years 26 through 29
and amending existing contracts.
Item 6.23, a resolution for OFC Y city span technology
contract extension.
Item 6.24 resolution for amortization
to relocate industrial recycling facilities.
Item 6.25 a resolution to amend resolution 90310 fiscal year 24 through 25
programmatic changes the youth employment partnership item 6.26 a
resolution for OPD PA excuse me PM AM contracts item 6.27 a resolution for PSA
with the elite corporation solutions LLC and your final consent item and
Ordinance for amending and reenacting open municipal code chapter three point zero eight and we do need an emergency
vote
for item six point fifteen as it was added to
the supplemental
You just need a separate
You can I believe you can take care of it in the voting of the consent calendar
Okay, although entertain a motion for urgency finding on six fifteen
Okay
But the urgency vote for item six point fifteen moved by council member guy or second by council member Brown
Councilmember Brown. Hi councilmember five. All right
Councilmember guy. Oh, I also remember Houston. I also remember Rama challenger. I also member under
Councilmember Wong I
Council president Jenkins aye
Passes with a vote of eight ayes, and that was for the urgency for item s six point fifteen
Okay, so we're from the councilmember Houston and then we'll that's the public speakers
Yes, through the chair. I like to to invite Maya Turner up and
Her two supporters behind her. This is a
commemorative plaque that I
I'm putting up on
99th and East Oakland for
Mr. Arthur E. Thompson.
He's his facility, he's 96 years old.
His facility's been there since I was a kid.
I'm about to date myself, right?
So it's been there and that's all I know
and it's his facility, he's been there.
So I have a few words that I wrote up
that I'd just like to say.
I usually go from the cuff, but I wrote this up
because this was important.
I'm proud to sponsor this resolution
to designate an installation of a commemorative plaque
for Mr. Arthur E. Thompson, the founder and operator
of Thompson Funeral Home.
For nearly 60 years, Mr. Thompson served the people
of Oakland with compassion, with dignity,
and unwavering dedication.
His business operations spanned across the tender
of six District Seven Council members,
from Frank Ogawa to currently me, Ken Houston.
Since establishing the funeral home in 1969, am I right?
1969, Mr. Thompson has become a pillar of East Oakland,
witnessing the difference of seasons Oakland has experienced
while becoming a trusted source of comfort, support,
and countless families navigating their grief
and their loss.
His contribution speaks to business owners
and reflect a lifelong commitment to care,
equity, mentorship, and public service
to the Oakland community.
Maya, can you say a few words, please?
Pull that mic down, I want to hear you.
I don't hear her.
K-top.
Come on board.
This is Robert L. Porter, Jr.
He's actually the new owner of Thompson Funeral Home.
And when I came on board, it was very important to him
to honor Mr. Thompson.
The things that he's done for the community,
as I'm going through doing research, I'm amazed.
There are so many things I told you guys about that people
don't know, but just Jim Jones.
When the families came back, he actually
took care of the families and charged no one.
To this day, we have stacks and stacks
of files of families that he just took care of.
He wasn't worried about money.
just worried about putting your family member away with dignity and care. And Mr. Thompson is,
Mr. Porter, I'm sorry, is now continuing that. So it's very important to us that we honor him,
especially while he's here to see it. He's actually 90 years old and 95, I'm sorry, 95 years old.
He shows up every day, suited and booted. Every day he comes in ready to go, still helping families,
still going out to the community, still doing whatever he can. So again, thank you so much
thank you so much for
honoring him and we greatly
appreciate it.
Thank you so much thank you.
Are you complete.
I'm complete thank you okay
thank you let's go to the
public speakers.
As I call your name please
approach the podium in any
order please state your name
for the record.
Please raise your hands I can
easily identify you on zoom.
Car excuse me Carla Guerreira
Jeff Levin Blair Beekman.
Mr. Hazard I have you with
Justine is it with I'm can't from Oakland I vest Richard Day who gary Maria
Ramirez send me a Ramsey I have you with multiple
Ramy I have you with multiple items as well in any order it's so fitting for
this recognition of mr. Thompson but I don't want to forget his wife cuz she
stood by him this whole time. It's both of them to get there. And you still have yet
to deal with the public health crisis related to FITNO. I don't understand why you are not
dealing with a deadly opiate.
Even the AC transit bus has a big advertisement
to wrap around, Kerry Navajo.
Because that helps in preventing a death for those
who ingest this deadly opiate.
And you don't want to make it a public health crisis?
Same on you.
You know, you could talk about, when
we talked about that ballot measure,
let me tell you what the function of the legislative body
of municipality, enacting laws and ordinance, zoning,
public safety, ethics, established public policy.
If there's a dysfunction in this town,
It's you because the city administrator
fall under your supervision.
And you want to pass the buck as though everything
is dysfunctional.
It's you.
You're negligent.
Departments come at the 11th and 45th minute of an hour
for an urgency finding.
They know if you're gonna apply for a grant,
they know it a year before.
But you sit there and go through this drama
and these diet traps that don't,
and it certainly doesn't move me,
because I know it's a bunch of crap.
You don't wanna assume your responsibility that you have.
I just read what your functions are,
which includes the supervision of the city administrator.
The city administrator is the enforcer of your policies,
but you want it played like you're helpless.
I don't understand it.
The council manager, former government, is what you need.
You can assume the responsibility
that part of your functions, but every time I sit here
thank you, thank you Mr. Hazard your time is up Mr. Hazard your time has exceeded your
time is up good evening members of the council I'm Richard day Howard from the open private
Industry Council I'm here today with several of my colleagues Myra Ramirez Raymond Langford
Edmond Haggler excuse me Edmond Haggler and we're here just to say thank you for moving
this item forward on the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act awards. These services
are so vital to our communities of color, who are desperately in need. The demand for
our services has increased by 35 percent in one year alone. So we thank you for moving
this forward because this way the services can continue uninterrupted beginning July
and this is so very important thank you from the bottom of our heart if your
name was calling you was to speak on consent please come on up otherwise we
will be moving to the zoom speakers so if your name was calling you're in
chamber and you want to speak on item 6 please approach the podium hey let's go
to the zoom users Carla Guerra please unmute yourself and begin your
comments thank you good evening my name is Carla Guerra I am the policy and
advocate and senior manager at the Unity Council.
And I'm here to comment on item S-6-22.
The Unity Council has served Fruitvale for 60 years,
where 54% of Fruitvale residents identify as Latino,
one of the most impacted communities
by federal policies in this city right now.
The Latino community is being hit from every direction.
Federal funding cuts, attacks on immigrants' families,
state budget cuts, that is mantling the programs
that have held our neighborhoods together for generations.
We are in a moment of crisis.
This RFP explicitly prioritized immigrant
and vulnerable communities.
Fruit Bill is one of them.
We appreciate the one-time allocation
but this is not the amount we apply for
and it's not a multi-year contract.
Staff who have dedicated their careers
to building this program will face layoffs.
And an unresponsive determination was made
without examining the proof we submitted
and vulnerable community members will be impacted.
This is the real cause of what happened here.
We need your support.
No more.
Jeff Levin you are next please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Thank you good evening Jeff Levin speaking for East Bay Housing Organizations
item 6.21 the annual housing programs report. First I just want to say we are
actually disappointed to see that this is on consent and therefore there is no
staff presentation and no discussion by council.
This is a remarkably comprehensive report about the progress the city has
made on its strategic action plan, its funding strategy, an overview of who actually lives in
the city's housing portfolio by race and income and much more. So I hope you all will read it.
I do want to call attention to the very last page of the report which shows the unfunded pipeline
of new construction projects for 240 something million dollars. This relates back to the
discussion we had yesterday at the budget hearing which is that
the budget proposal contains no new Measure U funding
and this pipeline will be frozen unless the council actually directs the
Measure U funds be released for this purpose.
Blair Beekman you are next please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Hi Blair Beekman I had thank you three items to speak on so thank you for the
three minutes. Item 6.11 13 and 23. So for 6.11 is the AANH PI issues. I wanted to remind
once again that actually 6 13 and 6 15 I wanted to speak to you that the item the AA items
is in Hawaii right now, there is issues on Lahaina, on Maui, because of the fires, the
big fires they had, they're rebuilding.
And they wanted to be rebuilding in terms of the original indigenous culture life that
was there.
And it's a big back and forth, and how that's going to take place.
just to bring that up here at this time, I hope can help.
And I think it's important to work towards
that original cultural ideas of how Lahaina
can be redeveloped and rebuilt in the future.
So good luck in those sorts of efforts and thinking.
And I just wanted to remind ourselves
that it's time for the item.
6.15 is a really interesting item
by council persons Wang and Brown,
who are working with data collection centers
So they don't share information on undocumented people,
I guess, basically.
So, you know, large data fusion centers.
In being from San Diego,
they had one of the first data fusion centers.
And there's a big debate on how
they should move forward into the future.
And so I've been learning important lessons how to do that.
I know systems like KLETS is ways that data collection
can be found about the undocumented and things
and to make that like a sole source.
I guess that's the goal here with this item.
I think it's a good intentions and a good idea,
good luck in its efforts and how to do that.
I'd like to learn more about it and learn this process
and good luck in that.
And finally with the OICY items,
I think it's called for Youth and Children Services Things.
You've had a lot of those lately.
It's been really nice to see here
at council and committee meetings
and San Diego really needs the help
in those kinds of issues
with their current budget austerity concerns
that we've been going on with
and a lot of similar things going on
between San Diego and Oakland
that I hope I can talk more about.
I can write letters to yourselves about
how to deal with strong mayor issues,
The IPA issues, IBA issues that were starting
to be discussed here about the future
of strong mayor and council use.
A lot of similarities.
Good luck in how we can have good conversations.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beekman, for your comments.
All names have been called.
Thank you.
Councilman Fife.
I just have a quick announcement
for anyone who has availability tomorrow at 2 p.m.
My office is hosting a town hall on the future
first Fridays and really it's just a conversation about nightlife in the
uptown downtown area. Not specifically first Friday only. So I'm inviting
everyone to come out and participate in the conversation. We'll have comments
from the mayor and presentations from our different department heads around
how we make sure that Oakland is safe and enjoyable for everyone who visits. So
is tomorrow 2 p.m. at cloud park at 1911 telegraph inviting everyone thank you
is that a motion as well no we do you're just a little early so that's a motion
by five second by Jenkins let's run the wall and then we'll go to announcements
after that well councilmember fives are already done with her announcement there
was a motion by councilmember five second by council president Jenkins to
councilmember. I would like to.
like I mean I think first Fridays and as we are trying to rebuild first Fridays
and make sure that it's a safe event for everybody that wants to come to Oakland
it's important that we attend this event where can we find out more about it will
be on your social media yes and thank you for sharing that this is again not
just about one day a month it's about every night in our downtown uptown area
And it you can find information that's pinned on my Instagram page and Facebook wherever
Okay, so please attend the event and follow council member five for one Instagram any more announcements any adjournments
Okay, let's go to first Fridays. I mean
Let's go to open forum
Has a car your name, please. Of course the podium in any order. Please raise your hand on zoom so I can easily identify you
Blair Beekman, Mr. Boatwright, Linda, I'm sorry, Lita Ozio, Kevin Dally, Tiffany Ng,
and Mr. Hazard. I'm going to continue the laundry list of what you're functioning on,
oversight of the executive branch. If the council manager of cities such as Oakland,
The council generally appoints and evaluates the city administrator.
And so y'all don't say anything and you let this continue to function.
You got elected city attorney that misleads you.
And if it wasn't elected, thanks to John Russell, then you would have some calls to gripe.
But you let the city attorney gives you misleading information as he did on Measure A, the transaction
and use tax.
And now the city is collecting an unconstitutional and illegal sales tax that was never a sales
tax.
It was a use tax.
You approved on June 3rd, 2020.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard.
Your time is up.
For sending the charter to voters as the only option, remember that former mayor Shung
Tao was elected by 700 votes by less than 50% of eligible voters.
Another item, city dysfunction, has been referred to several times today.
Lack of oversight and follow-up are examples.
A good example of this need is an item on the next week's public safety committee agenda.
item has a recommendation to award seven million dollars in grant out the
door to several CBOs those and all other grants awarded by the city need
oversight and follow-up to ensure these grants are resulting in measurable and
significant results another area another area requiring oversight and follow-up
have been working with our
community as part of our as a
city authorized measures an
example is measure M. M. which
a lot of time has been wasted
because there's things that
haven't been done in and we're
a two and a half year or a year
and a half into the bank
minister boat right your time
is up.
Good afternoon council members
thank you for your service my
name is Lida oh Joe I'd like to
speak to you briefly about an
that addresses both the academic achievement
and career readiness factors that we so desperately need.
Many of our students struggle with foundational reading
and math skills and many lack opportunities
for career exploration and workforce preparation.
So despite our budget limitations,
I believe the community can work together,
college students, nonprofits, businesses,
retirees to and to support literacy and training and the city wouldn't could
could focus primarily on the take your time it's fine take your time thank you
for the could focus on primarily on the coordination of that I'm just asking you
is there something else you want to say so take a look at it no is it was there
more that you wanted to say it I had a question for her and what's the name of
organization no no I'm not an organization I'm presenting an idea I'm
presenting a proposal I'm just I'm presenting a proposal an idea I'm
willing to work free yes okay thank you for all you do thank you moving to your
zoom speaker Blair Beekman hi Blair Beekman thanks for the meeting today
thanks that City Clerk staff was able there was a snafu with a bubble comment
issue for myself and on the Granicus website. They were able to help me out today. Thank
you. So thank you for public comment. It's Argus that was one of the first major data
collection centers in San Diego that they started the whole thing. And they're going
through issues right now that I'm learning good examples of how, you know, to ask what
Councilpersons Brown and Wang are asking for. So thank you for their efforts. It'll be a
a good learning experience.
A good learning experience about the strong mayor issues
today, how to develop that.
I hope there can be compromised still,
and a good process can develop.
The amendments have to be in by nine days from now,
so really work on them if you can.
And good luck to Alameda County
working on their own flock issues, leaving flock.
I think we have one more Tiffany.
Hi Tiffany Aang of Friends Lincoln Square Park.
Just thanking you for approving 6.18 Lincoln Square Park
and OPRYD's newest recreation and resilience center.
2026 marks the 30 years since the city's current
open space plan first called to expand the center.
We've waited long enough.
Please do everything in your power
to complete construction quickly without any delays
reduction in scope keep all park programming going through construction
keep the community informed throughout that process and really I just waited
all night to really just say thank you to you all and the staff and all of the
departments who have brought us here today navigating a disappointingly long
process over the three decades we look forward to working with the city and
contractors to respond to community interests and concerns during the
construction. We're grateful for your final vote here today for Oakland Parks
and for Lincoln and we'll see you all at groundbreaking. Thank you. Thank you for
your comments. That was the last. Thank you this meeting's adjourned.