Good afternoon and welcome to the community and economic development committee meeting of Tuesday, June 9th
2026 the time is now 137 p.m. And
This meeting may come to order before beginning we will I will provide instructions on how to submit speaker cards for items on this agenda
If you're here with us in chamber and would like to submit a speaker card
Please fill one out and turn one into myself or a clerk representative
No later than 10 minutes after the start of this meeting or before the item is read into record
Registering to speak via zoom is now due 24 hours prior to the start of this meeting time
This meeting came to order at 1 37 p.m. And speaker cards will no longer be accepted 10 minutes after making that time 10 40
I'm sorry 1 47 p.m.
Will now proceed with taking roll
Councilmember fife excuse councilmember Ramachandran
Councilmember Unger
Here and chair Brown present. Thank you. We have three members present one
One excused five chair before we begin. Do you have any announcements at this time? Yes. Thank you so much
Well, thank you so much for everyone for joining the committee meeting today
I look forward to a very good discussion on the multiple items that we do have and then I did want to make an announcement
for anyone who is interested
the Peralta community colleges board will be
Deciding on the merging of merit college and Laney College this afternoon at 6 p.m
And so if that's something that you are interested in
And want to weigh in that's at 6 o'clock for their board meeting. So just wanted to make that announcement. Thank you
Thank you starting off with item one approval of the draft minutes from the committee meeting of May 26 2026
We have no speakers on this item and just need a motion
Excellent. Thank you
entertain a motion
Thank you. We have a motion made by councilmember Unger second by councilmember Rama Chandra to accept the
Draft minutes from the committee meeting of May 26 2026 also noting the presence of councilmember 5 at 1 39 p.m.
on roll for the minutes councilmember 5
councilmember Ramachandran
Councilmember Unger I and chair I'm sorry chair Brown. Hi
Thank you item one passes with four eyes to accept the draft minutes from May 26 2026
Item 2 determination of schedule while standing committee items and we have one speaker on this item. Perfect. Thank you so much
Committee members or the administration anything to add for the pending list through the chair. No, excellent
Thank you so much. We'll hear the public speaker
Calling in the name that signed up to speak on item number 2, miss Asada Olavala
Okay. All names have been called. We just need a motion.
Excellent. I'll entertain a motion on the pending list.
Thank you. We have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Ramachandran
to accept the determination of scheduled outstanding committee items as is. On roll, Councilmembers
Aye?
Aye.
Aye.
Ramachandran?
Aye.
Unger?
Aye.
And Chair Brown?
Aye.
Thank you. Item 2 passes with four ayes to accept the pending list as is. Reading in item
item number three adopt an ordinance authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and execute
the following sorry at least in management agreement between the city as landlord and
sharks ice LLC as tenant to operate the Oakland ice center for an initial five year term with
four five year extension options at a rate of three hundred thirty five thousand dollars
in base rent per year, less an annual capital contribution
by the city of $100,000 with an annual tenant capital
contribution of $100,000 and percentage rent of 7%
of annual gross revenue above $4.3 million.
B, in advertising revenue sharing agreement
with the tenant retaining the first $100,000
and the city receiving 50% of the remaining
net advertising revenue for a five-year term,
with four five-year extension options,
see the use of $1,344,910 in capital reserve funds,
and up to $500,000 in anticipated net revenue
in fiscal year 2025 to 2026 to reimburse
shark ice LLC for losses realized
under the current management agreement
and D, Disbursement Agreement with the Sharks Ice LLC
in an amount of $10 million of Measure U bond funds
for a new refrigeration system
and related capital improvements,
and two, making findings at the least
for below fair market rental value
is in the best interest of the city
and adopting appropriate California
Environmental Quality Act findings,
and we have a number of speakers on the side.
Excellent, thank you so much.
I believe we will hear from our EWD team on this one.
Thank you, Brendan.
Good afternoon, Brendan Moriarty,
Director of Real Estate and Special Projects
within the Economic and Workforce Development Department.
I'll do a brief presentation here
to answer questions as well.
We also have a long-time EWD employee
who's been working on this asset for even longer than me,
like decades, really.
So he's available for deep historical questions as well.
we have some stakeholders here.
Why don't we go ahead with the slides then?
And I'll first just say I'm really excited to be here.
This is a long time in the coming.
We've been negotiating this set of agreements
as long as I've been at the city now, about six years.
Let's just start with what the asset we're talking about,
where we're looking.
This is the Oakland Ice Center outlined in red.
It's directly on the other side of the street
from the Fox Oakland Theater in downtown.
Takes up most of the block there.
is a city-owned facility. I meant to put a more current picture now. There's this
really beautiful mural on the side of the building featuring Alyssa Liu. This
is her home training ice, our own Olympic gold medalist. There's
a nice mural of her on the front there. Okay, so let me give a little bit of
background on the asset and why we're here today. So this is one of the city's
most heavily used recreational facilities. It serves nearly 137,000
visitors in a typical one year period driving foot traffic really at almost all hours of
the day and night because of the high demand for ice time.
There is a portfolio of community benefits and services that are provided through the
ice center including discounts for Oakland residents, about 27,000 served every year
in that regard.
Free programming for Oakland public schools, we have over 5,000 public school kids coming
into the ice center every year.
scholarships provided to young people as well.
It employs Oakland residents, as I said it's the home of Alyssa Liu, and also
recently announced the new home for the for the upstart minor league Oakland
Skates hockey team. They have a representative here today. The ice center
is managed by the by Sharks Ice, which is an affiliate of the San Jose Sharks,
the NHL franchise based in San Jose,
and they've managed this facility since 2007,
so deep experience and understanding of the asset.
We have a management agreement that provides
for them managing the asset on our behalf,
so it's a fee-for-service kind of arrangement right now.
And that runs through 2027,
and there's an extension through 2032
if we'd like to exercise that.
But there's some issues that have caused us
to really wanna rework how we structure this relationship,
And that's what I'll present today.
One of the key issues here is that the city is exposed
to operational complexities and financial risk
as a result of the way that things are set up right now.
This is our asset at the end of the day,
the losses of the cities to bear.
To that point, the sharks are carrying about $1.8 million
in losses on behalf of the city that were incurred
really as a result of the pandemic.
Before the pandemic,
the asset was producing net positive revenue,
and the city was realizing profit out of that
on the order of $200,000 to $300,000 a year.
The graph you see here is showing net operating income,
not city's take-home profit because in these figures,
we actually have to subtract out the fee
that we pay the sharks to run the facility.
We take out money, we set aside for capital expenditures,
that sort of thing.
But anyways, you see the trend here
that it was positive and looking good.
Prior to the pandemic, it crashed.
There were deep losses for,
particularly in fiscal year 21.
And it's been recovering,
but we're not yet at that pre-pandemic position.
We're also challenged by what is really
kind of an existential issue for this facility.
It uses a refrigerant R-22 that is no longer allowed
under an international treaty
because of its ozone depleting properties.
So the international stockpile of refrigerant supplies
Is limited it's getting drawn down and there will be a point where it won't be possible to operate that system anymore
And it's also just old it breaks down. It's problematic. The facility also is in need of a facelift overall
City Council in September of last year took an action to authorize the sale of
300 million dollars in measure you bonds that happened in December the action was in September the sale is in December and
City Council identified the projects that would get funded through that this was identified as one of those projects 10 million dollars to replace
the system so what I'm presenting today is to deliver put that money to work so
it's consistent with that earlier policy direction so what is the actual new
agreement going to look like it's a it's it now it would be a lease and
management agreement so rather than a kind of a fee for service you're
working for us you're running this in our behalf it's rather we're going to
lease the facility to the sharks we're going to share in the upside it would be
a five-year initial term with four or five-year options a fixed annual base
rent of three hundred and thirty-five thousand dollars with annual you know
increases for inflation I should flag here that's three thirty-five fixed
whereas today again we're not getting anything we haven't seen profits since
before the pandemic so we go from zero to three thirty-five in base rent just
just on that bullet alone in addition there would be seven percent of gross
revenues per year above a threshold of four point three million dollars seven
percent of that increment above point point three would come to the city in the
and by way of revenue share.
That threshold would increase by inflation every year,
that same inflation factor.
The, just as frame of reference,
the facility had 4.4 million in gross revenues in 25.
So if that number held today,
there'd be a moderate, about $100,000 revenue share
that the 7% would apply to.
We believe the numbers aren't in yet for this fiscal year.
We believe it's gonna climb up to about 4.6.
And as the facility is improved,
that number is going to continue to grow.
So there will be some real revenue there for the city.
The city would also get 50% of advertising revenue
above $100,000 per year.
Naming, any naming rights sale,
which the sharks would have rights to do,
subject to the city's approval of that specific naming,
50% of, that would contribute to this number.
So 50% of advertising revenue above $100,000 a year
would come to the city.
Um, the city would provide the $10 million in, in, uh, bond funds,
which are sitting in an account.
Again, this, the sale happened in December.
They're ready to be put to work.
The project would be delivered by the sharks as the expert in sort of ice
center operation and capital issues.
And it would, so we delivered by them with city oversight, the sharks would
then be responsible for the routine maintenance, repair of the facility.
That would just come out of their own operations, their own financial cash
flow that they're generating off the facility, their responsibility, the city
and the sharks would both contribute $100,000 every year
to a capital expenditure reserve
so that there's ongoing just upkeep.
So we don't end up in a place hopefully
in years to come where we have deep investments
that we have to make to modernize the facility.
But overall, it would minimize the city's responsibilities,
certainly with respect to day-to-day operation,
but also in a kind of larger management sense,
we would be responsible for upkeep
of solar panels on the roof,
We've just repaired those, they're in good shape now.
We would be responsible for some code compliance issues
if they arose, if we discovered any.
And then we'd be responsible for extraordinary things
like if there was a foundation issue
or a deep interior electrical issue.
Almost done here.
The arrangement would allow for Ice Center customers
to park in the Dalzil Garage.
So that's the basement garage
and the city center complex here after hours.
So that keeps that garage active when city workers have typically left for
the day and the sharks would pay their, their share of, of what that costs.
Um, and then they would be continued, they would continue to be on the hook for
providing a suite of community benefits.
Basically it would look like, like what it looks today, but with a threshold
now caught, codified in the contract that says it has to be worth at least those
services have to be worth at least $325,000 a year in reality right now.
They measure about $700,000 a year.
Uh, resolution management agreements, this would be terminated.
The existing agreement would be terminated in June, June 30th of this year.
The new lease would take would be effective July one.
We would wrap up that agreement so that the $1.8 million in losses that the
sharks are carrying are settled that would just use basically existing, um,
net operating incomes that are held in reserve at the facilities today to pay
that off. So we have those, those net proceeds are sitting reserved for the
OIC they were generated from OIC operations. They were dedicated for capital expenditures
We're gonna basically take that to settle out this agreement
Okay, so basically the final slide here
so staff does recommend that we go ahead with these agreements because
It would preserve the ice center would address that sort of existential issue with the 10 million dollar capital repair
it would preserve its community in economic benefits as a driver of activity in downtown a place where a lot of community and
when athletic activity happens.
It would remove the city from day to day
operational complexities and financial exposure.
It would establish a predictable annual revenue.
So that's that base rent,
but also establish upside potential for the city.
That total consideration when you look
at the community benefits and other things
that does exceed the fair market value,
fair market rental value of the site.
So, and then finally, we think that's a fair resolution
of the management agreement using the remaining funds
that are on hand at the facility
to settle the outstanding losses.
So that is the presentation, again, available for questions.
Thank you for your patience.
Excellent, thank you so much, Brendan,
for walking us through the details so easily, thank you.
Any questions?
Councilmember Fife?
Yes, Brendan, I think through the chair,
we've been working on this the entire time
we've both been here, so I just can't say enough
about the work that's gone into this project
in terms of being a win-win for all parties involved.
I just wanted to get clear.
I didn't see it, but maybe you can help me.
The revenues that will come into the city,
will they go into the general purpose fund
or will they be set aside with the revenue sharing
and all of the different revenues
that are now going to be generated?
Will they go to the general purpose fund
or can a portion be set aside for the operations
in that general footprint?
because I do want to say that Glenn has been an amazing partner, too, and has talked about
supporting with just being a brain trust for First Friday activities, so I just wonder
what that would look like in terms of the revenues.
Right.
Got a good question.
So through the chair, the facility was originally built using a loan of redevelopment bond funds,
so because that was an originating source of money to create this asset, the revenues
generate off of it can't go to the general fund that to be dedicated for
redevelopment purposes so that means we can use them to care you take care of
our responsibilities at this asset so if there is an issue with the solar
panels those revenues could be used we could use it to address issues at the
Fox Theatre or the Scotland Convention Center any redevelopment purpose that
could even include affordable housing so any redevelopment purpose through the
entire city of Oakland let me just confirm that yes so that how back there
That was Jens Hilmer, you know that guy?
Jens, come on man.
Huge credit to Jens, he's held this asset together for the city for so long.
So the redevelopment, if we're going to spend that money on redevelopment purposes, not
put affordable housing aside for a second, just other redevelopment purposes, that has
to be in the central district of the city.
So that's like Scotland, Fox, et cetera, affordable housing could be anywhere in the city though.
Understood.
In general, it's the footprint of the facility,
but if it's specifically housing, it's anywhere.
Housing can be anywhere.
Affordable housing can be anywhere in the city.
And then Chair, if I may ask, if Jens could come up.
Hi, Jens memory, WD.
Hello, it's been a minute.
And I know we worked on something like this
around the Marriott as well,
just in terms of deferred maintenance
and their need to keep up with,
some of the repairs that were needed.
and I just wanna be absolutely sure that
if there are needs that come up,
do the funds have to go into a specific line item?
No, they cannot pay for operations,
but they can pay for anything else.
So they can pay for capital improvements,
which is what the money would be used for primarily.
Capital improvements either at the Fox
or at the Scotland or hopefully at the ice rink.
That's where we would like to target those funds.
Is the Paramount included?
The Paramount is in the central district
and would be a recipient,
But the Paramount board I believe is sort of self-managing that facility and has thus far not relied on any city subsidies for that project
Do you like they've asked but we can just talk offline about about what the needs are in that particular footprint
Thank you so much for all your help. Thank you very much
Thanks. Excellent. Thank you so much
Council member Pfeiffer as asking that question. That was one of my questions around where the funds go
So that definitely provided some clarity. I just have three questions
So one question that I had was what would be the impacts on services during the capital like during the initial
the capital project
That is being done. I would want to defer to the sharks because they have the
Operational plan there, but I do believe the facility we need to be shut down for a period of time
This is a pretty profound capital project you drain the
The ice out of the rings you have to rebuild the piping underneath the rings that run the refrigerant and provide the cooling
You know electrical systems plumbing systems
And they can speak more to that so if you're interested they we can call them up for that John you available, okay?
Hear me John Gustafson senior vice president shark sports entertainment in response to your question
We would have to close the facility for roughly four months and we would traditionally do that in the slowest ice time
so in the middle of the summer
to allow us to
expedite all the
Construction process that we need to do so we're back up and running to hit when
Traditional ice sports is at its peak which is in September excellent and since you're there
I think my one of the questions that I had maybe you can answer it
This the report mentions that the sharks will
Basically choose the vendors to do this work and then I had this question around
Like is it kind of more of a niche project?
And so will we be able to select a local vendor or how does that work?
So it's the ice system in itself is very very specialized. So
We've used a company out of Minnesota
Which again specialize in this and we'd want to bring the very best to make sure that
We get all the things that we needed. Okay, excellent. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you
okay, and then my last question was just
from the PowerPoint Brendan you mentioned that
There is a reimbursement for
Losses that we would need to do how much is that in total that is?
One point eight four four million one million eight hundred forty four thousand nine hundred and ten dollars up to that amount we actually
Actually, that's the authorization for funds that we can use to pay it down
Let me see if we have the actual number of losses here
It's on the order of 1.8 million dollars
Thank you colleagues any questions, okay, we can hear the public speakers
Calling in the names that sign up to speak on item number three in no particular order
you can come up to the podium.
State your name for the record before beginning or if you're on Zoom please raise your hand
to be easily identified.
Karen Kiki Flatterty, sorry if I am mispronouncing your names, Zack Sayer, Arthur Liu, John Gutterston,
Asada Olavala, Daniel Witt, and Glenn Martin.
In view of Newmont's bankruptcy,
as the Comptroller and Collar in Del Monte,
I, Princesses England, chose to challenge Carl Mazzetti
in the view of the right of the ownership agreement
as the two principal owners of the Seattle Kraken,
and in this bid have challenged the right of review
as the ownership group with Edward Foley and Michael Johnson
for the view of the lease agreement.
I wish to propose an application to move into theater,
a request for an Oakland hockey team
called the Oakland Dragons as an ECHL of validity.
As a private individual within the allocation
Melinda Gates Foundation and the Melinda Gates is buying of my 51 percent ownership of the Seattle Kraken
the
Compilillary term of the
indictment or the
Agreement was to look at the JW Marriott building as a potential home
for the ECHL expansion I
I am interested as the fiduciary agent counter controller of bringing in what is known as
the Oakland Dragons as a parent team in to England upon arrival as the next monarch.
I am asking that in view of this proposal that the city considered a tax abatement
where this is a bond proposal and a expansion using the tickets as a freeway to use the bus
on the back of the ticket on a way to drive economic revenue downtown, where the playing
field as the center is where they practice and there's a little bit more community outreach
for the school system.
Thank you for your comments.
Your time is up.
Good afternoon.
My name is Kiki Flaherty and I've been a resident of Oakland for 22 years.
I'm also a member of the dire wolves, which is a hockey team that plays on
Sundays at Oakland ice.
And I'm also a player and president of the San Francisco earthquakes,
LGBTQ plus ice hockey club.
The earthquakes are a diverse, all inclusive hockey team, welcoming
LGBTQ and other players who traditionally have not played hockey.
We create a safe, inclusive space for all to enjoy the recreation,
Inspiration community and just plain fun that hockey offers
Oakland ice Center has welcomed my team
For two of our marquee events which were generously funded by the Sharks foundation the California pride
Invitational which brought over 80 players and fans from throughout, California to the facility and to downtown Oakland
for the entire weekend and
Hockey with pride which is a hockey outreach scrimmage and mixer to bring even more hockey players from Oakland and the East Bay
To our team and let them know about the programs that Oakland ice offers
Without this facility and the shark support we'd have to had we would have had to look beyond
Oakland for ice for these events and
We were so welcomed and supported by the staff at sharks ice in Oakland that we decided to locate our next team
in Oakland at Oakland ice
But we can only do this with ice and the refrigeration system as you know is a necessary and big deal
So your support to make this happen would be very greatly appreciated
The facility badly needs the capital improvements as you know on a personal note
I had the fortune of being in Milan and seeing Alyssa Lu skate a
Talk about a fantastic representation of Oakland and special thanks to assembly to council member Fife. Sorry about that
council member Fife and
council members good afternoon
I'm Arthur Liu. I'm the proud father of Alyssa Liu and
four other wonderful children
I can't forget about them
well Alyssa and
All my children grew up in the Oakland Ice Center.
At least I started just getting there at age five,
and since I'm a single father.
So when I go, I usually bring all the kids there.
So Oakland Ice Center is our second home.
So I'm here today to ask for your continuous support
for Sharks on Ice and the Oakland Ice Center.
It's so very important.
Without this facility, I would not have been able to raise an Olympic champion.
So thanks to your support and also thanks to Sharks on Ice.
They have treated us so well.
Thank you so much.
Pretty hard to follow that.
John Gustafson, Senior Vice President of Sharks Sports Entertainment.
First off I really want to thank staff, Jens and I have had the opportunity to work together
for 19 years and of course Brendan for bringing this forth because this is truly a big thing
for our organization.
During that time that we've been operating, we've worked together to create a facility
that serves thousands of Oakland residents and families each year through youth hockey,
figure skating, public session, learn to skate and other recreational opportunities.
We're proud of what we've accomplished together, and we remain committed to providing these opportunities for years to come.
The lease agreement before you today represents a significant commitment by the sharks organization to Oakland.
Not only does it secure our presence and operations at the Oakland A Center for up to 25 years,
but it also provides a framework for the much needed infrastructure and facility improvements
that will allow this building to continue to serve the community well into the future.
long-term partnership provides stability for our customers,
our employees and many youth and community programs
that rely on this facility each and every day.
We respectfully ask for your support,
staff's recommendation and approval
of the lease agreement before you today.
Thank you for your time, consideration
and of course, I'm here to answer any questions.
Thank you very much.
Good afternoon council members.
My name is Daniel Witt.
I'm an Oakland resident with two kids
attending Redwood Heights Elementary.
But today I come before you as a co-founder
president of the Oakland Hockey Project and Oakland's newest sports team, a hockey team
called the Oakland Skates.
We're launching this year as a semi-professional team rooted in Oakland, built to reflect the
diversity, energy, and pride of this community.
Our goal isn't just to compete, it's to create a new, accessible sports culture in Oakland,
one where families can easily afford to attend games, where local youth can more than just
see themselves on the ice and where hockey can once again become part of the city's identity.
The Oakland Ice Center will be the home ring for the skate's inaugural season starting
this fall, and for this reason and many more, that's why I'm here in strong support of the
proposed lease and capital investments that are under consideration.
This investment takes the Ice Center to the next level.
The upgraded facility will allow us to host regional tournaments, and within the next
few years, the playoffs for the Mountain Hockey League, which is the league that the skates
will be joining for this inaugural season this fall. This means bringing
visiting teams, families, fans from across California and beyond, filling
hotels, restaurants, and shops, and generating new revenue for the city. It
also positions the Ice Center alongside other successful sports catalysts we're
seeing in Oakland helping to anchor continued economic revitalization
specifically in downtown. The San Jose Sharks have been a strong and consistent
supporter of the skates during our launch and of the community with their
management of the rink to date. Their leadership and investment in the East Bay have helped
to expand access to on-ice sports, and passing this measure will ensure that future growth
is both sustainable and community-focused.
I respectfully urge your support of this item, and I invite each of you to join us for inaugural
season starting this fall at the Oakland Ice Center. Thank you.
Hopefully I can bring it home for us. I'm Glenn Martin, the general manager of the Oakland
The Ice Center celebrates 30 years this year of serving Oakland.
It's fitting that we take the important step to secure its future in asking for approval
for the term sheet between the San Jose Sharks and the city of Oakland.
For three decades now, the Ice Center has been a community cornerstone bringing families
together, developing athletes who represented Oakland on the world stages, including Olympic
gold medalist Alissa Liu, along with many other skaters, hockey players, and even curlers
who proudly call the facility home.
Approval of this term sheet also creates the opportunity for modernizing the renovation
of the facility for 30 years of service that it's provided. This is badly needed. The investment
also preserves the community asset, supporting future generations and ensuring the Oakland
And it continues as a source of pride for the decades to come.
Thank you.
It's a good thing that you have this facility, but everybody can't use it.
It works for certain people if you've got money.
So the sharks agree to pay for field trips for at least a thousand Oakland School District
students as well as offer every student enrolled in after school programs free ice time.
that in the new contract that was in the old contract. The old contract said that you would
supply a hundred thousand dollars annually for maintenance. The new contractual arrangement
says that you have a hundred thousand dollars for capital reserves. What does that mean?
It's good that you have a commitment for capital projects related to this facility. You still
haven't made a commitment to the Oakland Police Administrative Building related to the necessity
of that capital project being put in place.
You need to make clear how the free parking is paid for.
When I read it, I assumed that the city
was paying for free parking.
There's nowhere in the documentation that I read
that said the free parking will be paid for
by the Shark's organization.
You also have something that said
how we get revenue previously.
The sharp manage, uh, ring, ring had a fee, uh, did not take a,
pay a fee, but would pay 70% of all revenues would go to them.
And then we would get some kind of revenues.
I think it's different at it's different now.
What is the exact amount of revenue we're going to get?
It's not clear.
Okay.
So I'm concerned about clarity of the maintenance that they're going to take care
They say solar panels and foundations lastly you advertise for the hiring of a
refrigeration
engineer
Who paid for their salary to decay care of whatever needed to be done related to them?
Thank you for your comments chair that concludes all speakers on this item
Excellent. Thank you so much. So definitely I'm happy to support this item
Thank you so much to staff and everyone that had a hand in bringing in working on this comprehensive agreement
and
I would refer to councilmember five, you know since you've had the opportunity to work on this item
I do I would like it to be stated for the public about the participation of
The public school youth at the Oakland Eye Center and how that's gonna work moving forward
I do know several schools in West Oakland that utilize the center. So if staff or maybe someone
Glen or John could speak to that I would appreciate that
Okay
The question specifically around will OUSD students still have the ability to access the ice in or yes
They will nothing changes going forward. Can that be confirmed from staff?
That's right through the chair
We're taking the existing community set of community benefits required in the management agreement
Which includes that as well as a whole bunch of other things and we're moving it into this agreement too
Thank you, and then and through the chair if we Dan if you could talk about the Oakland skates
Program and truck because I know that's something we've talked about in the past about accessibility for Oakland residents to participate
Yes, so
The Oakland hockey project is technically the parent organization of the Oakland skates and that's really meant to be indicative of our
Sort of entrenchment and commitment to the community through the nonprofit side of that entity
We intend to inject a lot of the revenues that we get from not just this inaugural season, but from continued
continued seasons at the Oakland night Center to
address some of the cost barriers not just for the equipment but also ice to enable
Oakland youth to access the facility more regularly
Going back to some of the recent studies that have been done about ousd and specifically sports
We know that on ice sports not just hockey by the way are some of the most desired sports for Oakland youth
That is our sweet spot. That is where we intend to focus our time and attention
Thank you for sharing that and if you have not been to a game
I definitely encourage folks to go super exciting. I played hockey as a kid and
I think it's important
For kids to have other opportunities outside of sports where they hit their heads and get concussions and things like that
So although this could happen in hockey, but we're gonna we're gonna keep it safe for Oakland youth
So thank you for sharing that and I will make a motion to move this to for the first read
because it's an ordinance to the
Tuesday next Tuesday City Council meeting on June 16th excellent second
Thank you
We have a motion made by council member five seconded by chair Brown
To approve the recommendations of staff and to board this item to the June 16th 2026 City Council agenda on roll council members
Five aye Rama Chandran. Aye younger I and chair Brown. I thank you item number three passes with four
I support this item to the June 16th City Council agenda on consent
reading in item number four
Adopt an ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission amending title 17 of the Oakland Municipal Code
updating the
accessory dwelling unit regulations for consistency with state law and providing written
findings pursuant to government code six six three two six B
two revising discontinuous standards for nonconforming activities,
three removing applicability of S10 scenic route combining zone
discretionary standards to ministerial design review, four permitting
recreational assembly activities in the Wood Street DWS 9 zone, five revising
the minimum front setback in D-CO-2 zone,
six removing a review deadline from development agency,
or sorry, development agreement procedure
in section 17.138.030,
and seven revising utility screening standards
in section 17.124.045,
eight incorporating conforming and clerical revisions,
and nine making CEQA findings.
and we have two speakers on this item.
Excellent, thank you so much,
and we will hear from staff on this item.
Good afternoon.
Excuse me.
Ruslan Filippa on behalf of Strategic Planning,
Planning Bureau.
I'm here to present a summary
of the proposed planning code amendments package.
If I may ask Kate Opt to bring up the presentation,
thank you so much.
Okay, so I'll begin with the proposed ADU
related amendments, followed by the substantive
non-ADU code changes, and then highlight some key
conforming and clerical revisions,
and conclude with the staff recommendation.
So the city's ADU ordinance has evolved over time
to remain consistent with the state law.
The original ordinance was adopted in January, 2022
and later updated in both 2024 and 2025.
Most recently, in December of last year, 2025,
the city received a findings letter from state HCD
included with the staff report.
In response, planning staff outlined the changes necessary
to maintain full compliance with the state law.
So following are three recommended minor changes
that we're proposing.
First one is a clerking change to update statute numbers
to reflect the current statute numbers.
Second is to remove subjective visibility criteria
and third to remove subjective predominant criteria
and replace it with more objective,
similar with visually matching.
There are also two HCD findings
for which staff does not recommend any changes.
So the first one, state HCD claims
that the ATU regulations in S9 zone
are inconsistent with state law
and gives the city two options.
One is to amend the ordinance to comply with state law
and two, to adopt the ordinance with findings,
so supporting the city's determination
that the regulations comply with state law.
So staff recommendation and response to HCD
was that the city has already satisfied the second option
by adopting findings, supporting its ADU regulations
in the AS9 combining zone.
The findings were adopted with the original ADU ordinance
in January 2022, and then reaffirmed in ordinance adopted
in June 2024.
And therefore city has complied with state law
and no changes are proposed.
Second, finding state HCD claims that creating a preference
for ADU location other than the front setback first
as specified in code section
isn't confident with the government code with the state law
because it precludes an ADU of at least 800 square feet.
Staff recommendation and response in the meeting with HCD
on April 20, 2026, planning staff clarified
that the state HCD and state HCD acknowledged
that while ordinance establishes preferred ADU locations,
it does not prohibit front yard ADUs.
when no other feasible locations exist on the site.
And the city is also making additional findings
in the proposed ordinance to establish that
ADUs are not prohibited in the front setback.
And so the city is compliant with the state law.
Staff also met with, as I mentioned,
with the state HCD staff on April 20th,
and we also showed the HCD,
the existing findings for item number one.
So I'll briefly summarize the proposed substantive
and non-AGU code changes.
The first change is to revise discontinuous standards
for non-conforming activities.
We propose to eliminate ambiguous purposeful
abandonment standard in the planning code
and establish a clear 60-day time frame
for cessation of these non-confirming operations.
Second change is impacting the S-10 zone,
just to clarify that only objective standards apply
to ministering design review projects,
but discretionary criteria will continue to apply
to regular design review projects.
Next proposal is regarding Wood Street,
allowing recreational assembly activities,
such as plazas, community gardens, and so on,
in DWS-9 zone without a conditional use permit.
Next change is regarding Coliseum,
providing a consistent 10 foot front setback
along the west side of Hegenberger Road.
Next change is to remove or review the deadline
for development agreements that does not align
with the DA approval process.
You can see the final one.
And I think the final change here is to clarify
undergrounding and screening standards for utilities,
such as electrical transformers.
So finally, here are just several examples
of clerical and conforming revisions.
These include revising maximum residential density in DDT,
height areas five and six, in downtown and updating
the maximum height in DDT height area nine.
There were some errors made previously
and we're just correcting those errors.
I won't read all of them, just maybe one other,
we were proposing to reintroduce
economically feasible definition
to maintain an existing cross reference
with title 15 of Oakland Municipal Code.
Other things such as replacing dwelling unit
with living unit throughout the planning code
in some instances to be more inclusive.
This brings me to the end of presentation.
I'll just leave the staff recommendation up here
and we'll welcome any questions
from city council in public.
Excellent, thank you so much for the report.
I know that it takes a lot of due diligence
to bring the city into some of the state regulations
and so thank you for your work on that.
Colleagues, any questions or comments?
We can go to the public speakers.
Calling in the names that signed up to speak
on item number four, Victor Adjaye and Asada Olavala.
Good afternoon.
Appreciate the opportunity to comment.
We understand the city's interest in regulating legal nonconforming truck related uses, but
we want to make sure the proposed legislation does not unintentionally penalize property
owners who are acting in good faith to continue an existing lawful industrial use.
Our comments are focused on the proposed changes to section 17.114.050.c regarding discontinuance
of a nonconforming truck related industrial activity.
As we understand it, the proposed language would provide that the right to continue a
nonconforming truck related industrial activity immediately expires if the use discontinues
active operation for more than 60 days.
Our property has historically been used for trucking related industrial activity.
These types of industrial sites are an important part of the city's existing industrial land
use pattern and help support portable Oakland related operations, which are a vital part
of the city and regional economy.
The proposed language causes concern because in practice a gap in tenant occupancy does
not mean the owner has discontinued the use.
When a tenant vacates or lease terminates that is often outside the control of the property
owner.
During that period the owner may be actively marketing the site negotiating with replacement
tenants making repairs and so on.
Maintenance repair and construction work are also part of actively operating this type
of facility.
good faith activities are part of active operation of the industrial use and can easily take
longer than 60 days. For those reasons, we are seeking confirmation that in applying
the proposed legislation, the city would interpret active operation to include good faith efforts
by a property owner to continue the same lawful industrial use, including retentanting efforts
and maintenance repairs and construction. This confirmation is important because reinvestment
in these properties often requires construction maintenance.
This is what I understood.
You submitted some documents to the state,
and the state identified that you had,
you needed to correct errors and inconsistencies
within certain issues had to be addressed.
Errors, and it's a lot, it's a lot.
One of the things that stood out to me
around the free safety adequate evacuation in attachment C,
staff identified that South Piedmont
is served well with bus stops.
And they identified buses 646, 652 and 682 bus uses.
Those three buses offer the school district.
They only operate to pick up students in the morning
and drop them off in the evening.
This is misleading.
It's as if buses are available in case of an evacuation.
And that's not the case.
So I'm concerned if staff was intentionally misleading
or staff didn't know what the hell they were doing.
One of the two.
That needs to be corrected.
You also had limited permitting with ADUs,
the city must allow for conversion
of within certain scope of work of garages.
You can use garages now.
It says that you have to create additional kitchens,
some kind of way, free safety parking compromise.
ADU non-profit organizations have been working
have a different way that they can build you have to correct that you have to correct that
you can't you cannot be made to plant trees y'all were all may thank you for your comments
miss all of all chair that concludes all speakers on this item excellent thank you so much did
the district seven office have a question go ahead there you go Evelyn big on behalf
for this item, the setback of 10 feet of a Hennenburger.
He would like to hold on this item as he believes
is their concern regarding the development in that area.
Thank you.
Excellent, thank you so much for the comments.
So I have two questions for staff.
So the first one, can you, I guess we'll all start
with the district seven office one.
In my notes I have it under, what is it, 17.101 H.03.
Footnote number two establishes a consistent 10-foot medium
setback along Hagenberger Road aligning with all other zones
along this gateway corridor that already require a 10-foot
front setback.
So hagenberger Road in Oak Park, Oakport Street when I talked to councilmember Houston about this item
I think he was specifically asking does it the poor of Oakland also have to also have those same requirements
so this only applies to a very small area because this is a
This zone it only applies to the area
It's just south of the Coliseum on the west side of Hagenberger
And actually one of the parcels is owned by the city of Oakland
itself
so and then two of the other parcels already have
Developments on them currently so that would not affect those parcels
South of the Coliseum and so is that the the city-owned site? Is that where youth?
Where there's a housing?
I'm blanking on your name youth. Yeah youth spirit artworks. Is that the site or like am I in the right area?
Yes, okay
so I
I'm not sure how the committee wants to take the feedback from the d7 office
But I think that my recommendation if we move the item along can planning and building be sure to meet with councilmember
Houston to kind of explain the specifics and why
This recommendation is on the table if that seems appropriate to my colleagues
And then the other question that we heard from the public speaker. I
I believe that's on section 17.114.050c.
And I'm thinking that the question is around,
so it basically states clarifies the standard
when a non-conforming truck activities,
and it basically says it eliminates
the undefined, purposeful abandonment standard
and establishes a 60-day timeframe.
And I feel like the public speaker is just asking
for some clarity around like, I guess,
what is a true definition of, I guess, being active,
versus purposeful abandonment that we are now removing.
Right, I can start and then maybe also our city attorney
can add to that.
But essentially, this item stems from our environmental
justice element that basically wants the city
to look at non-conforming uses
that are in residential neighborhoods
that are causing harm of either pollution
or lots of trucks going through residential neighborhoods.
And so this is something that has been an objective
of the city as well as the residents
and was adopted by the city council.
And so what previously had been done originally was
there was actually a zero-day standard
for non-conforming uses in this.
And there was the purposeful abandonment
was what was stated in that code section.
And there was an appeal on that.
It was decided that wasn't clear
what purposeful abandonment meant.
So that is the change we are proposing.
So we are no longer talking about purposeful abandonment,
but that after 60 days that these businesses
would then no longer be reinstated.
This is similar to language we have
for all of our other types of nonconforming uses,
which we've had for years,
and most cities have this as well.
And so it's more that the use has not been used for 60 days
and not whether a business owner or a property owner
is still trying to lease the property for another use,
because the purpose is that we actually want this use
to stop in these areas.
I see, and then just to make sure
I'm understanding it correctly,
At first the standard was zero, was it zero day?
It was zero and now it's 60.
Now it's 60, okay.
I don't know if Mike Branson wants to add to this.
I'll just add a little bit.
Actually several years ago it was 90 days
and then after the environment of justice element
was adopted there was a proposal to be a little tighter
on that out of a concern about certain trucking uses
near residential neighborhoods.
So that's when it was revised down to zero days.
Under state law, you need to have an intention aspect
to removing nonconforming,
so there was a purposeful abandonment language added,
but it wasn't a defined term,
and it became very difficult to implement,
as we saw on an appeal at Planning Commission.
And so the 60 days is really intended to continue
to move in the direction
that the environmental justice element directs,
while also offering something that is a little bit easier
for both staff and the public
to understand what the expectation is around it.
I know that there's still conversations
perhaps about amortization language
and I'm sure that there will be further exploration
around the topic of legal nonconforming,
but right now, staff needs something
that can be more regularly implementable.
Excellent, thank you.
Thank you for that.
So to the public speaker,
someone from my team is happy to connect with you
and then we can also identify
if there's where the specific location is
and we can connect you with the district team as well.
And chances are they're probably there on the side there
that they can assist you.
So thank you so much for showing up
and for the question as well.
So colleagues, any council member Fyfe?
If we could, through the chair,
have the speaker tell us where the business is located.
And if you've contacted our departments, our staff yet.
Thank you, we're located at 4831 Tidewater here in Oakland.
I think we contest that it's not driving
through a residential area,
it's very much an industrial road there
and in a broader area.
Thank you for the response.
We are just trying to clarify as well
what active operation means
And I think our clarification here is that as property owners,
we are putting an investment into the building.
And that investment sometimes takes more than 60 days.
And so if you are clarifying that our active operation
stops 60 days after we have a tenant in there,
that we feel is too restrictive.
I understand.
I just wanted to understand where the district, what
district this was located, and definitely
encourage you to talk to those people over there yeah I think it's district
seven right yeah yeah thank you excellent all right any other
additional questions or comments on this item okay I'll make the motion to move
this to the full council meeting June the 16th thank you we have a motion made
by chair Brown seconded by councilmember five to approve the recommendations of
staff and support this item to the June 16 2026 City Council agenda on rule
council members five aye Ramachandran uh under I and chair Brown I thank you
item number four passes with four I support this item to the June 16 city
council agenda and to the chair is that on consent yes thank you okay now
reading in item five receive an informational report on the city of
Oakland's general plan and housing element annual progress reports for
calendar year 2025 and we have three speakers that signed up to speak
excellent I'm we'll hear from staff on this item good afternoon council members
and the public my name is Laura Kaminski I'm the strategic planning manager and
k-top if you can have the presentation please I'm also here with Caleb Smith
who's with the housing community development department so we're going to
be doing a joint presentation so the purpose of the housing element annual
progress report is to assess the city's progress implementing the housing
programs and meeting the regional housing needs allocation or the arena
committed to the six cycle housing element Oakland total arena is 26
thousand two hundred and fifty one units and the annual progress report is
required pursuant to the California law and the APR must be submitted to the
California Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and the California
Department of Housing Community Development by April 1st of every year.
At this meeting, I'll be providing an overview of the content reported to the 2025 General
Plan Annual Progress Report and the 2025 Housing Element Annual Progress Report.
So first, I'm going to go over the content for the 2025 General Plan Annual Progress
Report.
As I'm sure you're aware, we're currently working on the General Plan Phase Two update,
which focuses on four elements shown here.
The 2025 General Plan Annual Progress Report includes updates from staff regarding General
Plan implementation and update activity that occurred during the calendar year of 2025.
The city conducted extensive community engagement to inform the phase two of the General Plan
update.
These are a number of the other initiatives that happened during the 2025 that are listed
on this screen, such as, you know, over the years we've also adopted the Downtown Open
specific plan, various other specific plans, we have a safety element, and we're also updating
the open space conservation and recreation element.
We also have another approved or ongoing projects, and these include the Brooklyn Basin, West
Oakland BART, TOD, Lake Merritt BART, TOD, and Oak Knoll mixed-use community.
So now I'm going to provide an overview of the content reported in the 2025 Housing Annual
Progress Report.
So the Annual Progress Report Form provided by the California State HCD collects information
on housing units proposed, entitled, and permitted and completed in the reporting year.
Definitions of these include, proposed is when you, is for a planning permit that's
been applied for, entitled is when it's been approved as a planning permit, permitted is
when it's actually, the billing permit is issued and completed is when the building
is finished. So there was 1,007 units that were proposed in 2025, 1,944 units that were
entitled and 712 units that were permitted and 1,391 that were completed. So now I'm
going to go over some of the definitions of four, sorry, it's actually going to lead
this to Caleb who's going to take over this part of the presentation.
Thank you, Laura.
Caleb Smith for the City of Oakland's Housing Community Development Department.
So in the Annual Progress Report, we're not just looking at the total amount of housing
production, permitting, and such like.
We're also looking at how this is related across the different income bands.
And the state of California uses a standard based off of area median income.
In 2025, the year that's relevant for this information, for family four that was $159,800.
We see that area median income is based on a county-wide level.
So it's often affected by some of our nearby communities with higher incomes than Oakland.
Now there's six different standards that the state uses.
Some of these may be a little newer because the state has added these recently.
Acutely low income is for households that earn less than 50% of area median income.
Extremely low income is between 15 and 30.
Very low income between 30 and 50.
Low incomes between 51 and 80.
income between 81% and 120% and then a market rate or also known as above moderate income
is over 120% of area median income. Now, when our regional housing needs assessment was
originally assigned, only four of these categories were specifically assigned targets for very
low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate income. These other two categories,
acutely low income and extremely low income, are more recent additions that show up in
our reporting, however they don't have a separate target. Those are considered to
be part of the very low income target. So area median income is again the mid
point, half of the families earn more, half them earn less. This is available
for different household sizes. There's a state local chart that state publishes
every year. Now to provide a bit of a sense for what this means in a
practical level, we see that there is a variety of different incomes across the
spectrum, we see that above moderate income can be skilled professionals like doctors
in some of the higher earning professions. Moderate income, a lot of teachers fit into
that. We're low income, it could be a wide variety of white collar and skilled blue collar
jobs and we see that there's again a lot of working class Oaklanders who fit into very
low income or even extremely low income. And acutely low income, those are often people
on fixed income, people with part time employment, that manner of thing.
So now I'm going to turn it back over to Laura to talk a little bit more about some of our
recent progress.
Okay, so the following slides document our progress towards meeting Oakland's regional
housing needs allocation.
Only billing permits for the construction of new housing units may be counted towards
meeting the RINA.
Building permits ensure that any new construction applies with all health safety and building
code standards.
issuance of building permit signals that construction of a project may begin.
At the time, this, the unit is considered permitted.
So 14% of Oakland's regional housing needs allocation has been met in the first three
years of this housing element cycle.
We've been relatively successful at permitting very low, which is 19% of those units and
low-income units, which is about 25%, while production of moderate-income units and market-rate
units has underperformed with only 9% of the regional housing needs allocation permitted
at each affordability level.
Over the past eight years, significant shifts have occurred in the market.
In 2018, Oakland permitted record levels of market rate housing.
This major influx has helped stabilize rents in Oakland, however, high construction costs
and high interest rates have deterred market rate developers from continuing to produce
units at such a high rate.
Meanwhile, the city has aimed to leverage the cooler market to produce more affordable
housing.
In 2025, funding for Measure U and recent zoning changes and other factors have led
to high levels of affordable housing production in the city.
Continuing a trend that started in 2023, more deed restricted affordable units than market
rate units were permitted in 2025.
Fewer units were permitted in 2025 than in 2024.
These units permitted remain below average relative to prior seven years.
This represents a 31% decline from 2024 and a 10% decline from the previous low in 2023.
In contrast to planning entitlements, housing developers typically only apply for building
permits once they are ready to break ground on a project.
This means that building permit issuance is the best indicator for the current state of
housing development.
In this regard, this is the stage at which housing developers are more sensitive to high
high construction costs, high interest rates,
and low market rate, market rents.
Accordingly, the permitting activity in 2025
was largely driven by production of affordable housing.
The largest number of affordable units are being produced
within housing projects that have five or more units.
The city made important progress
advancing affordable housing
across all phases of development in 2025.
Significantly more affordable housing units
were proposed, entitled, permitted, and completed
compared to market rate units.
There was 870 affordable units proposed,
1,283 affordable units entitled,
600 affordable units were permitted
and almost 800 affordable units were completed.
It should be noted that affordable housing
that is entitled is a very strong predictor
of affordable units that will be permitted
in the following or upcoming years.
Given the high number of affordable units entitled in 2025,
we expect these to translate pretty directly
into permitted portable units in the coming years
based on funding availability.
Many of the trends we are seeing in Oakland
are playing out also in pure cities,
especially, or specifically in San Jose, Fremont,
and Sunnyvale.
So Oakland has permitted 14% of its RINA requirement.
This is roughly average compared to cities of San Jose,
which has permitted also 14%.
Fremont has permitted 12%,
and Sunnyvale has permitted 16% of the required units.
Notably, as you can see from the purple bars,
Oakland has permitted a larger share
of its very low income and low income units
than any of its pure cities.
So 19% and 25% respectively.
This represents 42% of all low income or below units
permitted in Alameda County in this housing element cycle.
Accessory dwelling units, or ADUs,
also saw relatively stable levels of production in 2025.
So while ADU production fell across all phases
of development tracked on the APR,
this decrease was less significant relative
to the decreasing in multifamily development in 2025.
This relative stability of ADU production shows
that even amid a financially constrained
development environment,
ADUs continue to be affordable by design,
not just for renters, but also for homeowners
that are developing them.
The city entitled 244 ADUs permitted 192 of them,
completed 183 in 2025.
The number of units entitled and permitted in 2025
were still below average from the last five years.
So the permitted 80s in 2025 represent a 9% decline
from 2024 and a 34% decline from the peak of 2019.
This figure shows the trends of the production of 80s
over the last few years.
The number of 80s entitled and permitted in 2025
for below average relative to what we saw in 2019 to 2024.
ADU production is not broken out by affordability
for a few reasons.
Prior to 2023, the city of Oakland reported ADUs
as market rate units to the state through the APR.
This was done because ADUs are not deed restricted.
However, recent studies on the affordability of ADUs
supports the idea that ADUs are an important source
of housing that is affordable by design.
So the Association of Bay Area Governments or ABAG
conducted an analysis of ADU affordability
included that in most jurisdictions,
30% of permitted ADUs could be counted as very low income,
30% could be counted as low income units,
and 30% could be counted as moderate income units.
And only 10% would be above moderate.
Therefore, beginning in 2023,
the city began reporting ADUs
as non deed restricted affordable units
in line with the ratios provided by ABAG.
In addition to reporting on housing production, the housing element APR also reports on Oakland's
progress implementing the housing action plan.
So these are just a few of the progress items from this past year that one is promoting
healthy homes and lead safe housing, also investigating a tenant community opportunity
to purchase act, right size development fees on market rate developments, adjusting or
are waiving city fees and paying payment time
for affordable housing development
and also implement objective design standards.
I'm not gonna let Caleb continue this.
Thank you, Laura.
So the annual progress reports primarily focused
on housing production numbers,
but the city of Oakland also invests
in affordable housing preservation.
We see here that the large majority of units this past year
were counted towards the arena as production units.
There were, however, some additional units
that were preserved via the city's
Acquisition Conversion to Affordable Housing
funding program.
Historically, those do not count
for the purposes of arena credit.
However, we are looking forward to some changes in state law,
which will take effect, so in future years,
we do hope to get at least partial arena credit
for these units as part of the city's
broader affordable housing strategy.
Now, we also with this Annual Progress Report
want to look ahead.
Looking at a snapshot in time like 2025
can sometimes be illuminating,
but it may also sometimes not adequately
capture the full picture.
Now, one of the key priorities
for housing community development in 2026
continues to be Measure U implementation.
There is over 1,000 units of affordable homes
that have already received building permits
or are expected to eminently receive building permits
in the first half of 2026.
So when it looks like we maybe had a little bit
of a drop in building permits in 2025,
in some respects that's a quirk
of the affordable housing funding calendar
on the state level as projects were awaiting
the final affordable housing tax credits
before they were ready to move forward in construction.
Fortunately, thanks in large part to the city's investments
to measure you and other programs,
a lot of our projects were in a position
to get those final awards last fall
as well as the first part of this year.
Our department housing community development
is also going to continue to deepen partnerships
with other agencies,
such as working with Alameda County on Measure W,
other parts of Alameda County on tax defaulted lots
and small infill developments,
and also working with our regional partners,
such as the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority.
There's going to be additional priorities,
investing available, Measure U, as Measure U's available.
In shovel-ready projects, we have a robust pipeline,
and we know there's a number of projects
that are excited to apply for our next NOFA when available.
And we also want to ensure that our pipeline projects
are positioned to compete
for additional affordable housing resources,
such as the upcoming state's
Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities Funding Program,
the upcoming tax credit rounds,
and other state funding programs.
In addition to some internal staff capacity building,
we're also excited to have an increased focus
on homeownership with some opportunities
Associated with the state's permanent local housing allocation funding program some new programmatic rules should make that a better source for home ownership
and then
Implementing the anti-displacement strategic action plan because we know that a lot of the work discussed in the annual progress report is focused again
On our capital investments, but we also have a much broader affordable housing strategy and housing community development
Which also encompasses a variety of non capital preservation anti displacement investments
which really create a more comprehensive and complete affordable housing strategy.
So now I'll turn it over to Laura to talk a little bit about some of the exciting work
planning and building has upcoming.
So the planning and building department is continuing to work on streamlining code approval
and making building faster and easier.
And also we're working as stated earlier in the general plan update.
We're updating our land use and transportation element, the open space conservation and recreation
element our noise element as well as a new infrastructure element and we anticipate bringing that to council for adoption in
2027 and that concludes the presentation
Excellent. Thank you both for the comprehensive breakdown
any
Councilmember Unger you can start us off
I just want to say it's it's pretty easy to go through these slides and you guys are so
Deep in it that you don't necessarily step back, but I just want to take a minute and acknowledge
What an amazing job you've all been doing on producing housing and affordable housing in Oakland, and it is we are beating a lot of our
Cities in the region we are doing incredible work, and it translates to real
Safety and security on the ground and I want to thank you all for the work. You've done and also
You know like like all of us. I'm worried about where the next
you know funds come from in doing this and that's something that we all have to put our heads collectively together because there's still an
Enormous amount of work to be done. But I just want to I hope you all take take a moment to
I definitely agree
both the HCD team and planning and building with all of the just when you were running through all of the elements that you know
Plan use and the general plan all of these all of this takes a lot of comprehensive planning
With various teams within the city and with community stakeholders and I we know that the job is not easy
So just really want to express my gratitude and just really gratitude for all of the hard work and also the HCD team
just really
Helping us be it really a leader and building so so much affordable housing and just all of the amazing work
so definitely agree with council member Unger's sentiments and
council member five
Thank you
Through the chair ditto to everything my colleagues have said can we get these slides email to us?
I saw the report but I the presentation is just a lot easier to flow through so if we could get
copies of the presentation I could I would really appreciate that because I
want to go back to the slide where I think we were showing that there was an
underperformance at nine percent for one of our categories of housing and I
wanted to understand what the baseline is for underperformance is performance
defined as a hundred percent of meeting the RINA goals or is there another
baseline. Yeah I think what we're trying to look at is you know in order to meet
the arena you know which on average you would try to you know have us you know
because it's an eight year arena cycle that you would try to have one eighth of
the production per year and so you know looking at it in that regard we are we
are behind but most of the other cities are behind or actually you're seeing all
the other cities are behind as well it's just reflective of the current economy
in the Bay Area right now for market or affordable or across the board it's
across the board but we are we are doing better in the affordable housing
production than we are in the market rate production and that's again
relating things to measure you right which is I see a hand up behind you
Timothy Green planner 3 just to clarify that 9% under production number is both
for moderate income units and market rate units and that's comparing
ourselves to our peer cities if you take if you take a hundred percent divided by
eight years I believe that's 12.5% annually that we would need to produce
of arena. Thank you. That math is very helpful. Thank you for that. Thanks, Timothy. And then
the market conditions that are producing this phenomenon across the state of California,
is it possible that we look at other developments, products other than the way that we're building
for construction for new
construction can we look at
modular are our developers or
builders talking about using
using modular construction so
we can reach those numbers.
Thank you Emily Weinstein
director of housing committee
development through the chair
councilmember five so I think
there's a couple different ways
to look at that information
first in terms of the amount of
production for market rate the
city of Oakland has produced
enough money in the city of
the center the state of Oakland
has produced I think it's been
fourteen thousand units or
something over the last eight
years.
Of market rate development and
so part of what you're seeing
here is the Rina cycle and it's
an arbitrary sort of date of
when this Rina cycle started
and we finished last Rina cycle
the last Rina cycle we overshot
the number of of required.
Or the goals for market rate so
stock. And so no matter what we do as a city, we're going to be absorbing that large amount
of supply, whereas other cities across the Bay Area, across the state weren't developing
all through COVID. So that is part of why our rents have been kind of holding still
while vacancies is starting to go down. Our rents are pretty much staying still, although
they're starting to tick up a little bit, but that's because of the large supply of
market rate housing that came online over the last several years. In terms of
the cost of housing, we are not seeing yet the huge savings for modular. So
we've seen, we've had a couple modular developments, affordable developments
come through and we have not seen yet the huge change in in cost. It really
has to do with the time savings, but there's other costs right now associated
with Modular.
So what a lot of affordable housing developers do
is during the design period,
they're evaluating their developments
with different construction methods.
Modular and not, and seeing,
particularly with infill, it can be difficult
because there are not a lot of staging areas
and so it can be, you can build up the costs
through construction.
So many developers will evaluate how to bring down the costs
and Modular is one potential solution
but it hasn't yet borne out really.
outstanding. Thank you for that information. And then I guess one of the last things I
wanted to add is what I would like to see moving forward is a process that brings in
small and emerging developers into this process that can access the funds that we have for
development projects because I know there are a lot of women, there are a lot of minority
developers that are trying to get projects off the ground, especially for units that
are less than 50 units the smaller on the smaller end I think that would be
really beneficial to the populations that we're trying to serve as well as
these developers that serve some of the marginalized communities that are so in
need of housing I guess I said that was the last statement I do have one more do
you want to address that yeah I can speak directly to that so as part of our
funding processes in our NOFA's we provide additional points for emerging
developers so that's baked into the way that we score projects through our
our competitive processes and that's really across all of our different
funding programs. In addition one of the big challenges for emerging developers
is pre-development funding. Yeah. And we know that that's the riskiest funding and
And so, as you are aware, we applied for a program through HUD and were successfully
awarded over $5 million of HUD funds, and we developed a pre-development program, a
portion of which is designated for emerging developers.
We have had some challenges to get that program up and running, and part of it is what we
came to understand is the program is designed to be rolling funds. The original funds, though,
come with what are called BABA requirements, Build America, Buy America, which adds additional
costs. So it makes those funds almost like cost prohibitive to use, particularly for
emerging developers. So we are in the process of identifying projects that already have
And we have to do that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
And we have to do more of that.
share information about this BABA program. This is so funny to me. We enjoy saying it
although it is very difficult when it hits our projects. Understood. The last two things,
the success that you all have had with affordable I'm sorry. I was going to add also for projects
that are for market rate projects. So number of the streamlining code changes that we made
who are also trying to help smaller developers as well.
So now we have a ministerial approval
or by right approval process for one to 30 units
that are market rate projects
as well as for one to four units.
Those products do not have to pay
affordable housing impact fees.
So trying to help encourage that missing middle housing
and those were action items from our housing element as well
that we have now implemented.
I remember, thank you for refreshing my memory.
And with the success that you all have had
with getting so many units developed, affordable units,
I just wanted to state that I think that underscores
why we need that allocation for affordable housing
in this upcoming budget.
I said when we had our last council meeting
that I was going to try to add back the 50 million
that I heard so many of our public speakers ask for
and I did that in my budget amendments to the mayor's budget,
so I just wanted to state that for the record.
I heard loud and clear from the constituents
that came and spoke that need
in order to continue this progress.
And then my last question is,
with such a robust introduction of affordable units
on the, in our system, what does that do
for the property taxes that,
like some of our nonprofit developers
and other developers don't pay into the city of Oakland,
do you see it balancing out with people
that are now able to afford rents
to be putting money into the economy a different way?
This is a completely random question,
but I'm trying to figure out how does that balance out
if we're not receiving those funds
that we receive from market rate projects?
Through the chair to Council Member Fife,
yes, under state law, affordable housing is subject
that we have. Done some
analysis in the past quantifying
this benefit and comparing it
with different levels of rent
savings and I think it is a
pretty definitive of the
analysis we've seen so far that
the benefit to the residents
and to the broader community
far outweighs the fork on taxes
in a scenario for all the city
supported projects. And in the
past there have been people who
have proposed projects for
In the past, there have been people who have proposed projects to the city that would not
meet those benefits that other cities have gone for and with unusual financing models.
And we said, no, thank you, because it didn't demonstrate that depth of public benefit.
So we always are very careful when it comes to safeguarding those city funds.
And fortunately for our city funded projects, there is always that very robust public benefit
that significantly outweighs any foregone taxes under that state law.
Outstanding.
I will make a motion to do we need to send this to the full City Council or can we accept and receive it in committee?
I was gonna ask if you had a preference. It does need to go to the full City Council
But I believe
But I guess specifically did you want to present to the full council? Do you have a press preference?
It can go on consent or non consent
So I'll make that motion to send this to the full City Council next Tuesday on consent
Thank you for all the answers very thorough
Second.
And then public speakers.
Calling in the names, I signed up to speak on item number five.
In no particular order, you can come up to the podium.
Or if you're on Zoom, please raise your hand
to be easily identified.
Zach Thayer, Jeff Levin, and Asada Ullabala.
And Johnson Pharmaceutical via the state of California
and Purdue, the United States.
In compliance with the COVID relief bill,
13 586 and 13 8 0 was changed and view of myself based on the big bill
Building purchases are notices not permits. You notice that these are all for new construction
but
through the ACA HX and the tax credit
room to housing
Hasn't been in his
meticulously
biased in this administration for turning buildings when granted money is already liquid
and capitalized and calling it steel case and just rezoning the building. We are known for
that in Simon property be the city of Oakland, Ledera be the United States and about a half
of SFR Investment Pool Mercy Housing. This is specifically an issue with I
myself knowing that through Sheldon Alden Anderson estate, Ernest Williamson
and Dolores Williams estate as Comptroller and Lotus Capital Management
and chair of the board as well as in TSO Capital as the private donor of
Operation Home Key and view of the System of Care I was put into bankruptcy
and in view of Merkle via the Articles of Impeachment knowing that it was my
capital gains for my grandpa Sheldon Mitchell James who was my grandpa Jim
his son and just want to remind you that affordable housing has different
components and it's not just the housing that you make available the Oakland
housing authority, with the vouchers, that's a part of affordable housing. The
public housing that you have in this is, that's a part of affordable housing. So
when you had the report on the, what's happening with the Oakland Housing
Authority and the fact that they support 18,400 Oakland families, with the
the contribution that they make to the possibility
that you can use Section 8 vouchers for mortgage payments,
for housing, and how to, instead of paying rent,
it can be a subsidy to pay your mortgage.
And then you don't take into consideration
in the discussion of affordable housing.
You talk about people's income,
but the responsibility when you are buying a house,
when you have to pay insurance and mortgage,
utility bills and other aspects of what's involved in that
contributes to your ability to have the capacity
to buy a house.
I'm also concerned in the report you make reference
to the Oak Knoll Project.
That project is out of control.
That project started in 2018 and right now,
if I can just say one thing about the project
is what's gonna happen to the Barcelona partial,
which is the property that we own
because the new owners are not committed
to building any affordable housing
on that Oak Knoll project.
So what's gonna happen to the Barcelona parcel?
Thank you for your comments.
Switching to Zoom user Jeff,
you can unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Thank you, good afternoon.
Chef Levin, speaking for East Bay Housing Organizations.
First of all, I'm just wanna thank the staff
for a very comprehensive report
and say that we very much appreciate the progress
that the city has made in meeting its housing goals,
especially for affordable housing.
As the staff notes, in the first three years
of this housing element cycle so far,
affordable housing has actually
outstripped market rate production.
We're very happy to see that.
But as has been noted,
This is due to the unique confluence of two factors,
the presence of Measure U bond funds in particular
and depressed market conditions
that have held down market rate housing.
These conditions are not likely to persist long term.
So if we look back to the last housing element period
and look at the entire fifth cycle,
which goes back to 2015,
we get a much different picture.
Over the last 11 years,
80% of new housing has been unrestricted
market rate housing and only 20% has been affordable housing.
So while we celebrate what we have done so far,
we also acknowledge that we have a long ways to go.
And this underscores the importance of continued local
funding for affordable housing.
And we are very happy to have heard council member Fife
last week speak of her support and intend to introduce
an amendment to the budget to put $50 million
of Measure U funding into the budget.
and we note that the council budget team has done so.
So we look forward to seeing that
become part of the adopted mint cycle budget.
A couple of things I wanna mention quickly
that aren't here that should be in future APRs.
One is the impact of suspending
the affordable housing impact fees
and whether that's made a difference.
Secondly, whether the zoning changes for middle housing
are doing anything and particularly whether they are
in fact, affirmatively furthering fair housing.
And lastly, just want to note
that the downtown Oakland specific plan
requires annual reports here.
Thank you for your comments, Chair.
That concludes all speakers on this item.
And we do have a motion made by Council Member Fife,
seconded by Chair Brown,
to receive and forward this informational report
to the June 16th City Council agenda on rule.
Council Members Fife?
Aye.
Ramachandran?
Aye.
Unger?
Aye.
And Chair Brown?
Aye.
with four I's to be forwarded to the June 16th City Council agenda on consent
moving on to open forum calling in the names that signed up to speak on open
forum Zach Thayer and Maclean Ken Slade Ken Slade I want to make sure you
understand I need I need to get a tusk you know Ken Slade are we ready to be
understood ons got a little bit of the application Ekman Nuremberg orders get
specific the nice little Queen Mary now as a prisoner of war the definition for
UN order 26 9 2 1 and UN order 11 84 32 puts into theater by the week of 9 11
the ability to order six isothermic atomic weapons against the state thank
you for your comments switching to zoom user and you can unmute yourself and
begin your one-minute comment I have submitted a packet of photos for the
and 35th Avenue corridor properties.
We do not need any of the so-called services offered
by the Laurel Business Improvement District.
We already pay annual assessments
to the city of Oakland for the same services.
We're being double assessed and want to be removed
from the business district
during the July window of opportunity.
The Laurel BID took in over 250,000 in assessments
during this last year.
The Laurel looks like a slum.
For the 10 year period, 2015 to 2025,
the Laurel took in more than 2 million in assessments.
And when I submitted photos last July,
the Laurel still looked like it's slum.
We coordinate properties,
which includes 61 rent control departments
are essentially being double tax
for the services that we do not want or need.
We keep up our properties.
We derive no benefit from being in the Laurel.
We want to be removed from the business district
during the July window of opportunity.
As a minority, we were never heard by the CED committee
and before city council.
The executive director of...
Thank you for your comments, your time is up.
Chair, at this time, all names have been called.
Excellent, thank you so much.
This meeting is adjourned.