Good afternoon and welcome to the council meeting of Tuesday, June 16th.
Before I call roll, I will have our interpreter give instructions in Spanish to participate
in this meeting.
So the translator giving instructions, please go ahead.
Yes.
Good afternoon.
If you want to hear this meeting in English, you need to, if you're on a computer, you
need to look at the three dots or the little world or where it says more, you need to click
I got it and then interpretation and you're going to choose English.
Everyone needs to choose a channel.
if you're watching online,
it has to be either English or Spanish.
If you could make me interpret it now, thank you all.
Thank you, I will now go over speaker card instructions.
If you would like to speak on any agenda item,
you must fill out a speaker's card.
You must fill out a speaker's card
before the item is called
or two hours after the start of this meeting.
This meeting was called to order at 342,
excuse me, 3.32.
So your last opportunity to turn in a speaker's card
will be at 5.32 p.m.
If you're looking to turn in an online speaker,
that time has, excuse me, online speaker card,
that time has expired as they were due 24 hours
before the start of that meeting.
So again, if you're looking to speak on any item,
please submit your speaker's card as soon as possible
before the item is called,
or two hours from the start of this meeting,
that would be at 542 PM as this meeting was called
to order at 342 PM.
On roll, Council Member Brown.
Present.
Council Member Fyfe.
Present.
Council Member Gallo.
Present.
Council Member Houston.
Here.
Council Member Ramachandran.
Present.
Council Member Unger.
Here.
Council Member Wong.
Present.
And Chair Jenkins.
Present.
Showing eight members present.
Do you have any announcements?
Yes, Council Member Ramachandran,
how are you participating today?
And is your camera on and do you have anyone
in the room over the age of 18?
Nope, no one in the room at all,
participating under AB 2449.
Thank you so much.
Also, because of potential quorum issues,
speaker time will be cut to one minute, thank you.
Thank you, going to item three,
modifications to the agenda and procedural items.
Are there any modifications to this agenda?
Yes, 6.1 and 6.2 continue to the next meeting
on non-consent, and 5.2 will go before 5.1.
Strong Mayor item 5.2 will go before 5.1.
So I'll entertain a motion to continue 6.1 and 6.2,
the GATT items, and the public still will have
an opportunity to speak on those items
you did sign up for a speaker card on the GAT items. On the motion to continue
item six point one and six point two to your next meeting which I believe is
July 7th and I believe that was a motion by Councilmember Brown and
Councilmember Gallo? Councilmember Brown? Aye. Councilmember Fyfe? Aye. Councilmember Gallo? Aye. Councilmember
Houston? Aye. Councilmember Ramachandran? Aye. Councilmember Unger? Aye. Councilmember Wong?
I and chair Jenkins, aye motion passes with a vote of 8 I so noting items 6.1 and 6.2 the GAD items are continued
to July 7th and noting that item 5.1 will be taken before item 5.2
Now the way around 5.2 will be taken before 5.2 will be taken before 5.1
Moving on to item 4.1
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion. I'm sorry. We need a motion to open the public hearing
Actually, can we take five point two before four point one?
So starting the agenda with item five point one five point two five point two
Then four point one then the right. Yep, is the mayor here?
taking item five point two first
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
And power the council to confirm the appointments of the directors of finance who in resources public works and transportation
And power the council to create an independent budget and legislative analyst office to provide the council fiscal and policy analysis
that is objective and non-partisan, affirm council members' right to request information
and relay constituent concerns, and city officials' duty to respond promptly, empower the council
to hold legislative hearings and issue subpoenas, create a mayoral veto with a line-item budget
veto and a council power to override any veto, require council members to work full-time
and not engage in outside employment, empower the public ethics commission to align the
the mayor and council members salaries with those comparable full-time city officials
require the publication of ordinances within 15 days of passage and direct the city clerk
to take actions necessary under law to submit this measure to the voters at the election
and making the appropriate CEQA findings.
We have 33 speakers on this item.
Madam Mayor.
Thank you very much.
First of all, Council President Jenkins, members of the Oakland City Council, also to the working
group SPUR, the League of Women Voters, of course my staff, Preston, Mia, and my entire
team.
Thank you all, especially our residents, who have been with us every step of this process.
Let me thank everyone, and I mean everyone, that has put in hundreds of hours to develop
this comprehensive report, especially, again, the League of Women Voters, SPUR, and our
working group.
I want to thank them for this measure.
To the council members that have been partners in this work, and many of you have been, I
just want to thank you all for working on some amendments with my office, and quite
frankly about 90 percent of them have been incorporated into this reform.
Now let me just be clear with you council members and the public, this measure is not
about me and it's not about any of us in this chamber.
It's about whether the people of Oakland get to decide the future of their own government.
That's all we're being asked to do, to trust our residents with that choice.
More than 750 Oaklanders participated through 14 community sessions in every single council
district, there were surveys, workshops and interviews. The League of Women Voters and
SPUR co-facilitated more than 60 conversations with current and former city leaders, governance
experts and officials from peer cities. Every step was documented, it was public, it was
transparent. All of the research, the comparative analysis and community input were published
and remain available for anyone to review.
And so for those who have spent years
in community engagement in Oakland,
this was by far and by any fair standard
the most comprehensive charter reform process
in our city's history.
The working group's conclusion was clear
and we narrowed this very narrowly
because it's not a full charter reform effort.
This was very narrowly directed and, and, uh,
framework was put within the context of governance, transparency,
accountability, and our financial systems.
And so the working groups conclusion was very clear.
Oakland's current system too often makes it impossible for residents to know who
is responsible when things go wrong.
Authority is divided across the mayor of the council and city administrator in
ways that diffuse accountability without securing the benefits of either governance model.
When services fall short, residents tell me time and time again, they don't know who to
hold accountable.
Is it the mayor?
Is it the council?
Is it the city administrator?
When legislation comes before you, many residents ask me, who drafted the legislation?
Is it the mayor?
Is it the council members?
the city administration, who drafted the legislation. Too often there's just no
clear answer and that's a structural problem. It's a structural problem that
requires structural solutions. So this reform creates clear lines of
responsibility so residents know exactly who to call, who to hold accountable, and
who can do what to help them make their lives better in our city. We see the
consequences of unclear accountability every day just yesterday they alameda
county civil grand jury examined Oakland's response to illegal dumping
one of the issues that residents raised to me most often and to our council
members the grand jury recognized that the city's effort to address the problem
was a priority of course while noting that Oakland's current weak mayor system
limits the mayor's authority over city departments
and day to day operations.
Even as Oakland spends millions of dollars each year
responding to illegal dumping, residents
still want to know who is responsible for solving
the problem.
Clear lines of authority make clear lines
of accountability possible.
Let me be equally clear about what it does not do.
It does not eliminate checks and balances.
It does not weaken oversight.
And it does not take a single power away from this council.
You retain full authority to pass laws, set policies,
serve constituents, amend and approve the budget,
new powers to confirm appointments,
and to represent your districts.
Some have raised questions about the role
of executive authority given to Oakland's recent history.
Now let me just be direct.
What happened under the prior administration
occurred under our current hybrid system.
One where lines of authority were already blurred.
The accountability that ultimately materialized
came from our democratic institutions,
the voters, the city auditor, the public ethics commission,
and existing ethics and transparency laws.
Those systems worked because responsibility was identified.
It could be held to account.
This new system makes it clear who has responsibility,
and those lines are not blurred.
This reform does not remove those safeguards.
It adds clarity, clarity so that when problems arise,
it's easier, not harder, to know where responsibility lies.
And again, those oversight tools are only strengthened,
but we also are adding new powers as well.
I also want to speak very plainly to a distinction
that matters for good governance,
the difference between oversight and preapproval.
When we require legislative confirmation
before the executive branch can act on a personnel matter,
especially in personnel matters involving misconduct,
fraud, or a situation requiring immediate attention,
we are not strengthening accountability.
We're creating delay at precisely the moment
When decisiveness is most critical,
a process requiring public deliberation, agenda notice,
and multiple votes before the American Act
just does not slow things down.
It can compromise active investigations,
open the city to lawsuits, and expose victims and witnesses
to risks.
The reform provides the council with robust tools,
such as subpoena authority, formal oversight hearings,
budget powers and resolutions of no confidence.
Those tools are real and meaningful.
They allow this council to investigate, question,
push back and put its position formally on the record
without tying the executive hands in a crisis.
That's the right balance.
Similarly, when we add procedural conditions
on executive powers that are already addressed
elsewhere in the charter, we risk creating
not stronger governance, but more confusing government.
That's not accountability.
It reintroduces exactly the kind of ambiguity
that this reform was designed to solve, what we have now.
We don't want another hybrid form of government.
The residents don't want that.
And that's what we have right now.
On council compensation, it's been reported
that the council will receive 125% salary increase.
And let me just tell you, that is not accurate.
This measure does not give the mayor control over salaries.
It does not allow the city council to set its own pay.
Instead, it creates an independent, transparent process
through the Public Ethics Commission
to review compensation for all city elected officials
based on peer crisis and objective criteria,
and makes it consistent with what the Ethics Commission
already engages in.
The intent is also about equity.
We are a working-class city.
We want working-class Oaklanders,
people like some of you, who can't subsidize public service
with outside income or through their pensions or retirement,
to be able to just serve on our council.
So equity is a big issue here in Oakland.
And also, there's been some misinformation about the veto.
As I've mentioned previously, I also want to be clear that this proposal does not simply
concentrate power without checks.
It preserves a strong check on the mayor through a six-vote override of any veto.
The working group spent months studying these tradeoffs.
They examined Oakland's own history, our governance model across California and cities
nationwide.
They look closely at both strong mayor cities
and council manager cities.
While they acknowledge the council manager systems
have strengths and work well in some places,
they ultimately concluded that Oakland's current challenges
and Oakland's residents' expectations
that someone be accountable for results
are best addressed by these reforms.
It was for a system where executive authority is clear,
legislative authority is protected and clear,
And also, the delivery of core constituent services
would be better delivered, much better than now,
would be delivered in efficient and effective ways.
And the Section 218, I've received many suggestions
from council members, which again have been included
in this reform, including the repeal of the majority
of Section 218, and also making sure
that the misdemeanor provision is taken out.
That's a huge step in making sure that the council can better deliver the services to
their constituents.
The working groups meant months doing research because of how important this work is.
The charter is the governance document of our city, and the last thing we want is a
charter measure that includes amendments that will blur the lines of authority.
Reasonable people can disagree about specific provisions.
should unite us though is that Oakland residents deserve the opportunity to weigh in on the
charter reform working groups legislation. The question before you is not whether every
member of the council agrees with every line. It's whether the people of Oakland should
have the chance to evaluate this proposal and make their own decisions at the ballot
box. And I want to be candid about what this vote represents and I'm respectfully asking
the council to not preserve the status quo at its core.
This is about whether Oakland residents should have the opportunity to decide if they want
a system with clearer lines of responsibility and greater accountability.
Quite frankly, I trust the voters of Oakland to weigh the facts, to consider the arguments,
and make the decision for themselves, allowing voters to make their choice.
That's how democracy is supposed to work.
So let's at least let the voters make an informed decision.
Let's trust them with that responsibility.
Again, that's what democracy asks of us today.
And so thank you again for giving me a chance
to be with you.
Thank you, Mayor.
Do any of the council members who have amendments
want to introduce your amendments
before we go to the public speakers?
Yeah, included within this resolution,
or excuse me, this charter amendment,
is just the amendments that I had discussed
last time we discussed this item,
which is in essence that in order to increase
more transparency that we actually add
a council public vetting process
for a number of department heads
that are included in your packet.
So that is the extent of this provision.
I'll talk more about it after the public comment.
Thank you council member.
Council member Houston.
Yes, and I'm thank you through the chair
and I had a couple of amendments
that I sent to the city attorney.
Amendment one under article
to the council section 207.
The city council shall confirm the mayor's appointments
of the role of the city administrator
by a minimum of five votes.
the city of ministrater.
I think the mayor's action to remove our reprimand
the city of ministrater is subject to confirmation
by the city council of a minimum of five votes.
And the reason why I put that in there, President,
is because the mayor actually sends a recommendation
for the city administrator, and we approve it.
the city administrator that's number one and I know my my city attorney's gonna have something to say about that one I'm amendment to article to the mayor section three oh five.
except the order to veto any item I feel that is unfair it's just my opinion my
reality that if this council right here makes a decision to give Oakland or
use some money or you know just we make a decision if you voted down I'm good
with it. I'm good. If you voted up, I don't think anyone should veto anything we put on
the table. That's our, that's our duty. I remember when I first ran for council it
says city council duties. I see five bullet points here and the one that
really caught my attention was number one says we vote on ordinances and
resolutions so if I put something on the floor and you guys approve it I expect
it to stay that way not somebody that I'm not talking about this mayor I'm
talking about any mayor to veto something that we put on the ground or
on here so let me finish this one up accept that in order to a veto any item
the mayor must personally and I made adjustments on this personally attend
all of the discussion of said item in the meeting where the council votes to
adopt an item including both first and second reading of the ordinance for
purposes of this section the mayor attend may be remote so long as the
mayor's remote attendance meets the same Brown Act requirements that apply to the
council members so I'm making a I don't want the veto but this is what I would
accept for my amendments but my real one is that city administrator we should be
able to and you want to come up Council I mean my city attorney and ask me why I
can't do that because in it says among other things and I believe that falls
among other things. Thank you. Ryan Richardson, City Attorney through the
chair. So to Councilmember Houston, Councilmember Houston introduced three
amendments, one of which our office was able to sign off on, the other two of
which were unable to sign off on. The amendment that we're able to sign off on
has to do with requiring the mayor to attend meetings or to attend items that
that he or she may veto so the idea is as a prerequisite to vetoing any
resolution ordinance the mayor would have to have been in attendance at the
meeting or meetings where that resolution ordinance was adopted. That
is some change that we were able to sign off on it is within the scope of the
title of what we noticed the public is on the table. The other amendments having
to do with requiring the mayor to get approval from the City Council before
for removing or reprimanding the city administrator.
Unfortunately, they're outside of the scope of what the public has been noticed in the
title.
We, to Councilmember Houston's point, the title doesn't list every single change that's
in the proposed resolution, but it does list every single major change that's in the resolution.
That's why that title is so long.
The title does not put the public on notice that one of the things that could be on the
and we do have to make sure
that we don't need to remove
a table in this resolution is.
Record would be to require the
mayor to get.
Council approval for moving the
city administrator that's.
What's on the table is
essentially a strong mayor
proposal and that is a hall mark
of a council manager.
Form of government.
So to the chair when I hear when
I read among other things I
feel that that could fall in
there.
Here's one other thing I like to
share.
I just heard rumor that
Unger, Council Member Unger, and Council Member Rahmachad,
Chodra Jadimi, was bringing something forward
to bring those both to the public to vote on,
which was strong mayor, and the other one was what?
Strong council, strong manager.
And I heard it was coming, but now I heard it's not there.
I think that is the Democratic way,
to allow the public, the public's not stupid,
they're watching this very closely.
And I think the public to be able to choose
to one that they want,
not just one that's put on the ballot.
So where is that at, and if can we bring that forward,
and is there enough time to bring both
for the public to choose, right?
Because I feel that the public should be able to choose
they understand the difference because we know why we're in this what did she
what did we call it a hybrid mayor why because Jerry Brown didn't want to sit
on the council we know that we know this come on so I talked the truth so here's
what I like to know since I didn't want to break the brown act I'm always
the council member. And I think
Specifically it has to be heard at two council meetings and those council meetings have to be at least 10 days apart
That's in the charter
After that once a resolute once the council passes a resolution to say we want to put this charter amendment on the ballot
The council has to adopt an ordinance that that list all of the offices and all of the ballot measure that the city wants
The county to put on the ballot. It's basically the city's instructions to the county of what we want our section of the ballot to look like
that has to be done by ordinance and that takes two readings those readings have to be at least five days apart as
Of today the council has two regular meetings left before the deadline for our office and the clerk's office to transmit all those materials
To the county so dance answer your question councilmember
Houston yes, there is enough time technically, but in order for the council to introduce a new charter amendment
Have two readings of that amendment and then passed the ordinance from two readings the council would have to add several
Special meetings to its its agenda before the end of July. So through the chair a
special meeting
Meeting that the president can make
And I think it was already vetted through the city attorney's office. Is that right council member ugher?
So I did work on a strong council manager
Measure with the city attorney's office
We did not finish that work because it became clear to me that we had reached a point where there was not enough support
On the council to get there. So that measure is incomplete. I do favor a strong council manager system
I also don't believe that it's a good idea to have two
Competing ballot measures on the ballot at the same time
I think the the math of that just doesn't work if you have a hundred people in the electorate and 49 vote for one system
49 vote for the other system and to don't vote or vote no on both you end up with nothing
I think that if we are if this council decides to put strong
Mayor forward the public should have the opportunity to do a clear up or down vote on strong mayor on one system alone
I I don't I don't favor putting two
competing ballot measures on the same ballot
Councilmember Houston is me. I respond very quickly. Yes, you may. Let me just clarify something
The League of Women Voters and SPUR conducted a very thorough democratic process.
There was no predetermined conclusion.
They engaged with over 750 people.
This was one of the largest community engagement efforts ever as it relates to charter.
And this was the recommendation out of this democratic process.
Had it been another recommendation, that would be the recommendation that the SPUR and the
group and the engagement process would have brought forward, but this is the one that
was brought forward.
And so this is the one that we're asking for the vote so that the residents and the voters
can vote this up or down because the process was very, it was transparent, it was engaging.
People had many, many questions about both and other forms of governance and this was
the conclusion.
to be able to follow those
rules and so I would encourage
you to look at this very
carefully because the status
quo is just untenable thank you
again.
Thank you to the chair.
So I want to make sure that the
city attorney address what I
was saying so you saying that
my amendment number one among
other things it doesn't fall in
to be able to hire and fire the city administrator
because that's huge.
That's huge for us to be able to do that as a body.
And I don't want no veto.
Through the chair, I agree that it is huge
and that is precisely why the public would have been put
on notice that that type of proposal would be on the table
this evening and it's not in the title.
So among other things is for more technical edits
they're not as big.
I want to hear the audience, thanks.
Thank you, Council Member Fife.
I wanted to know if Council Member Houston
would require a second for the veto amendment
that was approved by the city attorney's office.
When this body is ready to make a motion,
it can debate the amendments that are in the packet
or other amendments that are on the floor,
and yes, any motion would require a second
and then a full vote.
And I also wanted to get clarity on how there would be,
through the chair to Council Member Unger,
how would you come to a conclusion
about the votes being necessary
for a strong council, city manager form of government?
How would you come to that conclusion?
I just think if we have two competing ballot measures
on there, the odds of both of them losing are much higher.
I understand, but you said you came to the conclusion
that there was not a desire for this body
to pass or to put something forward for a strong
city council manager.
The folks that I had within my Brown Act bubble
who I thought were with me were no longer with me.
Okay.
Changed their minds.
Understood.
And I just wanted to say before we go to the public speakers,
I, as I stated in our previous council meeting.
Order in the chambers.
As I stated in our previous council meeting on this topic,
I support the voters of Oakland being able to determine
what, if they want to vote up or down, a strong mayor model.
I'm not gonna stand in the way of that democratic process.
I believe there are some weaknesses here
that are based on misinformation
and the very real reality that voters in Oakland
feel let down by city government, by their local government.
Some of those reasons are valid, and some of them are not.
But the reality is what's working, the status quo,
I mean, the status quo is not working, period.
We know that.
And I believe that this particular measure,
as it's drafted, will be weaponized against the mayor
as she's running for her reelection.
I just have to say that publicly.
Because I don't think it's valid,
but I believe that it will happen.
And it has to be made very clear what this measure does
and does not do, what it will and will not do.
To say that it will not impact the ways
that this council engages when it comes to our powers
is largely true, but by allowing a mayor to veto a budget
or other legislation and requiring a super majority
to override that is a bit of a usurpation
of this body's powers.
That's the reality.
But I will not, again, stand in the way
of allowing the voters to choose
and based on that vote in November,
I think this body needs to be prepared
if it doesn't go the way that my base,
My base literally has asked me not to support this.
And I have to go against the people who put me in office
to move this forward.
And I've made that commitment to do that.
Because I believe that the voters have a right to decide
whether they want a strong mayor or not.
And it stands to reason that with the other jurisdictions
surrounding Oakland, that a strong mayor model
may be what we need in this particular era.
I don't know.
The voters will choose.
if they choose no, then this body needs to be prepared
to come with the legislation that you say
your allies or your Brown acted group stepped away from
to put another model in front of the voters
because again, what we have does not work
and we need a better system.
And I just wanted to say that, but in respect for the mayor
and all of the work of SPUR and the League of Women Voters
and everyone who, and myself, wonderful presentations
in District 3 about this particular ballot measure.
I'm just concerned about who comes after Barbara Lee.
Who comes after Barbara Lee?
We're seeing massive changes to billionaires
being able to buy elections and to put people in office
that they want to run.
I had a tech billionaire who put a bunch of money against me
in my race say, I'm going to continue
to do this in perpetuity because I believe,
I deserve to set the table, not to have a seat at the table,
but to create it.
So let's be clear about what's happening in Oakland.
And this is not about our current mayor
because I have so much respect for you.
And I appreciate everything that you've done
in terms of the changes that you've brought
to the city of Oakland.
I'm concerned about what comes next.
Thank you.
And through the chair.
And through the chair.
Before Council Member Houston begins, if I could,
And we do have overflow seating in here in room one.
We cannot find a seat, you can go down to the first floor.
You will have plenty of opportunity to come back to speak
if you are speaking to the council.
Although I do see some empty seats in here,
because you are not supposed to stand on the back wall,
as it is a fire hazard, and there are still seats
in the chamber, so please find a seat.
Council Member Houston, the mayor,
and then we're gonna go to public comment.
Yeah, we will.
So, and through the Chair,
I'm gonna echo my Council Member Fife.
This has nothing to do with my mayor and I'm gonna say my mayor, Barbara Lee, up 10 toes down. I'm worried about after, after my mayor, right? And who's going to come after me, after you, Council Member Fife, after you, Council Member Brown, after you, President Jenkins, Wang and Uggar. So I yield the floor.
to be able to do that. But Thank
you very much. Thank you very
much councilmember five and
councilmember Houston but let
me clarify just a couple points
one is with regard to the veto
it's only a line item veto for
the budget. So if the fiscal.
Condition of the city says that
we can't afford. Ten dollars
for. X Y and Z. because I have
argument that this line item, that $10, should be placed elsewhere given the budget kind
of scenarios and the comprehensive view of the budget. So it's not vetoing the entire
budget, it's a line item. And with regard to the structural change, this is a structural
change that regardless of who is mayor, the accountability systems, and I hope you read
this really carefully because the accountability systems of checks and balances are much much
stronger than what they are now regardless of who comes after myself and it's so it's
not based on anybody it's not based on any council member but it's based on on the foundation
of the city to make sure that the chaos and the confusion is is is minimized in terms
of good governance in terms of accountability and delivering, of course, services. So thank
you again.
I appreciate that response, Madam Mayor, and that's exactly what I was thinking about in
terms of a line item budget because of tech interests and business interests and chambers
of commerce come together to say they want to veto what the council says about, say,
the police budget, with the police already being
the highest expenditure that we have
in our general purpose fund.
If there's a line item veto where the council says,
well, we wanna move some of these funds into community
or services and a mayor after you is like,
well, no, I think we need to do this.
I think that could have a massive impact.
And if I'm wrong-
And six members of the council, council members,
would be able to-
The mayor, they're gonna buy the council.
I hear you, I hear you.
Again, I'm not, as you stated in your earlier comments,
reasonable people can disagree.
I see the trajectory of the city.
I've seen its impact on my district.
I've been organizing in the streets of Oakland.
I see a lot of folks I've been organizing with
for the last three decades.
And I've seen the changes for the good and the bad.
And again, I'm not gonna hold up this legislation.
I'm going to vote to support it moving in front of the voters.
And again, we will have to regroup,
or may or may not based on the outcomes in November.
That's all I have to say.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Let's go to the public comment.
As a Congressman, please approach the podium in any order.
If you are participating via Zoom, please raise your hand
so I can easily identify you.
Ryan Mizik, Karan Talak, Corey Cook,
Helen Hutchinson, Blair Beekman, Kevin Dally,
Mr. Hazzard, Gail Wallace, Mrs. Asada Olabala,
Steven Falk, Mindy Petunek, Jerro Petunek,
Nancy Falk, James Murphy, Stephen David,
I'm sorry, Stephen David Kahn,
Nicole Netich, Allende, Mark Sawicki,
Daniel Motley, Keith Brown, Isaiah Tony,
Angelius Clover, Rehman Langford, Sean Elleburn,
sorry if I said that incorrectly,
Ben Gould, Deborah Scheffler, Cynthia O'Malley,
Sujata Sorostova, Semio Remzi,
Buffalo Sojourn, Meg McAdam, Lynette Diaz,
Let me know if you have time
seated to you so we can give
you the appropriate amount of
time before you speak.
And if you do have seated time,
the person must be present in
chambers or on Zoom.
And again, this is for item 5.2.
Good afternoon, council members.
I'm Keith Brown, resident of
District 5, and here today
representing the board of
and here today representing the voices of over 45,000 union households in Oakland
under the Alameda Labor Council who keep this city running every day and when our
services are inconsistent it's the working people, our teachers, our grocery
workers, our transit operators who pay the price. This charter reform proposal
we do not know is about politics
it's about establishing clear
executive leadership so that the
person we elect has the
authority to deliver results and
the accountability if they do not.
Workers and residents alike
benefit from a governance
structure that establishes clear
executive leadership.
Working families should not have
to navigate through a maze of.
I just don't want to let you
know what time is up unless you
have time seated to you.
People have a sister.
Good afternoon council president
and council members.
My name is Danielle motley
Lewis and the.
The president of the Oakland
Berkeley chapter.
But what has already submitted
our formal letter of support on
behalf of this measure so I will
keep my comments brief.
Too often when something goes
wrong as already stated we never
And I want to give you the
glee of women's rights and
strategy that allows women to
build an open structure.
And allows Oakland voters to
decide whether this is the
direction they want to travel.
Tonight I'm simply asking that
you trust in the community
engagement process that's been
put before us.
And allow Oakland voters to
place to vote when you place
this measure.
On the ballot.
Let them decide thank you.
Hello my name is Cynthia O'Malley
Thank you.
Hello.
I'm Deborah Scheffler.
I'm also from the League of Women Voters and I cede my time to Gail Wallace.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Gail Wallace on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Oakland.
This is the moment when we tend to lose the forest for the trees.
I want to remind us that there have been distinct and independent phases to this process and
the tasks and the players have differed at each stage.
the League has adhered to its position on governance that emphasizes the goals of a
responsive, effective, and transparent government. We have worked to facilitate the bringing
of one or more choices for Oakland. We want those choices to be complete and internally
coherent. In the first phase, the working group deliberated efficiently to analyze why
the Charter contributed to Oakland's dysfunction. We all know their conclusion, based on extensive
input was that the lines of authority and accountability have been blurred.
They for the first time gave Oakland a coherent public report about our history and when and
how the charter authorities were muddied.
They explained two prevailing models of municipal governance and they daylighted experiences
in different cities as well as the consensus of experts that either model could work if
well executed.
I want to underscore their advice, which was to do something, because the worst outcome
of this process would be to do nothing.
Since the working groups report in January, Mayor Lee and Council President Jenkins have
led a second phase.
They have produced legislation that clearly articulates one model.
It happens to be the model that research suggests is the one likely to function well in cities
like Oakland, where there are grave disparities, where there's a highly engaged civic culture,
where there are complex intergovernmental relationships to manage, and where a city
confronts significant fiscal challenges.
As we've heard, it would have been possible for others of you to also present legislation
for the alternative model.
That didn't happen.
Happily, it's not necessary because one clear ballot measure will clarify which model of
governance Oaklanders prefer. We are at the final phase where the process is in
your hands. Sometimes I liken this process to passing the baton in a relay
race. The working group members collectively were the lead runner. The
mayor and council president Jenkins took the baton and have produced solid
legislation. Now this is in your hands to confirm that this legislation clearly
articulates a choice for the voters, not necessarily that it's the model you
personally might have preferred. I would argue that your role is to safeguard the
integrity of the legislation and present that choice to the voters. The voters
should run the last lap here. Please refer this measure to the ballot. Good
afternoon my name is James Murphy and I'm a Oakland resident for over 30
years and I support this measure and this ballot and I make please the
recommendation to move this forward. I did have a little bit of a prepared
speech here but having listened to the mayor and one thing I wanted to bring up
is I trust this mayor. I earnestly trust her professionalism and their experience
and we should vote to move this forward one because of trust her. That structural
change needs to happen. If you don't move this forward, as I will continue to live
here probably for the next 30 years, we're gonna say what happened? City
Council voted for the status quo. Put it to the voters. I think that a lot of
people here have talked about how well thought out this was, how the community
was brought into the process, and it's not about the current mayor, it's about
building trades council and
second vice president of the
central labor council. But also
as a long term resident of
Oakland one thing we can all
agree on. Is the way we're
structured now is not working
so we need the change so you
need to be bold here. And make
a movement. The other thing too
is that this charter is the
people's charter the residents
of the county are going to be
on the way we're on the way we
are structured now is not
working so we need the change
so you need to be bold here.
And make a movement. The other
thing too is that this charter
it's not the mayor's charter it's not the council's charter it's not the sea administrators charter it is the people's charter and the working group process has been an extensive comprehensive inclusive and participatory process of which labor was a big part to come up with the recommendations and we strongly urge you.
you to support those recommendations there may be some changes that you may
need to make but you need to follow the spirit of a document that was crafted
with full participation so with that take action be bold and we'd like you to
support the recommendations of the working group. Thank you. I'm Sujata
Shrivastava from SPUR. I'm gonna cede my time to my colleague Nicole Netich.
Good afternoon my name is Nicole Netich and I'm here today representing SPUR.
We've had the great honor of helping co-facilitate the mayor's working group over the last year,
and we urge you today to move this measure to the ballot and let voters decide.
As you've heard, so many Oaklanders took part in this process because they love this
city, they want better for the city, and they want a city that is designed to work.
Everyone that we talked to agreed that Oakland's current charter is not working.
It blends a council manager form with a strong mayor form of government without securing
the benefits of either of them.
We have a mayor that the people vote for to lead our city but that doesn't have a vote
on council and lacks veto power that they would have in a strong mayor city, a power
that ensures that the CEO of a city can weigh in on important policy decisions that impact
the operations of the city.
We have a council who takes the majority of constituent complaints but that doesn't have
a way to hold the administration accountable.
And we have an unelected city administrator who holds all of the responsibility currently
for executing laws and policies,
but who's unaccountable to the people of Oakland
and who takes conflicting directions
from the mayor and the council.
The result, a system where everyone
is pointing fingers at one another and we need a change.
This was the first recommendation of the working group,
do something.
The working group ultimately recommended
the strong mayor structure because it's most aligned
with Oakland's specific needs.
It's highly engaged residents,
it's need for strong citywide perspective
and it's need for visible, accountable leadership.
The mayor's office did the hard work
of picking these recommendations up,
working with you all on reasonable amendments
that preserve the integrity of the recommendations
and moving this process forward.
Well, you could have brought other legislation forward,
you didn't, and so we please ask you right now
to support the incredible momentum and work
that went into this and move this to the ballot
for voters to decide the next step.
Thank you.
thank you and to the security guards
one in one out there has to be a seat for some
if we're if more people are coming in please make sure there's a seat for them
if not please direct them to the overflow room
one in one out
my name is kori cook
uh... there's no perfect form of government
every institutional design involves trade-offs
the working group understood this
we began the process with different views different perspectives in different
preferences
and yet we ended it with your humanity series of recommendations
Our recommendations are unanimous because we concluded that Oakland's greatest challenge
is a system that fragments authority, blurs responsibility, and weakens accountability.
If we had concluded that a city manager council system would be better, we would have adopted
that, and I would be here today recommending that.
Instead, we concluded that Oakland would be best served by a balanced system, and with
the chief executive is elected by and directly accountable to the voters, and why the council
strengthened as a co-equal legislative branch with robust oversight
responsibilities. I recognize this may not be everyone's first choice but I
hope that you'll ask that yourselves the same question that we asked ourselves
on the Commission which is not whether this proposal is perfect but whether or
not it is substantially better than where we are today. We unanimously
concluded that it is and we ask that you please allow the voters to make their
determination. Mindy Pachnuk, candidate for Oakland Mayor, and the buck has to stop
You're putting through a strong
mayor is putting through another
system that does not work.
And that's not a solution.
And Ken Houston to you,
council member Houston, you know,
I think that you all have an
ability now to actually go and
get your mayor on the city
council.
That's your solution.
You know, I think that you all
have an ability now to actually
go and get your mayor on this
city council.
That's your solution.
You need to have your mayor functioning with you on a daily basis when you're meeting in dialogue in
Discussion and if you don't have that Oakland will go down the hill
So right now I am calling God before you do not pass this strong mayor
This cannot go on the ballot and let's fight for what will work and have a city
That's actually going to be a beautiful great Oakland
My name is Meg McAdam. I'm an Oakland resident small business owner and the founder of human and pet initiative an Oakland based nonprofit
I support charter reform. I believe strongly in civic engagement, which is why I attended the community meeting
I assumed that I would support the strong mayor system, but I came away believing a council manager system would be better for Oakland
Others may recently disagree, but that's the point merely I hear you saying that this measure
go to the ballot so that Oakland residents can't be heard but there's a
difference between public engagement and public selection if Oakland residents
are capable of deciding who should be married then why are we not capable of
deciding which form of government we want we lived with the current structure
for 22 years most of us agree it doesn't work I applaud the mayor for starting
this initiative but because we've also waited 22 years to have this
conversation we need to adopt the structure that will shape the city of
Oakland for the next 20 years or more. Why aren't voters being given the
opportunity to make that choice? I don't want thank you ma'am your time is up.
Good afternoon. Lynette Diaz I'm an Oakland I've been an Oakland resident
for 25 plus years I'm also a downtown business owner for over 20 years. The
recommendations before the council are the results of a thorough objective
community driven process. They reflect extensive community engagement not a top
agenda by the mayor. The working groups charge was to simply assess and make
recommendations about how Oakland's government structure could better serve
its residents all and that is what they did and those recommendations I was
modified by the mayor in consultation with many of the council members are
what are before you tonight and are this afternoon and they will provide the
citizens of Oakland a balanced separation of powers, clear executive
authority that increases accountability making misconduct more visible and
attributable a council that maintains full legislative and budgetary powers
and gains power to override any veto with a supermajority thank you ma'am
your time is up good afternoon council members my name is Ben Gould and I'm
speaking as an individual I encourage you to vote no on both this ballot
measure and on the amendments a strong mayor system only works if the mayor is
given a dangerous level of power to implement their agenda.
They must stand or fall on their own.
These amendments would risk yet another
dysfunctional government.
I am sympathetic to the concerns that these amendments
are trying to address, which is why I recommend you
work towards a council manager form of government.
You had no say in who was appointed to the working group
and you are not required to put forward just any ballot
measure that comes across your desk.
That's what the signature initiative process is for.
Our democratic process, your voters,
require you to use your judgment and expertise
to represent and advocate for the best interest
of your community.
In November, the voters will not see your concerns
or hesitations here on the dais.
They will see that council voted in support
and they will trust their elected officials.
If you do not think this proposal is in the best interest
of your community, you should vote now.
Thank you.
Good afternoon council members,
Mark Sawicki, resident of District One.
Thank you to the three council members who voted no
on this at the last meeting,
and especially for council member Unger
for trying to bring forward the council manager form.
be very interested in hearing from the four council members who expressed reservations but still
voted no what do you have against the council manager form of government why not put a competing
measure on the ballot um if if you have two measures on the ballot whichever one gets the
most votes as long as they're both the majority is the one that you move forward with it's very
simple let the voters decide thank you. Hi council member um Jenkins and to the rest of the council
the city council members I'm
that was something that started with the question how can we deliver for the residents of Oakland the kinds of results that they deserve.
Folks before me have mentioned the fact that we have worked with a Frankenstein version of city government for a while now that has not delivered results.
And I think that while the charter work and reform work is not a panacea or a silver bullet, it represents progress.
And I think that most of all, I think the voters
deserve the opportunity to weigh in on this.
So I respectfully urge your support.
Thank you.
Greetings, Buffalo Soldier in here.
Point of information, this thing about seating time,
do you seat all your time?
Can you seat half the time?
How does that go?
You have a new operating system, the Brown Act.
How does that go?
We'll answer after you're done.
We'll answer after you're done.
Go ahead and get all your time,
and then I'll have the parliamentarian answer.
other words I can't see my order in the chambers through the chair I have on
your card written mr. Solzhen that you're seeding to mr. Hazard is that
correct Kevin dally if the council does put this initiative on the ballot I'd
like to give one last look yet yet override of veto especially the budget
For a non-budgetary veto, the city clerk is ordered to put the override of the veto at
the next council meeting no matter what.
For a budgetary override, there is no such order and there's only seven days to override
whether or not there is a council meeting on the agenda.
I think there should be a similar rule for budgetary override to have an automatic veto.
Sorry, automatic override going on the next council meeting.
I still prefer the council manager, but I reluctantly think strong mayor is better than
the current system, which is a strong administrator.
Item 5.1, parking reorg on the agenda soon is an example.
Hello, Council members, my name is Steve Cohen.
I'm a long-term resident of Oakland
and homeowner in District 1,
and you are our voice in government,
and you are, we are your constituents,
so I have received a letter from the working group
saying there was a Q and A at the end of the message,
and it said, question, does the council lose
any of its current powers?
And the answer was no.
The proposal does not reduce any of the council's
existing formal powers and instead expands their powers.
So with a two-thirds majority,
you can override a mayoral veto.
But right now, there is no mayoral veto.
So my concern is will we lose our influence
if this measure passes?
And I ask you to vote against it.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Nancy Falk and I'm a proud Oaklander.
I just need to reiterate that I'm deeply disappointed
that Oaklanders will not have the opportunity
to consider the proven best practice
in municipal management for high performing cities
should this move forward.
We missed the opportunity
to bring the highest performing option,
which is the council manager form
based on a number of external studies
when leaders opted not to consider
and bring forward the council manager system,
which I strongly prefer.
So I wish you well.
I'm gonna continue to be a proud Oaklander,
and I'm hoping we can improve the governance system
and bring the highest performing best practice to Oaklanders.
Members of the city council, greetings.
My name is Stephen Falk.
I'm the co-founder of the Oakland Charter Reform Project.
In California, there are 483 cities,
and five of them use a strong mayor system.
Every other one uses a council manager system.
And that is for a reason.
Over the last 20 years, not a single city
has successfully changed from a council manager form
to a strong mayor, and that's for a reason.
to have tried. San Jose tried in 2014 and in 2020. Sacramento tried in 2014 and 2020
and were unsuccessful. And those votes were 56 to 45, which is the same vote that Measure
E just got recently. San Jose tried in 2020 on a proposal from Mayor Sam Liccardo, but
there was so much pushback from the public
about concern of concentration of power
that the council and the mayor decide.
Good evening, Council President Jenkins,
members of the Oakland City Council.
My name is Isaiah Tony.
I'm an organizer with Faith in Action East Bay,
speaking in support of the current proposal before you
and bringing it to the voters in November
with whatever amendments you see fit
to approve this evening.
Just wanted to ask folks to keep in mind
that while the council manager system certainly has merits,
there are shortcomings as well.
I think we all remember a number of scandals
that happened in Oakland under the council manager system,
and especially this year, we're eager to make sure
that we don't have any new consent decrees coming up.
The other thing I wanted to mention is that
If you want to have a process for the public
to give more input on a council manager system,
we will have to have a community engagement process
for that system.
Who's gonna do that?
Are you gonna ask the task force to repeat their work,
create a new commission?
Is there staff for that?
Is there a budget for that?
Good evening, council members.
I am Barbara Lafitte Oluole.
I'm representing hundreds of leaders
from Faith in Action East Bay,
and I'm here because I love Oakland
and want a city government that works for its residents.
Today when something goes wrong,
it's often unclear who is responsible
or who has authority to fix it.
That lack of clarity frustrates residents
and makes it harder to hold leaders accountable.
This charter reform proposal addresses that problem
by creating clearer lines of responsibility
so Oaklanders know who is accountable
for delivering results.
It's important to be clear.
This proposal does not weaken the council
or take away its legislative authority.
It strengthens the power of the council.
The council would still pass laws, approve the budget,
provide oversight, and represent residents.
However, they will have stronger tools to now do that.
This measure simply clarifies executive responsibility
and strengthens accountability.
I urge you to honor the spirit
of the working group's recommendations
by placing this measure on the ballot
and allowing Oakland voters to decide what time.
Yes. My name is Gerald Petchenuk, the other Petchenuk.
And I would like to give you what I got in my left hand
and give you what I got in my right hand.
So you're gonna get two barrels.
First one, everyone who came up here and said,
I'm in the working group and I've been working hard on this
and we had transparency and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Forgot to mention who appointed them to the working group.
Barbara Lee, that's who appointed them,
decision to appoint a working group
instead of an official city advisory body.
A, that means they didn't have to have open meeting,
the Brown Act, the city council, the committee,
and the advisory bodies must post agendas up front.
That didn't happen, okay?
So that's all balderash.
Second, there's a pot at the end of the rainbow,
the charter could be changed,
so everyone's sitting up here and getting extra.
Thank you, Mr. Petunia, your time is up.
By pushing this proposal forward,
my name is Ayinde, I'm an island.
By pushing this proposal forward,
you further the distrust that is already present,
because I personally don't trust any of y'all,
but the bottom line is, if you create further distrust,
all the people who came up here
undermine the president system for the last 30 to 40 years they're now at the
point where they seize an opportunity or see an opportunity where they could
jump in and do something different because they've managed to undermine and
cause Oakland to be where it is now so now there's a need for a change so they
want the opportunity to have this so-called strong mayor who will further
the distrust in Oakland. I support a five Houston proposal for the ballot on
November 2nd. I didn't notice until I read the Oakland report but the the
problem is the process. So the process calls for, you don't have to be in
compliance with the Brown Act. So there was no public agenda with this
working group. There was no public deliberation, no minutes, no video. The Mayor picked the
working group. She picked the questions. Members were mostly her supporters. We had listening
sessions, but listening sessions are not the same as deliberation, opportunity to participate
in the deliberation, which the public didn't have. You have the opportunity to increase
substantially the salaries of the council members. But where is the fiscal impact study
that has to be done around that? You can't put anything on the ballot without a fiscal
impact study or report. Thank you Ms. Ollabala. Mr. Hazard I have you with time seated by
Mr. Sojourn and Mr. Ramey and I know they're both here so you have three minutes. How many?
minutes. This is a joke. The League of Women Voters and the other folks in 1998
they clamored because we had a reincarnation of Christ Jerry Brown.
That's why they voted for the strong mayor form of government. Now they come
up here and want to switch to the game. Councilmember Houston was correct. Put
two measures on the ballot, wait till the spring of next year. That's real
simple, let the voters if you're concerned about the voters, we want the
voters decide. With all due respect to the mayor, because she said this is not
about personality, this is about instruction. So, and the city attorney, we
We know the city attorney misleads you, because we'll be in court on June 25 on the ballot
measure last year, where he altered the text of Measure 8, which is the transaction and
use tax.
For 366 days, I've been fighting them.
Okay?
I put this document together after they did a demure on June 1.
On June 12th, I had this finished.
I did my homework, got it to the paralegal,
and we found it Friday.
Do not vote for this.
It's a canary down a rat hole.
And you can come up here with all these glorious deliveries,
but you're being misled.
And this is one of them.
if you're concerned about all due respect,
council member five of the voters voting for it,
then let's have that council member Houston said,
put two things on the ballot.
It's no right.
And we're talking about the negligence of this council.
The charter right now is clear.
But you don't follow through with what's in the charter.
And right now, if you look at what's proposed here,
You become caretakers, that's all you are.
Caretakers, your power has been stripped.
Read it.
Don't go for the okey-doke.
Do not vote for this.
And all of you who do, and you're up for reelection,
you're going to be called on the carpet, Jenkins,
Just like you did on Rule 29 when you and Ramachandra
after the mayor didn't vote for the tie.
That was legal.
I got that all written up, but I had
to deal with this one first, OK?
Because that's coming back door, the writ.
Because what you did was suspending the rules last
November 4 and December 16.
That was all illegal.
And the city attorney and the parliamentarian
should have told you that.
You ignore a guy or you always turn around and say,
well, the city attorney tells me the city attorney
be lying to you, OK?
I give you the law, and you don't want to look at it.
The charter is clear with regards to your responsibility.
You're not adhering to your responsibility.
You're negligent.
Constance, it's easier to take it under.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard, your time is up.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard.
Honorable council members, good afternoon.
My name is Sean Ellsberg and I have the privilege
of serving as the president and CEO
of the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Center, SPUR.
It has been our true honor to work with so many people
to get this proposal in front of you today.
I just want to uplift a couple of points.
what's been said has already been said,
I don't need to restate too much.
Let's give the voters a chance.
Let's give the voters an opportunity to weigh in.
And I wanna uplift Gail's comments earlier.
I love the analogy of passing the baton
and running the relay race.
We're now at that stage where we get to continue
the element of civic education.
Continue the element of talking about
the city of Oakland's charter,
how we should be governed as a city.
That's what happens between now and November.
That has been the biggest benefit
of the outreach we have done so far.
the huge number of members of the public
that have learned how their government has operated
and how it could operate.
Let that process continue.
Bring this to the voters
and let's let the voters weigh in at the end.
Thank you very much.
Buenos dardes.
My name is Richard Fuentes.
I'm an executive board member with AFSCME Council 57.
I have members that work throughout the city of Oakland,
East Bay Regional Parks, the Oakland Museum,
OUSD, AC Transit, BART, just to name a few.
that we want to do to you
as a member of the working
group.
But I'm here today to really
urge you as a member of the
working group to please allow
the voters, the public to vote
on this proposal.
As a former city of Oakland
employee, I saw how difficult
it was to provide resources to
answer constituency calls
because we can't deliver
because we don't know who's in
charge.
We don't know who's in charge of
filling the pothole.
this allows an opportunity for the public to make a decision.
I urge you to please put this on the ballot.
As a small business owner, I urge you to allow the voters
to vote and happy pride.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Fuentes.
Moving to the Zoom speakers, starting with, again,
I will be calling the names only of those
who submitted a card for item 5.2,
starting with Helen Hutchinson.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Good afternoon.
My name is Helen Hutchison.
I'm a resident of District 3.
Oakland's current governance system is dysfunctional.
The proposal before you today is to adopt a standard,
strong mayor model of government.
Some people, including some council members,
prefer the other model,
the council manager form of government.
However, despite a lot of talk,
no one has produced the language
to make that a viable option for Oakland voters in November.
There are also calls for a new process,
one they would call more public than what has happened.
I'll point out that this kind of process,
a formal charter review commission,
is what brought us the current state of dysfunction.
The time now is to decide, do we do something
or do we do nothing and continue
in this current dysfunctional state of affairs?
Thank you.
Moving to the next speaker, Karan Talak.
Sorry if I said that incorrectly.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Good afternoon, my name is Karan Talak.
I'm the vice chair of the Public Ethics Commission.
I'll focus my remarks on two aspects
that are fairly small in the grand scheme,
but very important to the commission's work.
First, we welcome the opportunity through this proposal
to set the mayor and city council salaries
in the same manner as other elected officials.
However, that process and those factors
take considerable commission resources.
At a minimum, we would request that the proposal
start the setting of those salaries in 2028
to align with the city attorney and city auditor
so that it would efficiently use the commission's resources.
Second, the changes to section 218 stray far
from the commission's mandate of ethics and transparency
and don't really belong
in the commission's enforcement jurisdiction.
If they are to remain in the enforcement jurisdiction
of the commission and this proposal were to pass,
the commission would need additional resources
to set standards to meaningfully enforce those provisions.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment.
Blair Beekman, you are next.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comment.
Hi, Blair Beekman.
Good luck with this item.
I've spoken often, you know,
I'm hoping that we really want to work
for a good organization and good governance together
that that can be a guiding light
and however we're gonna talk about this issue
in the next few months.
I heard some few ideas about from the Strongman position
how this wants to be on the ballot that is interesting.
But I've described before being from San Diego,
we have an IBA system already and it isn't working.
We need to move, we're trying to find ways
to move past that because it isn't working.
And I would hate to think you guys are gonna do this system
and it doesn't work or it won't be sustainable.
I think it may work at first,
but over time, is it gonna be sustainable?
I think we need to trust what the council manager
hybrid system can offer, and that we can still practice
the strong mayor system within that.
And that shouldn't be feared.
I don't know what else to say.
Good luck that we work on this together for organization.
Thank you, Mr. Beekman.
Is Brian Misik in the chamber or on Zoom?
If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand.
Otherwise at this time, all names who have submitted
a card for this item have been called.
Thank you to everybody that came out to speak on this item.
we're gonna open up to council members.
Council Member Brown.
Yep, so grateful for all the community feedback.
I know that, at least for myself,
I've, I guess, set through the presentation
of these amendments maybe three or four times so far.
And I know that from the start,
I had a lot of apprehensions.
And kind of following that first discussion,
I had the opportunity to work closely
with the office of the mayor and their team
to try to include some amendments to section 218
and various other sections.
And so, as was stated by my other council member Unger,
I do not, I'm not interested in having
both of these items appear on the ballot.
and I think that in this moment we should move forward
with what was proposed and then also,
there's gonna be a true test of when we say
that there has been community engagement on this item,
we're gonna be able to see that, right?
And so, I'll make the motion to go ahead
and move the mayor's proposal as is at this time.
Thank you, second.
Councilmember Wall.
So, well, there's a motion on the floor,
but I do wanna explain the amendments
and the authority that it gives this council body
and why I do think that we should adopt
the amendments that I've put forth.
So, just in general, I've established already that,
sorry, excuse me, one sec.
I've already discussed, the last time we discussed this item,
why do you think that we need elected executive authority?
Because so many of the dysfunctions we experience
in the city are related to the implementation
and execution of our policies,
not the legislative issues that we have.
However, one thing that's really important to me
is to actually increase the transparency.
In our current processes, department heads
actually don't get any vetting before this legislative body.
The amendments that I've added change that.
And to be clear, I wanna thank the mayor and her team
because they had already incorporated a subset
of the department heads
to a formal council confirmation hearing.
So this was the head of finance, the head of HR,
as well as the departments charged with public works,
infrastructure, streets.
So that would, in the current day,
would be Department of Transportation
as well as the Department of Public Works.
However, I don't think it goes far enough.
And to be clear, this does not conflict
with a strong mayor proposal.
I did a peer review around 25 cities.
It is commonplace to have, essentially,
council vetting process when I reviewed about 25 cities.
So part of what I've added as an amendment to this
gives us the option, it is not a mandate,
It gives us the option to bring forward
any newly appointed heads to come before this body
in an informational session.
I think one danger of the strong mayor system
is that a mayor could put in place
an unqualified friend of theirs
who has no business being the head of whatever department.
I'm not gonna name a specific department,
but the key thing is that I think one of our duties
is the city council is to actually surface questions,
force transparency into the public sphere
in terms of what are the qualifications,
what is the background around a department head
that a mayor is appointing?
And so I have added a number of,
I haven't put in the departments by name
because it'll leave, it just leaves more flexibility
in case departments merge and there's changes
over the course of the next decades
of the city government, but in essence it includes the department heads of housing production,
fire protection and response, parks included in that, yeah, anyways a number of those departments
included as part, again, it is our, it is open to us whether we want to vet these department
heads or not.
So we would define the exact procedure through an ordinance.
That way we don't need to go through the ballot measure again to define what exactly that
informational vetting would look like.
And I'll just say this, that I think that adopting this without that extra layer of
transparency would be problematic.
We should do that.
I've talked to the mayor's team.
They're good with this amendment, if anyone wants to speak to that.
I think it is important that we actually show to the voters that this is a movement to additional
transparency compared to what we have right now.
Thank you.
Councilmember who is next?
Oh, Kyle.
Thank you.
Thank you and thank you for all of you that joined us this afternoon for the presentation.
I support a strong city council city manager form of government.
I was witness when Jerry Brown was mayor because I worked under Jerry Brown when he went to
the voter to become stronger and run the city and become the mayor form of government.
And had a great impact in terms of what happens in the neighborhood.
It had a great impact in terms of how the council functions because at one time the
mayor was president at all the city council meetings.
He was present, she was present,
and they were actually able to discuss, debate,
and work together with a council as one.
And so when you take a look at
the majority of cities in California,
they're a city council, city manager form of government.
The only one in the Bay Area is Oakland and San Francisco
because they're a county city form of government.
And but you don't see any other city here in the Bay Area
that has a mayor form of government.
So certainly, I will continue to support
the city council, city manager, former of government,
and because I think we have a greater responsibility
to get things done and not hold more press conferences
every day to how great a job we're doing.
When we're living, if you live in the hood,
well hell, you're going through a different experience
and not having press conferences,
oh, we're doing such a great job here,
we're doing this, we're doing that.
But my children are not afraid to walk to school
because they may not return back from school home.
And therefore we'd have a different attitude today
in Oakland and for those of us that grew up here
in Oakland, in East Oakland, we haven't seen Oakland
the way it is today.
So we need to get back and reestablish a city council,
city manager form of government.
Because at one time, all the city administrators
would meet with each council member once a month
because you would give them direction
what needs to happen in your district.
And they would have to report back
in terms of what they did or didn't do.
And I didn't have to face the grand jury
because I'm micromanagement in the city system
here as it is today.
So anyway, so my vote today will be no on this matter
and we need to reestablish the city council city manager.
Thank You council member guy Oh councilmember under
Question to the city attorney the mayor's office submitted a bunch of amendments between the first reading and the second reading are those all
Automatically included and would be passed if this measure passed
Yes, so through the chair to council member Unger and to the maker and the seconder of the motion
You need to clarify whether you're adopting the legislation as indicated in the supplemental legislation
Dated 6 12 20 26 and I believe the mayor's office is here to speak to the amendments that were included in that legislation
Thanks councilmember under you beat me to it
Preston Silver W chief staff to mayor Barbara Lee so yes to read these some of the amendments that were
Mentioned last week or two weeks ago on the record. I'll go through those very briefly
They are on Legis star for your all pulp your public viewing
But if you go to section 216 effective date of resolutions and ordinances subdivision D
We are amending
section 216 D
Specifically adding or is otherwise required by law
amendment 2 is
Section 218 non interference right of inquiry and access for constituent services
For this one. We are removing section 218 a
Both specific languages each department under the mayor's or city administrators jurisdiction shall maintain at least one
one designated council liaison for council inquiries
and the mayor or city administrator
shall ensure coordination.
Amendment three, under section 218, non-interference,
right of inquiry and access for constituent services.
For this one, we are specifically adding
per the recommendation council is under 218c,
shall have the power to the full sentences 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,
city administrator or other appointed or elected officers
in respect to administrative action.
The next amendment we have is amendment four,
section 305R functions, powers and duties of the mayor.
The specific language for this one is under 305R
to perform, we're adding, to perform such other duties
as may be prescribed by this charter
or by ordinance or resolution.
the last two Amendment five section 502.
This was one requested by city attorney at section 502
acting city administrator section 502 acting.
So we are specifically adding acting city administrator.
The city administrator shall designate two or more
of the city administrators assistance or department heads
in the sequence in which they are to serve
as acting city administrator to serve as city administrator
in the temporary absence or disability
of the city administrator.
In the event of the removal and resignation
of the city administrator,
the mayor may designate one of the city administrator's
assistance or department head to temporarily serve
as acting city administrator.
An acting city administrator shall have all the powers
and duties of the city administrator.
The last one, and thank you for bearing with me,
is amendment six, section 603C,
elected official salary increases.
So this one, there's one small line
that came from the public ethics commission
that we are happy to accommodate is
The full set or the language we're adding is at the discretion of the executive director.
And so the full sentences elected official salary increases the public ethics commission
with the assistance of the city administrator and or outside consultants at the discretion
of the executive director shall set the salary for the for all elected offices as provided
for in charter sections two oh two three hundred four one four or three one.
Thank you for bearing with me.
Appreciate you.
Thank you for that.
process question so
The amendments from council members Wong and Houston
Would we have to vote on all of these amendments together or is there a way to separate them out?
There can be an alternative motion, but if there are
Individual
If there are individual if you want to vote on them, we I guess we can do a straw poll
Is that that that's up to you? I mean my where I'm coming from is I believe that the
Mayors office should have the opportunity to write the ballot measure that they want
I'm not in support of it, but I believe that this is their measure
So I would support their their ballot measures or their amendments rather
What I don't want to do is sort of try to
graft a
partial strong council
System onto a strong mayor system
I believe that at that point then we wouldn't know what the voters were telling us if they voted it up and down in November
So I would not like to add
Partial strong council provisions to the strong mayor provision. So I am in support of the mayor's amendments and
Not in support of the other amendments. Thank you
Councilmember Houston
So it's easy for other council members to say this I represent I'm the public servant and I'm gonna say it is clear
I'm the public servant of the most underserved community in Oakland this district seven and
I want to be able to move to the highest level for my people that's been underserved for years and decades, right and
This is not gonna allow me to do what I have to do
I'm already breaking the charter when I do things like move things that I shouldn't move direct people
I do it I do and I'll call it out that way. They could do whatever they want to do to me
Let me say this because I'm gonna represent my people to the highest level. I'm built from a different cloth
So if I can't represent my people as being underserved for so many years
I'm gonna say and if my amendments don't go on this I'm gonna say no
So what did you say councilmember president president that my amendments aren't in this?
Well, you said if your amendments aren't in there, you're not gonna say I'm gonna say no. Yeah
There might my boat is no okay. Thank you councilmember Wong
Yeah, I
Also want to make myself myself clear here that I think look we the consolidation of power and of executive
Story is both something that we need but without the added layers of transparency
I cannot be on board and the other thing I will say is this is that this is not some sort of
Freaky, hybrid, the amendments that I proposed.
New Orleans did a charter amendment and they did a study
where they actually gave council members
confirmation authority.
Out of 25 cities that have a strong mayor system,
they have this council confirmation system.
I think it's important that we as a body
stand for transparency, that we show that we're willing
to do our jobs, to vet any department head,
and that we ensure that we don't have unqualified people
heading up multi-million dollar departments.
And again, this leaves the option for us to pursue this.
This is not mandating it.
It simply gives us the option to do this.
And I think that is a type of authority
that I don't think that we should strip away from ourselves.
Thank you councilmember.
Councilmember Houston's out of our seat, out of the seat.
I'm sorry, sorry.
Councilmember Brown.
Excellent.
I just wanted to just say publicly, similarly,
I'm not supportive of the additional amendments
for a very clear reason that there has been
months of community engagement around the specific,
around the specific items that are before us.
And from the very first time, the working group
and the office of the mayor presented to us months ago,
following that discussion, I had the opportunity
to weigh in, make my recommendations.
So I think in this moment, which I would say the 12th hour,
to have an item that hasn't gone through
the same level of scrutiny around
these proposed changes, like I just, I can't get on board.
So let's go back a little bit.
So are you, is your recommendation as amended?
So as amended by the mayor's office?
Okay.
As amended.
On the motion.
So just through the chair for clarity,
the motion and the second is to adopt the recommendation,
the supplemental legislation submitted by the mayor
You know what I mean.
You know what I mean.
That's what you did six twelve that's in your pocket.
Madam Mayor now I'd just like to weigh in very quickly with regard to an amendment that we
had had to clarify we had accepted council member Wong's amendment in terms of the vetting
issue that she just laid out at the at the cap just now at the council meeting.
We had discussed this prior to today and have accepted that for the record.
Councilmember Brown.
quick question through the chair to the mayor I know that there were some
substantive some significant changes that were added around the department
heads prior to this and so I'm just looking at the item that I'm seeing in
front of me now the department heads initially prior to today we had
discussed the Council approving certain department heads finance public works
more. Those would be subject to
council approval. The ones we're talking about today that council member Wong
has suggested would go through a vetting process where those individual department
heads would come to the council per the council's request to question them, to
ask questions about their background or to make some recommendations to them.
making sure that they're
background and experience and
credentials were presented.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Are you going to amend your
motion to add council member
Long's?
Are you going to amend your
motion to allow for council
member Wong?
Oh, council member Feiffer.
I just want to, I want to get
clarity and I appreciate the
mayor speaking to this, but I
want to understand what the
intent is.
Okay.
Thank you.
I understand how transparency about someone's resume because that's how I'm reading this
amendment is allowing the City Council to vet these other department heads.
How does that play out in the functionality of having stronger department?
I don't understand this amendment.
So through the chair, to Councilmember Wong, how does this strengthen the Council's powers
and how does it determine that we'll get better department heads and then will we
have to go start a whole new recruitment process if the council votes it down I
don't understand how this strengthens the outcomes of what my constituents
want to see which is better delivery of services because what it comes down to
me is enforcement I've been told by one department head in particular we're
going to do five different things around a legal dumping and when I asked four
months later where are those where the outcomes where the enforcement to these
things that you said you were going to do and I was then accused of directing
staff by asking what happened four months ago a complaint was filed against
me if you all didn't know for asking what was going on with the legal dumping
in my district and I don't see how vetting their resume could have impacted
that situation so help me understand how this strengthens our powers and get
I mean do you think not having a public vetting process would improve the the
scenario though this essentially allows us as a body again it's an optional it's
it's optional it is not something that we need to do but it leaves us with the
option to say if a future mayor were to appoint somebody that we had doubts
around their capacity to deliver to put them before this body for questions around what
is your policy approach, how do you intend to deliver for your constituents in District
3, and I would argue similar to how this body has for example vetted, for example, I think
it was the police commission appointments, right, I think that was something that was
of vigorous discussion in Rules Committee, it allows at least the surfacing of whether
this person is qualified or not.
And while this does not give us formal appointment powers for this subset of department heads,
it can create the political pressure for this particular mayor not to hire a department
head if it's made clear that someone is being appointed who is not qualified to take on
that role.
I hear you. I hear you. I don't see. I don't see how this does that. People come with their best foot forward in presentations and interviews. I've seen it a million times for commissions. And we don't know until they actually get in the role and start engaging in that role. I feel like this increases the administrative burden on the council where I don't want to micromanage the mayor or the city administrator and who they hire. I want to determine by what they do when they get in the job that they are qualified for.
they are qualified by what they are actually doing not what they're saying
so I don't I personally understand what you're trying to get at I just don't
think that this is the amendment that gets us there again I want to see
results and we're not going to get that by what people say in front of us at a
microphone council member man through the chair councilmember Frank the reason
that I thought this made sense was that any mayor would see this as a red flag
the vetting process and if that red flag I mean that would be something that
would add a layer of scrutiny for any appointment. So yeah and the intent is not
for again this is a pre-appointment vetting process so it's not the intent is
not to micromanage anyone it's really to say you know if there's some doubts by
this body and we would like to vet someone before they get into the role
people who have had a lot of
information about the role we're
actually preventing the
micromanagement later down the
line.
It just allows us again the
option to vet an individual.
That's it.
It's not mandatory.
Thank you, councilmember.
I'm going to go to Houston.
Unger, Brown, and then we'll
call a question.
Through the chair, I just want
to say I agree with you,
that a lot of times people apply for jobs
without telling their current employers
that they're applying for jobs.
And so if everyone has to come to us
before they've gotten the job,
that's gonna have a chilling effect
on who's gonna come and wanna apply for those jobs.
Let's go to Councilmember Wong and then we'll go to Brown.
So we discussed that scenario, Councilmember Unger.
That is again why the language is deliberately left flexible
so that we have the option of bringing someone before us.
It is not mandatory.
And so we're to undercut our ability
to hire someone on a competitive nature.
The language has been deliberately designed
for us to formulate an ordinance that would address that.
Thank you, and then let's go to Braille.
Yeah, I think my question, or the red flag
that I'm seeing in this is the issue
around there being an option.
Because wouldn't you want to ensure
that there is actually an analogous process,
like a process that is the same
and not driven by one to two maybe council members
that feel that X, Y, and Z,
what you're trying to articulate?
And so for department head A,
we, you know, two, a couple council members feel
You know I think it's really
helpful that there's a red flag
about their you know them being
qualified whereas maybe you
know weeks later there's another
department head or something
that's hired and they don't go
to that do that same scrutiny
and so I guess maybe I'm asking
more of like a legal question.
In on this item like is this
actually legal.
Well it was vetted by the city
attorney and I'm so it's
definitely you that through the
chair to the office of the city
To the to the share Ryan Richardson city attorney so
Councilmember Wong's amendment or proposed amendment
Would be to allow the City Council at a later date to pass an ordinance and that ordinance would set out the process
For for vetting or not vetting certain department heads that ordinance would also
List which department heads would be subject to the vetting it would specify whether that vetting takes place
pre-appointment or post-appointment
I don't think we have to.
But to answer your question
councilmember brown it's that
ordinances what would provide
the certainty as to which
department heads are or not
subject to vetting I don't the
idea is not that.
For each appointment the
council would just decide on a
case by case basis whether that
individual is subject to
vetting the council would have
to make a decision.
About what their process was
going to be and then apply that
have a lot of interest in
passing that ordinance and we
make a determination. Of you
know the said department heads
what what is the outcome
through through this open
session. Like are we voting on
this as a body like okay well
five of us think that you know.
You know this vetting is you
know we approve or like what
what is our outcome in like
and that would be the use of
the council approval.
It would differ it would not be a confirmation process so would not be the case that the appointment would be subject to council approval it would be much more like an informational report where the count the council might provide.
Feedback on individual basis but they would really just receive the information got you and this is taking place after it like the person is still in the hiring process is that what it is.
a decision that council would have to make in the ordinance of whether it
wanted to do that process pre-appointment or post but so the council
could decide that it's better to do this process to have this informational
session after the person is appointed. I see and then with the ordinance also to
be doing the same thing if there's multiple candidates. The mayor would
submit their one of their their perspective appointee it's not a it's
not a interview process or a vetting process for multiple candidates it would
be that the person the mayor intends to appoint or has appointed would come
before council I see all right thank you councilmember Ramachandran you have
your hand raised yes thank you I I don't support this amendment either because
even though it might be legal on paper it if we're gonna go with the strong
mayor system, then it should be neatly that. This leads to the idea that council can discriminate
against certain types of department heads, certain people, certain backgrounds,
certain identities that that individual holds, and in a not uniform fashion. I think that it is
dangerous to give council some power to have this discretion, and what happens after this
process is still unclear, but not give that same level of scrutiny to everything across
the board.
If it was neatly a council manager system, you would have that, you'd have much more
discretion across the board, but if it's a strong mayor system, I don't think it's right
council have a lot of
information about what's the
right for council to get to.
Pick and choose which type of
people who get selected for
certain departments and again.
We don't know who's going to
sit in these chairs in you know
a decade from now who might
choose to discriminate a
concerned characteristics and I
think that sets a dangerous
precedent so that's just a
statement not a question thank
you thank you council member-
so I'm gonna ask for the end of
debate and council member.
we have an agenda item five
point two we call the well and
what we're calling well on.
Is a mare strong mayor as
amended in the supplemental.
Calling the vote on item five
point two as amended including
amendments in the supplemental
councilmember brown I also
member five I also member Gayo
no councilmember Houston no
councilmember ramachandran.
councilmember Wong. Why I'm sorry councilmember Unger. No. Councilmember Wong. Councilmember
Jenkins. Aye. Motion fails with a vote of one two three eyes. I'm sorry it's a tie four and four. Is the mayor
available to break a tie? Yes Mr. President President Jenkins I'd like to break the tie on this. How do you vote? I vote yes. Thank you.
motion passes for the tie-breaking vote by Mayor Lee moving on to item 4.1
going back to the regular order of the agenda starting with item 4.1 I do need
a motion to open the public hearing some of the second I can't hear was that
Unger and Brown thank you on the motion to open the public hearing council
member council moved by councilmember Unger second by councilmember Brown
Councilmember Brown aye Councilmember five Councilmember Gallo we're on item
four point one motion to open the public hearing open the public hearing yeah
yes Councilmember Houston on the motion to open the public hearing are you a
higher no something is still going on so while something is still going on so why
are we gonna open for we're gonna open public when we have something still
that's why I'm here for you.
So what happened right over here.
Your previous item is complete.
So are you on item four point one.
Are you voting yes to open the public hearing or no.
No.
Councilmember Ramachandran.
Aye.
Councilmember Unger.
Aye.
Councilmember Wong.
Aye.
Chair Jenkins.
Aye.
Motion passes with a vote of seven ayes, one no.
reading the item into record conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion
adopted ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission amending title 17
of the open municipal code updating the accessory dwelling unit regulations for
consistency with state law providing written findings pursuant to government
code 6 6 3 2 6 part B revising discontinuous standards for non-conforming
activities removing applicability of s10 scenic route combining zone
Zone discretionary standards to ministerial design review permitting recreational setback in
D dash co dash two zone
Removing a review deadline from development agreement procedure in section seventeen point one three eight point zero three zero
revising utility screening standards in
appropriate
I'm sorry
Revising utility screening standards in section seventeen point one two four point zero four five
Incorporating conforming and clerical revisions and making appropriate sequel findings. You have three speakers
All right, how much time do you need?
About five minutes
Let's throw five minutes on cloud, please
Good afternoon to city council and to public. My name is Rosalyn Filippo
I am here on behalf of the Planning Bureau, and I'll be, I'll go very briefly over the
proposed amendments.
If I may please ask Kate up to bring the presentation?
Thank you.
So here are just the three categories of amendments that the Planning is proposing.
The first is ATU-related amendments.
The city's ADU ordinance has evolved over time
to remain consistent with state law.
Most recently, the city received a findings letter
from state HCD evaluating the city's ADU regulations
for consistency with the state law
and to remain consistent with the state law,
planning staff proposes the following three minor changes,
mainly to remove subjective terms such as visible,
predominant, or visually similar because only objective design standards may be applied
to ATUs.
There are two findings that were addressed by the planning staff with state HCD during
a meeting on April 20th, and these do not require code amendments, and the city is fully
complied with the state law.
So here is the summary of the proposed other related to ADU code changes, these amendments
were discussed and addressed at the city council, at the CED, I'm sorry.
And finally, here's the summary of some examples of
clerical revisions to correct errors
and inconsistencies in the code.
And these did not raise any questions at CED.
So this concludes the summary of the proposed changes.
And I will leave the staff and planning commission recommendation up on the screen.
And planning staff is here, happy to answer any questions.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Let's go to the public speakers.
Thank you.
And as I call your name, please approach the podium.
As usual, we'll take those who are in person first.
As you come to the podium again, please state your name for the record.
And for those who are participating online, please raise your hand so we can easily identify
you.
We have a question from the
mayor of the city of Davis.
We have a question from the
mayor of the city of Davis.
We have a question from the
mayor of Davis.
We have a question from the
mayor of Davis.
We have a question from the
mayor of Davis.
We have a question from the
mayor of Davis.
We have a question from the
mayor of Davis.
of the Homeless Advocates Working Group.
I am a long time resident of Wood Street
and I'm looking at this briefly to see what's going on.
But here's the thing is that you guys are running
the unhoused out of the neighborhood
that was specifically localized and the unhoused
from the area had moved into the zone.
And we had a plan for a campus.
Our campus was supposed to be a business campus
that included live, work, teach, learn
And that was initiated in 2019 with Joseph Rees,
which gave us rights to use the land
that was predominantly right behind us at Wood Street.
That would be the Caltrans land.
During that period of time, there was COVID
and we were put on hold.
And many people were looking forward to be working
at this location and living at this location
and bringing themselves by their bootstraps
up out of homelessness.
We were crushed.
We were totally.
Thank you that completes your time.
Next speaker.
So the planning department submitted
to the California Department of Housing
and Community Development certain code changes
or what they wanted to do with certain codes.
Several of them were found to be inconsistent
or out of compliance, whatever.
So you had to go back and make corrections.
That's what's happening now.
You made the corrections.
What I'm concerned about,
there was a statement in the document that says fire safety,
South Piedmont is served well with bus stops
related to evacuations.
They named the buses 646, 652, and 682.
Those buses are school supplemental buses.
They're not the regular routes.
They only come in the morning to pick up the students
and they come in the evening to take them back home.
It's misleading to say that these buses
will be available for you.
Thank you for your time, Ms. Asada.
Our next or last speaker that signed up for this item,
Kevin Dalley, are you participating here in person
or are you on, Kevin Dalley is passing.
That completes your speakers for this item.
I'll entertain a motion.
So moved.
the public hearing please.
And that's to staff
recommendations and to close the
public hearing yes.
Thank you for that and that
again was I apologize a motion
by councilmember under seconded
by councilmember Brown to close
the public hearing and approved
staff recommendations.
On item four point one on role
for this councilmember Brown I
councilmember houston aye. Ramachandran councilmember Ramachandran aye. Thank you. Councilmember
Uncker aye. Councilmember Wong aye. And we will go back to councilmember. Councilmember
five how do you vote? And council president Jenkins. Aye. Item number four point one was approved with
eight ayes or yes eight ayes. That concludes that moment. That concludes your public hearings. Moving to
item five point one. Receive an informational report from the city administrator on the
Prose reorganization of the Department of Transportation's parking division including the rationale for the proposal a fiscal impact statement
including any new or unfrozen staff costs and an analysis of operational costs a summary of I'm sorry
fiscal impact statement including any new or unfrozen staff costs and an analysis of operational cost savings a
summary of outreach that occurred to Department of Transportation staff
The public and the business community and information on how the change would impact the division's collaboration with other departments
you have
Sorry six speakers on this item. Hey Brad, how much time do you need?
two minutes
Thank You council president members the council Brad Johnson director of finance before use information report regarding the reorganization of
we also have a collection of
parking functions within the
city that was approved in your
recently adopted budget.
To really at a high level
summarize heard this
reorganization the department
of finance my department will
take on board.
Responsibly for the parking
mobility assistance center
including its administration of
parking citation and back office
affairs.
Things related to the collection
and again back office management
Accumulation.
Issuance of residential parks
and permits, again, based on the established zones,
management of the garages, off-street lots,
and management of technology required for collections.
The Department of Transportation will retain responsibility
for parking enforcement and management
of all associate staff.
On-street parking infrastructure installation,
like meters or both multi-space and single space.
of the city's ongoing activities.
And they will also retain enforcement of abandoned auto
assignments.
There is more information in your report regarding the
positions that are funded in order to facilitate this.
They are noted in Table 1.
And again, these were all collectively
related to the ongoing activities.
And they will also retain enforcement of abandoned auto
assignments.
There is more information in your report regarding the
positions that are funded in order to facilitate this.
and we hope to move forward in
to speak. Blair Beakman, Kevin Dally, Mr. Hazard, Mrs.
Otter Ollabala, Michael P. Ford, Alaya, Ana Serena Ford, Yassaman Bridget Ford, Shahala
Azimi.
I do appreciate the way that this proposal has finally reached the City Council. However,
I have extreme disappointment with the way it was handled since October, where staff
were getting regular announcements that their job is moving to finance, or maybe it isn't,
or maybe the deadline's passed.
This city council years ago decided to separate transportation from finance and city administrators
shouldn't be ripping it apart unless they come back to counsel for permission.
I'd like to know what the current city administrator and any future city
administrators are planning to do to make sure this type of destructive
actions does not happen again.
Thank you.
I don't think you have ever had all of the public awareness of parking revenues
and what those revenues are.
When y'all were having discussion last week
on the Oakland ICE Center, I brought up
that people get free parking over there.
I was told by a representative of the administration
that the Sparks Management Group pays for the parking.
I have never seen a document that totals up
or gives a summation of how much money we've collected
from the parking in the garage
where there's free, validated parking
for those who use that ICE center.
Haven't seen it.
I don't know how you came to the conclusion
that the two garages in Montclair
can be managed by the Montclair Business District
and why you are not managing it
and why you don't have oversight of it
as well as the revenues that are brought in in that garage.
So y'all need to do.
thank you miss all about that
uh... city clerk uh... my name is michael ford and i have two people sitting
uh... time to me
a la lee on serenio ford and you know someone ford
thank you
again uh... michael ford i'm an oakland resident
and a city employee represented by local twenty one
speaking for myself
the decisions on this reorganization have already been made
in february
I was removed from managing the Parking and Mobility Division, and last Thursday, I was
removed from managing the Abandon Auto Unit.
On Friday, Council approved four new permanent positions for parking management, costing
$1.2 million in general purpose fund dollars.
Three of those positions have already been filled with interim appointments.
Those recurring expenses and the breakup of the parking and mobility division is the administration's solution.
But what exactly is the problem?
According to the report, customer service center is experiencing backlogs, delays, and gaps.
These are symptoms of the problem, of the real problem.
What is the real problem?
The real problem is that citation issuance has doubled over the last three
years, while our customer service staffing levels are at historic lows.
That's a math problem, not a management problem.
More citations means more revenue, but also exponentially more work.
payment transactions, disputes, refunds, phone calls, emails.
My team was asked repeatedly to do more with less.
December 2024, restore parking enforcement for revenue we delivered.
Spring 2025, enhance parking enforcement for revenue and services we delivered.
delivered. When staffing dropped to only two public service representatives, we were told
carry the load for 11 months and we delivered. Extend customer lobby hours without additional
staff. We delivered. Implement the speed safety camera program without additional staff.
delivered and the administration's response invest 1.2 million in middle
management rather than frontline capacity. I'm speaking today to create a
record. My team did extraordinary work under extraordinary pressure and the
administration's response was to organize to reorganize instead of investing in
the people who are doing the work.
That's what I wanted you to know.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Shalazimi, within parking mobility management.
I would like to take a moment to highlight some of the accomplishments and that parking
division has achieved given the past few years when parking mobility division took over the
division from finance.
Our division's achievement is in recent years shown the dedication, professionalism, and
hard work and tireless work by the Frontline staff.
With limited resources, even with limited resources and small teams, the division continued
to provide critical services to the community and carried a large workload and took the
extra responsibilities.
We have said over and over the issue is that we need more staff.
We have really dedicated, intelligent folks working there tirelessly, working past hours
to ensure that public-
Thank you, ma'am.
Your time is up.
Mr. Hazard, are you wishing to speak on this item?
Gene Hazard, go to cleanoakland.com.
You know the parking division is one department
that generates dollars.
When are you going to do an audit?
You know, parking fees go up.
And the public only finds out
if they go to the meter and it expires.
And now you see you got $38 versus 24 before.
So when are you going to request an audit
from the auditor's office?
It requires that so we can see how much is coming
through parking fees, whether it's from the meters
or from the parking lots.
So stop being negligent.
We know the city's in fiscal crisis.
And ask for an audit so we'll know how much is being taken in.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard.
Your time is moving to the Zoom speaker, Blair Beekman.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Mr. Beekman.
Hi, I'm Blair Beekman.
Yes, hi, Blair Beekman.
Thank you for this item.
I wish I understood it better, I have not.
And that is my fault, that's my problem.
I can explain where this item was at months and months ago
and I hope we progress to move forward
and not the item can be stained within transportation
and good luck in such a process.
I've been around Oakland enough to know
that as you've been trying to move the parking issues
to finance, kind of a regular practice in Oakland
to make those kind of moves and shifts of departments
into strange other departments.
But I mean, there's a certain logic there
And I just hope that the Department of Transportation
can still be a respected source.
And with that said, good luck on.
Thank you, Mr. Beekman.
All names were called.
That was the last speaker.
Thank you for that.
There's no comments from the council members.
I'll entertain a motion.
So moved.
On a motion by Council Member Brown,
second by Council Member Unger,
councilmember. I would like to.
going to item 5.3 adopts a resolution awarding grants to 21 community-based
organizations for community violence intervention services set forth in
tables 1 & 2 for the period of October 1 2026 to September 30 2029 in a total
amount not to exceed 38 million one hundred thousand dollars and authorizing
the city administrator to negotiate and enter into grant agreements with the
the state's state of the state.
the grant and modify the grant amounts as set forth.
You have 58 speakers on this item.
What a mercy.
Dr. Josie, how much time do you need?
Director, how much time do you need?
About 15 minutes, please.
OK.
Thank you.
I'm ready for the slides.
Good evening.
The Department of Violence Prevention
is here this evening to present our recommendations
for community grants for 26-29.
As I stated at the beginning of the Public Safety Committee
meeting last night, I understand the advocacy
in the building this evening.
I've been in the agency director's shoes
working to keep the doors open and services
flowing in an Oakland-based nonprofit.
It is not an easy job.
It is important to put tonight's presentation
and our conversation within the context of the funding
landscape that we are all facing as community violence
intervention practitioners.
The field of community violence intervention work,
despite a growing body of research
that speaks to the efficacy of our work, is underfunded.
We know what is happening at the federal level
with the closure of the White House Office of Gun Violence
Prevention and large cuts to CVI grants
across the country that have impacted us here in Oakland.
CVI is underfunded by the state.
And in Oakland, our total investment in CVI
is approximately $22 million to include $5 million from the General Purpose Fund and
the measure and end dollars that we are here to discuss this evening.
Considering these realities, the resources we have available to us to allocate to the
CBOs through this process clearly do not adequately address all needs.
And yet, we are tasked with the challenge of running a competitive bidding process and
reviewing rating and selecting the agencies most aligned with the city's
current approach to community violence. Questions have been raised about the RFP
process and our presentation this evening will answer some of those and of
course we're prepared to engage with council's questions as we move through
this evening. The resolution before you asked to award grants to 21 community
based organizations. Again the period the grant period that we are recommending is
is October 1st, 2026 to September 30th, 2029,
in an annual amount of 12.7 million
and a total amount of $38.1 million.
Just a bit about Measure NN.
It passed in November 2024,
and of course was a replacement for Measure Z,
and just as a reminder for the council,
although the voters did agree to a tax increase
for Measure NN, that tax increase did not translate
into additional funds being delivered out the door
to community-based organizations.
Because in past years, the city of Oakland
had additional funding coming from the general purpose fund.
We were in a different financial situation
during those years, and so there was actually
more money allocated out the door
to community-based organizations than we have
in this current Measure NN allocation.
Measure NN is a continuation of a public safety
program. It is not new new
dollars per se. And of course
with this current iteration of
the public safety legislation
it allocates approximately 40%
of the annual revenue to
violence prevention services
and 75% of that funding must be
allocated to the community based
organizations. So for this
upcoming fiscal year that
begins July one. Bradley Johnson
has estimated that our budget
Bradley Johnson has estimated that about 16.9 million dollars have come in and 12.7 million of that, which represents the 75 percent, should be allocated to community-based organizations, 4.2 to be kept by the DVP to administrator the grants and to fund Lifeline services.
have been raised about the N. and oversight commissions legislative
duties to oversee and direct the T. D. V. P. have been answered. We have
discussed at length with the city attorney and addressed with the
oversight commission. They are clear about the
and that's what we're going to talk about and that's what we're going to
talk about. So just a bit about the spending plan that informed the RFP
with the oversight commission they are clear about their responsibilities and
the boundaries of their authority and we are as well we have built a good
working relationship with that body and we were here supporting their
presentation of the four-year public safety strategy along with police and
fire a few weeks ago to be clear the NN legislation gives that commission the
responsibility of ensuring that the DVP fire and OPD are spending NN dollars
according to the activities listed in the measure, but does not give the
commission the authority to create our spending plan or make contract decisions
about which agencies receive awards. Per the NN legislation, the DVP was
required to present that spending plan to the NN Commission within four months
of them being seated. We did just that. In fact, we developed the spending plan and
presented it to both the SSOC, which was the previous body, and the current
Commission. It was well received by both bodies and in turn informed both the NN
Commission's four-year strategic plan and the RFP that we are here to discuss
today. In addition to the civilian oversight duties that do belong to the
NN Commission, all DVP planning strategies and implementation activities
are aligned with the mayor's public safety strategies and created with the
oversight of the city administrator's office. For our spending plan it focuses
services on individuals who are at the highest risk of gun violence or gender
based violence in Oakland. You can see some of the eligibility criteria here
for gun violence. This addresses some council members questions about us
making sure that we are able to serve tier one highest risk individuals in
this city. And so the eligibility criteria ask these important questions
which is connected to the individuals connection to street crews or groups
whether or not they themselves have been intentionally
stabbed or shot at, their connection
to the criminal justice system, and then whether or not
they've had a close friend or family member shot
or arrested for a shooting in the past six months.
And this eligibility criteria was
created in collaboration with our consultants
at the California Partnership for Safe Communities
to be in alignment with our ability to serve those
at the highest risk.
with that uh... explanation and and in the spending plan process uh...
i'm gonna turn it over to jenny lynchy that deputy chief of the department to
discuss
the request for proposal process thank you
good evening council members jenny lynchy deputy chief the department of
violence prevention
to award measure and then funding to community-based organizations as
required by the legislation we conducted a competitive request for proposals or
rfp process
following the city's standard
of the citywide contracts team
which is applicable to all city
departments.
It's important to note that
there are two parts to any RFP
process.
The first part is a technical
review of application elements
by the citywide contracts team.
After applications pass that
initial screening process, they
are forwarded to departments for
So with that framing in mind, the DVP released an RFP for Community Violence Intervention
Services funded by Measure NN in December of 2025 with a closing date in February of
2026.
When the citywide contracts team completed their initial review of the applications that
were submitted to that RFP, only 26 years ago, the DVP released an RFP for Community
Violence Intervention Services funded by Measure NN in December of 2025 with a closing date
47 of the 41 agencies that attempted to submit
Applications would have been forwarded to the DVP for further review because they met the initial
technical requirements
That is a 34 percent failure rate. The Department of Violence
Prevention felt that that failure rate was unacceptable. It was clear that the instructions regarding submission the technical submission
Steps were not clear enough
so we
Convened with the citywide contracts team and the city administrators office
we were told that our only options were to accept the 34% failure rate or to
Cancel the RFP entirely and issue a new one, which although it is rare that an RFP is canceled
It is fully within the discretion of the city to cancel an RFP at any time for any reason
We elected to issue a new RFP, which was released on March 13th and closed on April 1st.
This was a three-week period because the sole intention of the second RFP was to allow the agencies that prepared
applications to the first RFP to correctly submit them. There were absolutely no changes to the services being requested or
to the required application components. There were simply more
about how to submit properly in iSupplier.
The DVP received from the citywide contracts team
following their initial review of the application elements
40 responsive applications.
That was a 9% failure rate.
So there were 44 agencies that attempted
to submit applications and 40 passed the initial screening
and were forwarded to the DVP for review.
It's worth noting that all of the agencies
agencies that passed the initial screening the first time and would have been forwarded
to the DVP for review, did so the second time as well.
And their applications were read and scored with the exception of one agency, and that
is the LGBTQ Center.
Once the DVP received those 40 applications, we conducted a review using three reviewers
for every application, two internal reviewers, the DVP, one direct service staff member,
grants or program staff member and then one external staff member. It's also
worth noting that the city does not require departments to use any external
scorers but the DVP elected to do so for out of one of the reviewers. All
applications were reviewed and scored out of a maximum of 205 points. And
another thing worth noting is that the all reviewers were required to sign a
conflict of interest form, attesting that they have not received income or
gifts from any of the agencies that they were reading and scoring applications
for within the past year, that they do not have ownership interests or direct
investments with those agencies, and that they are not currently an employee or a
board member. And all of those things apply not to just to them but to their
immediate family members as well. As Chief Joshi mentioned, we are advocating
for funding for a three year period,
October 1st, 2026 to September 30th, 2029.
At the Public Safety Committee last week,
the recommendation was made to shorten that length
to two years.
We are still advocating for a three year period
for a few reasons.
The first is service stability for participants.
It can be very disruptive to be changing the agencies
that are delivering services every two years,
especially since some of the services themselves
last at least a year.
There's also funding stability for agencies
who, especially given the current funding landscape,
having consistent funding over three years
can be very impactful.
From evaluation purposes, it's much easier
to evaluate services that are rendered
by the same agencies over a longer period of time.
The three-year funding period also aligns
with the three-year spending plan
that we were required to complete as part
of Measure NN legislation.
The total funding over a three-year time period
would be $3.1 million, $12.7 million per year,
with $22,875,000 going to gun violence services,
15,225,000 going to gender-based violence services.
And we are awarding funding to the same number
of agencies that we currently fund, which is 21,
the number of people who have
gone out of town.
Which it also should be noted
that our prior city administrator
was strongly advocating for us
to reduce that number- but we
are keeping it consistent at
twenty one.
We are keeping funding for gun
violence services relatively
consistent- we currently funds
for those services at seven
point five million dollars per
year we're looking at a slight
increase to seven million six
hundred and twenty five thousand
which result in the identification and initial engagement with individuals who
are at highest risk for gun violence. Those services are violence interruption,
hospital-based intervention, life coaching, and youth diversion. And then we
have our support services which are primarily available to individuals who
are engaged through the core services based on their unique needs. So we have
emergency housing relocation, we have housing, we have employment, we have
healing services and we have family and victim services. It may appear that some
of these services are duplicative with services that are funded through other
city departments specifically housing and employment but it is critical that
the Department of Violence Prevention fund specific versions of these services
that are tailored to the unique needs and constraints of individuals who are at
highest risk for gun violence. So individuals at highest risk for gun
violence face unique circumstances that make them not able to access traditional services.
For instance, they cannot move freely throughout the city and access offices and service locations
wherever they are, so services need to be mobile and move to them.
Another example is that they cannot be in group services with other individuals who
they may be in conflict with.
So any group level services have to go through
a deconfliction process to make sure that people
in conflict with them are not together.
A final example is for both housing and employment.
Oftentimes it makes the most sense for those services
to be accessed outside of Oakland
because of the unique safety concerns facing this population.
For our core services, we're looking at investing
$4,550,000 annually, which would fund 24 direct service staff,
full-time direct service staff, and 288 individuals.
This is actually probably closer to 200 unique individuals
because we anticipate that many of the individuals served
by hospital-based intervention will then
be referred into life coaching.
Apologies.
I don't want to interrupt.
Just to let you know, you have one minute left.
Thank you.
Is there any way I can get any, no, okay.
Maybe I'll just skip very quickly then
to our performance management work.
So based on concerns raised by members of this body,
we are strongly emphasizing performance management
as part of this process.
We will have service deliverables articulated
in scopes of work in contracts.
Agencies are held to those deliverables.
If they are falling short,
we respond with coaching and technical support,
but if they continue to fall short,
we do have the ability to withhold funding based on that.
And ultimately, if necessary,
we have the ability to end contracts early
and reallocate money.
We are also administering now participant surveys,
which are new to receive feedback from individuals
who are receiving the services on the quality of the services
and the impact of the services rendered.
We will be performing annual program site visits
and fiscal audits to ensure that we are being
good stewards of public funds,
and that is unfortunately in response to prior experiences
where funds were not used appropriately.
And then lastly, we will participate
and support any impact evaluations
that are commissioned by the Measure NN Commission,
which is required by the legislation.
Thank you, and we're happy to entertain questions.
Thank you, we're gonna go straight to public comments.
Thank you.
As I call your name, please approach the podium in any order.
State your name for the record.
If you have time seated, please state that as well ahead of you speaking.
I will call those who are here in chambers first, followed by those who are participating
online.
If you're participating online, we ask that you raise your hand so we can easily identify
you.
And if you are participating in a group, make sure the entire group is with you as you approach
the podium again.
Please state your name for the record.
I have quite a few speakers so bear with me as I read these names and apologies in advance if I mispronounce
Sam McNeil
Richard Raymond Earl Langford and Leah
village
Jean Hazard, Mississauga, Ola Bala
Kelso Sneed
Nicole
Petty way
Feeney Johnson, Denise Itwa, Iyende,
Jonathan Jones, Kaye Shabazz, Jennifer Lettie,
James Delgado, Jonathan Broomfield, Kevin Phillips,
Niemond Kane,
Lizer
Cabara,
Martin Hortado,
Harris Kane, Millie Cleveland,
Lee Jones Loggins,
Brenda
It in Shama,
Gabriel Garcia, Cindy Rayhos, Sarah Kane,
Nufina Yasmin Hasim.
Kay Kalia Thomas.
Ann Janks.
Cristino Lamas.
Kelly Dillon.
Jontay Gamble.
Killens Martin.
Terrence Washington.
DeLeo Neal.
Darryl Allams.
Cesar Johnson.
Desmond Mea Evans, Dwight Hockin, Carlton Crossley,
Sarah Nasall, Rick Fortaberry, Lynette Higura, Andrew
Davis, Tanya Carvela, John Jones III, Figney Johnson,
Tim Davis, Sierra Tsai, Bex Beleba,
and then there is a group of eight.
Dr. V. Uchi Lui,
Almez Yaogo, Desmond Timi,
Desmond Iman, Fultu Nizim,
Jennifer and yet
Tanya givens in that group of eight when you guys do approach the podium
We ask that you you will get a total of eight minutes at once. So make sure you guys are all together
So if I called your name in any order, please approach the podium again
Please state your name for the record
And if you have time to see that please state that at the beginning in any order, please we approach the podium again
I have time seated by a lesion logins
Good afternoon, each and every one of you. I am here for integration. And first of all,
I want to thank the Department of Violence Prevention because I found out recently that
I was in your book and you guys thanked me for my input as the chair of the VPC. My daughter
is from here. My daughter left her school where she was going to get a degree to be
to be a doctor, to come and work in violence prevention
here in the city of Oakland.
So violence prevention is very important to me.
Violence prevention is the basis for why I do the work
that I do, to make sure that other families don't go
through the same thing that I went through
with the loss of my son.
The holistic change that we're trying to make
is not a balance, we have to do both.
Because the people that DVP is not handling,
out here on these streets, robbing, shooting,
and killing people.
So where is the balance?
The balance is in the CBOs that actually have boots
on the ground.
And I say this each and every time
because I don't get funded by none of y'all.
And I don't want to because I'm going to be able
to move how I want to move.
But if I need to call somebody, I could call
Darrell Adams, I could call Andrew Park,
I could call Youth Alive, because my daughter works
for Youth Alive, and these are the people
that are not getting funded.
I could get calls at three o'clock in the morning
And I could call somebody and say,
I got a girl right here that wants to go home.
And I could call my friends.
And we put money together and put them on planes.
We put them on trains.
Is that a part of what they're talking about in the spending
plan?
Because I have never, ever been able to call DVP
and get help for anybody.
So we're going to help people.
We got to help everybody.
Because this city, we've had murders, what, almost every day?
Almost every day.
Who's on first with those killers?
Who's on first with them?
Because if somebody's losing their, it's a summer.
Everybody knows in a summer, crimes go up.
Fun these people.
Thank you for your comments.
Brenda, next speaker.
My name is Darrell Allams.
Caesar Johnson is Caesar's size to me.
He's right here.
I've lost family members.
I have lost cousins, uncles, and I have lost a son.
And I'm standing here today and I'm speaking
because I'm from a foreign country called DP Stoklin.
and in those recommendations there are no East Oakland
organizations being funded.
In the recommendations, they're cutting the CVI's
from almost 28 to six to eight CVI's in the streets.
If you take twin officers from the police department,
if you take 20 firemen from the fire department,
then you're gonna have some trouble.
That's the same thing with the CVI's.
know if you know if you guys are parents I don't know if you guys have lost loved ones
in these streets but it's it's not a it's not a good feeling right and in this ecosystem
that we have helped build for the last five six years I'm a founder of the Department
of Violence Prevention I sit here many nights to fight for that to pass through for two
years I was in this building right and I'm standing here today to say that I already
know that y'all probably gonna pass this but what I'm asking the city council members
that's what we're trying to do
is to find additional funding for these other CBOs
and so these CVI's will not be cut on September the 30th.
I'm asking you to find the money.
Now, if it was $9 million just donated to the city
only for trash, don't tell me my people ain't better than trash.
Don't tell me East Oakland ain't better than the tribe.
Just like Ken Houston just said, I'm from this cloth.
And I'm just real about this.
to do this work out here in these streets.
A license to operate in my neighborhood
because the community has said so.
The community has voted you into these seats.
It's your responsibility.
Not relationships on who your partner is
and who your friend is.
But who does this work in the community?
So I'm-
Thank you so much.
Your time is up.
Next speaker, please.
My name is Cesar Johnson.
I would just see time for Mama Asada.
I just got a couple questions.
I'm sorry, who's?
From Mama Asada?
I just got to see the microphone.
Miss Asada?
Yes, Miss Asada, Mama Asada.
I got a couple questions for the people over at the DVP.
Y'all, we going from 20 life coaches, violence interrupters, right, down to six.
But usually the team just ran by like six people in an organization's high work.
What you gonna do with that many interrupters, with a city with 400,000 people, it's just
like when Libby Shaft cut the shot spotter off for them two weeks back in the day, the
went crazy cut it back on said crime was down it was more bullshit like this
summer how many lives are we gonna have to lose like I'm not saying I give up
the money but the money got to come from somewhere you know we've been here we've
been here we've been there we like this shit it gotta stop and it's really not
about how you feel cuz people's lives these kids are losing lives the feelings
is out the way it's like we got to put preventive measures in place and policies
and funding the ways to be effective this is not being effective nobody cares
about how you feel I've heard these mothers cry and how they holler when
they lose their kids it's not okay I lost three generations out of my house
it's gonna be worse than this if you don't put the money out so they can fun
and wrap around these people don't have cultural competency I mean we go over in
minutes I know is this a caesar yes yes you see that okay okay okay thank you so
much your time although we can still hear say all day we can keep talking I
could just keep talking to y'all could pull me out of here but it's serious
though thank you because these kids is dying though we have to take the next
speaker thank you so much for your time
order in the chamber order and I don't want to hear what you're talking order
the governor's office. And the-
of the state of the state of the-
we want to thank all of the
people who have spent years
doing the prevention as someone
who works with people returning
on from incarceration I know
many of these preventionists
personally they are people who
transform their own lives to
choose and dedicate themselves
to help.
I apologize Danny your time is
up.
Thank you so much your time has
ended we need to go to the next
speaker to allow everybody their
time to speak thank you so much.
I'm a violent interruptor, I'm,
before I was a violent interruptor,
I was in the streets, so I did a lot of things
I wasn't supposed to do, but I'm reformed now.
So I got shot, right?
Not only did I get shot, I lost a child to gun violence.
So who better to do this work besides people
that actually come from the trenches?
You know what I mean?
It's a lot of other organizations
that wasn't counted in here that should be here
because we are actually in the field late night,
daytime, we do this work.
And I mean, we do funerals when y'all got to understand
when they picking up their bodies,
we there with the family, you know what I mean?
In the time of crisis, you know what I mean?
When ain't nobody else there.
You don't understand how giving somebody a bottle of water
when their child just passed will help, you know what I mean?
So I ain't here to beg, I ain't here to borrow,
but if you cut off an octopus to his arms,
you just left with some puss.
That's my thing, I love y'all.
Thank you for your comments.
Next speaker please.
how are you all doing, I'm Dwight Haskell, I'm a VI for boss, I'm also born and raised
in East Oakland, I just became a VI last year in October, but before that I was actually
a peer of my community, and I just love doing what I do, not disrespecting, or I'm not even
going to talk about the other organizations, but I feel like Boss is very important in
this field, in this community of East Oakland, because we're really in the streets.
We're not just at work on the computers, like we're really in the streets.
We talking to these Jews.
We talking to young killers out here, you know what I'm saying, to make them know that
it's a better way.
Like my man just said, we out here, we see the funerals.
We go to the funerals.
We go to the wakes.
We doing all this.
Not saying the DVP don't, but it's other organizations that actually care about this city as well.
and I'm a part of bus.
Thank you so much for your comments.
Next speaker.
My name is Jonathan Brumfield, Safe Passengers
from DP Stokan to West Stokan.
We've been able to use DVP to actually serve our youth
night, day, weekends, all year round.
We just ask that, one, we honor the RFP process for sure,
but we just ask that no interruption
or decrease of services happen
because we actually decreased violence in the town
through this initiative.
We've been doing it for years.
and just being somebody who's growing up in the town
from East Oakland.
We've done this countless years in a row.
So we're not begging for money,
we're just trying to make sure it doesn't get disrupted.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Hello, good afternoon council members.
My name is Kyria Shabazz, I'm with Roots Community Health.
The data is clear in Alameda County,
gun violence has killed an average of three people
and injured 12 every week,
with East Oakland neighborhoods bearing the highest burden.
We've also seen that community-based interventions
work. Oakland has reduced shootings in homicides by over 30% in recent years
through these investments but right now no East Oakland CVI organization has
its contract renewed putting one of the highest need areas at risk and losing
critical violence prevention capacity. If we disrupt what's working we risk
reversing progress. We urge you to align funding with the data and invest where
we have to make sure that the
need is greatest we also
respectfully urge you to pause
and condition these contract
decisions to require greater
transparency and equity
specifically a clear funding
map for our peace scoring in
audit details in a geographic
equity service gap analysis
thank you.
Thank you for your comments
But in the process could increase violence in Oakland, DBP has been very detrimental
to us and the youth that we serve throughout DB East Oakland, East Oakland, and West Oakland.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Hey, how you guys doing?
My name's Nimrod Cain.
My life coach would say passages from East Oakland born and raised, fifth generation,
1997.
I was a victim of violent crime.
I lost my kidney in the neighborhood that I'm from.
I just wanted to say we are in a process I know culturally relevant program some of
them who are you know work with with EVP you know those kind of things save people I went
to all types of programs got a with safe passages as a kid and I came up to the pipeline they
helped me get to college they got me a salary you know they got my mind right because you
know I could have did AV and C but instead I'm not so thank you.
Thank you for your comments next speaker please.
My name is Haddis Khan from Safe Passages I just want to say that we want to honor the
RFP process because any disruption to the process will increase violence and I want
to emphasize the impact that we've had in reducing violence through DVP.
Thank you for allowing us to serve our community.
Thank you for your comments next speaker.
My name is Millie Cleveland I'm with Coalition for Police Accountability.
I want to raise that I think the council is being fiscally irresponsible.
People are searching for money when you know OPD's overtime is the main contributor towards
the budget.
I gave the example last time of Tin Nolan making $490,000 in overtime that would have
paid for three violence interrupters.
To this day, OPD overtime has not been agendized on anybody's council or anybody's committee.
Thank you for your comments.
Cierra Neisel, ceding my time to Andrea Diaz.
Andrea Diaz, I am here with Missy.
We are one of the organizations that is being funded and we would like y'all to consider
moving forward.
We are excited to be back in community with the city of Oakland.
we have been doing this work for over 20 years,
and over the past few years,
it has not been put in through the city,
yet we have continued to serve the city,
as well as the rest of Alameda County.
Our work includes housing, providing basic needs,
such as food, respite, hygiene kits,
as well as coaching and case management for young people
in Oakland and throughout Alameda County.
We primarily focus on youth impacted
by commercial sexual exploitation,
those that are at risk currently being exploited
as well as those that have left and need ongoing support.
Our work has also expanded working
with Oakland Unified School District
for prevention services, including leading 13 cohorts
of prevention workshops
across Oakland Unified School District.
Our work I think is important as we know
that exploitation and trafficking spans across
all of Oakland, and youth deserve to have services
that center them, that really are culturally responsive
and are not just broader parts of gender-based violence
and gun violence, because the youth we serve
are impacted by all these things.
Yet they are not often served throughout all these services,
and are often excluded from these services
and not seen as victims, but rather blamed
and seeing as responsible for what is happening to them.
So we can appreciate and really,
I would like for y'all to consider moving this forward.
We think our work is important.
And it hasn't been highlighted and present
in Oakland's budget thus far.
Thank you for your comments.
Next speaker.
Hi, good afternoon or good evening.
My name is Lynette.
I'm a youth engagement specialist at Missy.
We serve girls, gender and expansive youth ages 12 to 24
who are impacted or at risk of sexual exploitation,
as well as violence.
Right now, I am working with a young person
who survived being shot multiple times by her exploiter.
She's currently in a safe place.
However, the trauma did not end when the shooting stopped.
She lives with physical and emotional impact
of that violence, which affects her safety, trust,
and ability to move forward.
She's constantly living in fear.
This is just one of the countless stories
I think it's important for me to
take the time to understand
things from the people that I
work with.
Funding makes it possible to
provide housing and housing
assistance, transformation
coaching and long term stability
stabilization services for the
vulnerable youth.
Community-based organizations
like missy are addressing
violence before it happens and
helping young people build
stable futures.
In my experience, I've seen them
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Analia Villagra, and I am with Bay Area Legal Aid.
We are grateful to the DVP for supporting legal services for low-income survivors.
We are proud to be a part of the Oakland community and to have been providing these services
in Oakland for decades.
Bay Legal works with DV survivors who need help with restraining orders and child custody
to escape abuse, and through our uniquely holistic legal services, we also work with
clients to address legal issues including housing, public benefits,
immigration relief, and reentry services such as getting arrests sealed and
convictions expunged when survivors are wrongly arrested for defending
themselves. Access to civil legal aid significantly reduces incidents of
domestic violence and homelessness. This work saves lives. Our thanks to the city
and the DVP for recognizing the importance of legal services for
survivors. The need is much greater than the funds available can support and it
it is our hope that the city council can identify additional funding to expand the availability
of these critical legal services.
Thank you so much for your comments.
Next speaker.
Hi, my name is Cindy Rios, I am the director of programs at the Dream Youth Clinic.
I am born and raised in Oakland just a few blocks away from commercial sexual exploitation
that occurs on international and where Dream now holds its mobile clinic.
First I want to thank the council for investing in community based solutions to address the
of violence impacting our neighborhoods,
we recognize and honor the competitive process
that was established to allocate these funds.
Many organizations like ours dedicated significant time
and effort developing comprehensive proposals
to address critical community needs.
We have also acknowledged the frontline evaluators,
review committees and city staff who work diligently
to ensure thoughtful selection process.
The funding awarded through this process
will allow us to expand healing-centered intervention
services for youth experiencing gender-based violence,
sexual trafficking, and exploitation.
We respect the work being done by all organizations
committed to violence intervention across the city,
and we believe it's important to uphold the integrity
of the process that was established
and carried out for these awards.
We look forward to partnering with
fellow community organizations.
Thank you so much for your comments.
Hello, my name is Nefeya Hassan,
and I am the Reproductive Justice Programs Coordinator
at Tree Meath Clinic.
I was raised by a single mother throughout Oakland,
and today I have the privilege
of supporting and advocating for young people
across our community.
At Dream Youth Clinic, I lead programs focused
on preventing and intervening in gender-based violence,
including human trafficking, where we serve unhoused youth,
foster youth, LGBTQ plus youth, and young people
who are experiencing some of the most significant barriers
to safety and stability.
Last year, our youth led a survey,
collected responses from over 230 young people in Oakland.
What we heard was clear, young people are experiencing
violence, exploitation, housing instability,
mental health challenges, and a lack of access
to trusted adults in supportive spaces.
Many reported witnessing and experiencing
unhealthy relationships, community violence,
and situations that put them at risk
for trafficking and exploitation.
These aren't just statistics.
These are realities of our young people
that they are navigating every day.
Through our mobile clinic, we provide direct services
to youth in areas where exploitation is prevalent.
We bring health care.
I apologize, nothing.
Okay, Sarah Cain is still in the, Sarah Cain, okay.
One more minute, thank you.
Thank you.
Many reported witnessing and experiencing
unhealthy relationship, or well, here we go.
Through our mobile clinic, we provide direct services
to youth in areas where exploitation
and trafficking is prevalent.
We bring healthcare, STI testing,
harm reduction supplies, referrals, and support
directly to young people who might never walk
into a traditional clinic.
At Dream, we have created a safe haven
where youth can access free medical care,
therapy, showers, laundry facilities, mills,
and caring adults who are committed to their success.
Our health advocates help youth access housing,
education, employment opportunities,
and other critical resources.
We also invest in youth leadership.
The young people in our programs are learning
how to advocate for themselves and engage in policy work
and speak in civil spaces like this one today.
They are becoming leaders,
organizers, and changemakers in Oakland.
When you invest in Dream Youth Clinic,
you are investing in prevention,
you are investing in intervention,
you are investing in healing, and most importantly,
you are investing in the young people
before they become another statistic.
I urge you to continue funding organizations
like Dream Youth Clinic that are doing the work.
Thank you for your comments.
Next speaker.
Ann Jenks.
So police overtime, that's one aspect.
But the greater aspect is the absolute lack,
in curiosity and unwillingness to do any oversight
budget on your largest budget items, like the OPD budget.
You won't look at civilianization of staff, although you will take a staff person from
oversight and give it to OPD and call that civilianization.
There's 50 positions you could civilianize tomorrow.
Put more officers on the street and save money.
There's overtime.
But generally, you're just incurious and uninterested in doing oversight on your big issues while
you leave folks scrambling over the scraps and the pennies.
You know, OPD stated how they were going to use the NN money.
It's supposed to be 50% for sworn officers and 10% for non-sworn.
It's very clear that the majority of the money is for sworn officers and is well under 10% for unsworn and you-
Thank you for your comments.
Next speaker.
Good evening, Kelce Sneed from the Mentoring Center.
Mentoring Center has served youth and young adults for 35 years and
specifically have been has been doing intense violence prevention work with the city of
Oakland for over two decades.
The public procurement process in which the Department of Violence Prevention engaged
remains opaque and fought with inconsistencies, unclear procedures, unprecedented recall
of the first RFP, no clear appeals process and among many other problems.
Therefore, I'm asking the city council not to adopt the recommendations as put forward
and to find additional funding to support the organizations
that continue to do the work.
Oaklanders, including Oakland voters,
who are supporting a $30 million investment deserve
a process that is transparent, fair, equitable,
at every stage, and that has been effective
and reflective of the organizations
that have been doing the work for years.
The Council's justified concerns about disruption
and critical services can be addressed
by extending the current contracts
with organizations who have been receiving.
I apologize Ms. Sneed your time is ended.
Thank you so much.
Next speaker please.
My name is Sierra C and I see my time to Jennifer Lyle.
Hi my name is Bex Biloba I work for Missy
and I also cede our time to our AD Jennifer.
And I'm sorry your name was what?
My name is Bex Biloba I work for Missy.
Hello my name is Jennifer Lyle
and I'm the executive director of Missy.
And for nearly 20 years we have served Oakland youth
impacted by violence, exploitation, and trafficking.
We are survivor experiencer organization,
meaning we are representative of the people that we serve.
We are based in East Oakland,
and we serve the entire Oakland community.
Last year alone, we served more than 730 young people
through housing and housing assistance,
emergency support, food, school-based support,
transformation coaching, and our drop-in center.
I wanna thank the Department of Violence Prevention
and acknowledge the many community organizations
doing this critical work.
I also want to address a concern raised earlier
regarding three-year grants.
Multi-year grants are not unusual.
The federal government funds organizations
three, four, and even five-year grant cycles.
The state of California does the same.
Multi-year funding is a best practice
because it allows organizations to retain staff,
plan services, build partnerships,
and focus on outcomes rather than constantly
reapplying for funding.
Not every organization received funding and difficult decisions had to be made.
The larger issue is not the process,
it is that the need in Oakland exceeds the resources available.
I urge you to continue strengthening the Department of Violence Prevention and
investing in the community-based solutions that are creating
safety stability and opportunity for Oakland's young people and families.
I also encourage the council to trust the leadership and
expertise of the Department of Violence Prevention.
Chief Joshi has is a respected leader in the field not only in Oakland but nationally the D.V.P. team brings deep experience data community relationships and a first hand understanding of what it takes to reduce violence.
None of us will agree with every funding decision that's the nature of a competitive process but if we are going to ask experts to conduct the thorough review engage the community evaluate proposals and make difficult recommendations
then we should also trust their professional judgment.
Oakland has invested years in building the Department
of Violence Prevention into a nationally recognized model.
We should continue to support that work, strengthen it,
and give it the resources necessary to succeed.
The organizations here today are part
of a larger ecosystem, working every day to make Oakland safer.
The question before us is not whether the need exists,
we know it does.
The question is whether we are willing to invest
that's an opportunity.
And that's not just at the level
necessary to meet it.
Thank you for your comments.
Next speaker.
And if I may is this.
Desmond is this the group of
eight.
Yes so you will get a total of
eight minutes on the clock so
you guys need to.
Share that time evenly so one
your minute is that please go to
the next person so we have eight
cards here and if they can state
My name is Kiwi, I am from District 1.
Good afternoon to all.
Many African immigrants arrived in Oakland,
carrying trauma from war, displacement, family separation,
violence, and migrant, yet culturally representative
mental health services remained difficult to access.
Too often, families struggle in silence because of a culture, language barrier, stigma, and
the luck of providing who understand their culture and experiences.
That's why is why our requesting funding for African immigrant mental health and community
health healing three years african immigrant community stabilizing initiative
funding four thousand four hundred and fifty thousand again four hundred and
fifty thousand annually mental health support should not depend on whether a
community can afford mental health thank you so much good afternoon good
My name is Desmond Jeffries I live in district six the council budget team has identified public safety violence prevention, but public safety violence prevention reducing homelessness and core city services as a top priorities for the city of Oakland.
Those are our priorities to African immigrant families experience housing instability violence trauma language barriers and barriers accessing services as I even go to your city website on immigration.
on immigration. These are the languages I see Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, English,
Hindi, Japanese, Korean, Persian, Punjabi, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, Vietnamese. We
don't see one African language listed, not Tigrinya, not Meherik, not Swahili, so
as I move on, when we are not what yet when we are looking for looking at the
the funding recommendations, we do not see a dedicated investment in African immigrant
community.
We are not asking the city to create a new priority.
We are asking the city to include our community within the priorities it has already established.
That is why we respectfully request $450,000 annually for three years to support housing
and stabilization, mental health services and case management for the African immigrant
families.
For years, GCA has been part of Oakland's violence prevention journey.
We supported early advocacy, community research, evaluation conversations with urban strategies
and public testimony before city commissions and council.
We helped elevate the need for a stronger violence prevention system, including a dedicated
department and leadership connected directly to the mayor.
We believe this work will lead to a more equitable strategy.
That is why it is deeply heartening to see 3.81.1 million in measure and in violence
prevention funding move forward while African immigrant communities remain largely invisible
and invisible to the process.
Good evening, House.
My name is Dr. Jeffrey Añeone.
I run a church in Oakland for the past 11 years, Nigerian-African congregation.
And here we are presenting GCEA.
Your budget includes funding for public safety, homeless service, temporary shelter beds,
hotel vouchers, community safety programs, and violence prevention.
Those investments matter, yeah.
But there is a difference between funding a program and ensuring everyone can assess
it.
African immigrant families face unique barriers, including language assets, immigration-related
stress, cultural isolation, and challenges
navigating public systems.
Without culturally responsive support,
many families remain disconnected
from the various services intended to help them.
We are asking, therefore, the city
to recognize African immigrants as a community that
deserves visibility, partnership, and investment
through a three-year African immigrant community
National Stabilization Initiative funded at $450,000 annually because equity is not just about what
gets funded, it is also about who gets included. We support case management, housing stabilization,
family conflict, gender-based violence, concerns, community healing and crisis responses. We
currently manage three housing sites through master leases because public system have not met the
much of this work has been subsidized by the continuity itself. Alameda County
phase five has become an important partner in supporting our family's
emergency and transitional housing programs and we are grateful but GCEA
receives no dedicated city or state founding. We respectfully request a
three-year African immigrant community stabilization initiative funded at
at $450,000 annually, to support two case managers,
an African immigrant mental health clinician,
house stabilization property management coordinator,
and culturally responsive healing services.
If Oakland is serious about violence prevention,
African immigrants cannot remain invisible.
Thank you.
My name is Alma Zitego.
I'm also from the African Resource Center.
During the campaign, many of Oakland elected leaders
committed to support African immigrant community
through housing, language access, public safety,
mental health services, and culture-responsive programs.
We appreciate that commitment.
Today we are asking for action, for action.
GCA current serves no delegated city or state funding.
Despite providing housing support, family stabilization,
community healing, system navigation, Christ response,
much more services for the African Resource Center
and community.
We are not meaningfully invited into the community conversation and we did not see African immigrant
communities reflected in our outreach, language access or funding outcomes.
We ask for your help in making sure that the African community is able to thrive, get the
support they need.
They are in your district.
They are in your grocery stores.
they are in your restaurants that you go to.
They have their own businesses.
They...
Pay taxes like everybody else.
Paying taxes like everybody else.
Our tax, we work hard, we pay taxes.
What, we're not getting nothing from the city.
So if this is gonna continue, we're gonna explode this.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much, you guys, for your comments.
On to the next speakers.
You order, order in the chamber.
Sir, you may begin.
Hi, my name is Ayinde.
I'm sorry, Miss Joshi and your group over here.
I heard your guys' whole program.
None of that is prevention.
That's a bunch of reactionary bullshit.
The bottom line is, where are our after-school programs?
Why in Oakland, our kids don't have anywhere to go?
There's no summer youth employment program.
There's no TRIO programs.
That's how you prevent violence,
is earlier you do prevention.
You don't wait till somebody becomes at risk.
You do it early and none of that is happening through what I just heard.
And I'm going with what I just saw their department put up there.
None of that is prevention.
You have to do things for these young people.
Go into the schools.
Where is their program going into the schools?
Where is their program where they're going to families like boss does?
You don't do any of that.
What you guys do is wait and be reactionary until after the horses get out the barn.
and we need to be in touch with
the public we need a true
prevention program and boss is
the only one who's answered that
call.
Thank you for your comments next
speaker.
Our good evening members of the
council I'm Richard D. Howard
game from the Oakland private
industry council.
Of we just want to appear here
today to thank you and we are
honored to have been a recipient
development program or one of the few that got awarded in that regard and so
it's an important area of intervention and prevention to have jobs for young
people and we're excited to be able to work together with Chief Joshi and her
staff to continue our cohort training a 16-week training that has been going on
under a pilot program and we've graduated eighty eight percent of the
people that are in it. A sixteen week program it's remarkably successful thank you very much. Thank you so much for your comments. Next
speaker. Yeah my name is Rick Ford and Barry. I'm with Oakham Pig. I like to say hello to you. You guys. We work with some of the
strongest, worsted youth that comes through Oakland,
and we do what we call a 16-week curriculum
for Chief Joshi.
We did it for the first time, and it went really well.
And what's important is that in these cohorts,
we sit around with these young guys, and they get hope.
Most of the time, we lose our hope as a man
to do things in this world to make a change
for our family and our community.
What these young men are here is learning,
not just job skills, but how to be a man,
how to shake a man's hand,
how to stand up and look a man in the eye,
how to dress for an interview.
Those kind of things mean a lot to these young men,
and I'm just grateful for the life coaches
that Chief Jopsee has her team.
Thank you so much for your comments.
Next speaker.
Hi, I'm Pastor Langford, and I also wanna,
I have the time of Jonathan Jones.
I wanna start by-
Is Jonathan, I'm sorry, is Jonathan Jones here?
Thank you so much Mr. Langford.
I want to start by I have been a part of the violence prevention program since day one.
And I say this but I don't think a lot of people hear me.
I have buried 100 people in Oakland who have been murdered.
Pastor Langford has and I have helped to raise most of the money to bury them.
I have buried 19 of my own family members who have been murdered in Oakland.
I am so thankful to have met Sarah Bedford and I'm so elated that this council has hired
Chief Josie because the violence prevention work and many of the staff I have employed
formally through Healthy Oakland, but it gives me something to do.
I walk the streets of Oakland and I drive the streets of Oakland more than anybody in
this chamber and no one at the end of the day wants to get the word that you've lost
your mother, your father, your sister, your brother.
That is something that Oakland has been dealing with and we're getting better at it.
And the answer is into the structure, the organization that has come forth, especially
with Chief Josie.
Her leadership, she's from Oakland, she's from East Oakland, she was a former police
officer the sister gets it she understands she has hearts incredible
men and women that are from Oakland who have been formerly incarcerated who live
the life who doing what's right the challenge is we don't have enough money
and I want to say that the Oakland private industry council yeah we get
funded but I fund a lot of things out of my pocket and will continue to do so but
this is a time for us not to point the fingers but this is time for us to
And I thank you all for being
with us today to continue to
reach out to corporations to
athletes entertainers and
others to invest in Oakland so
that we can save lives and so
that the great work of Oakland
will continue to be done I want
to thank the council for your.
Thank you so much for your
comments Mr Langford your time
is ended.
Next speaker.
Yes good evening council
and appreciation for the funding being proposed for Youth Alive so we can
continue our services for victims, survivors, and interrupt cycles of
violence in east-west and central Oakland. At the same time, we recognize
that there are many great organizations, programs, services that are not being
included in this round of funding. And as somebody that helped write and pass
Measure NN, I would again reiterate to this council that Measure NN is the
floor, not the ceiling, on the city's ability to invest in violence
prevention intervention and healing services throughout Oakland as somebody that's helped bring millions of dollars of investment from the state of California
From the federal government to community-based violence intervention programs here
I fully support the council working with us working with the community to do that bring in additional investment
So that the great work that's happening through many services programs in Oakland can continue. Thank you
Thank you so much for your comments. Mr. Hazard
This discussion is very interesting
there's no question about the need.
The issue is equitable distribution of the resources.
We could give money to other cultures
to come in the black community.
Some of them may hire some black folks,
but they don't have oversight of the dollars and cents.
You give money to the law family.
They hire some black folks,
but they oversee the distribution of the money.
You could give money to the Asian Local Development
Corporation.
They have some black folks.
You could give money to the Spanish Speaking Council.
But when you're going to give equitable money
to black folks who are hurting and dying,
we represent 70% of the unsheltered,
but we only 21% in this town.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard your time is up.
Excuse me, Mr. Hazard.
If your name was called, please approach the podium.
At this time, all names have been called
and we do not have any Zoom speakers.
Or if you are on Zoom and your name was called
and you wish to speak, please raise your hand.
Thank you.
Thank you for everybody who came out to comment on this.
Thank you for everybody who's doing work
in the city of Oakland to reduce violence.
Without, we're going to pass it to Council Member Wall.
Thank you, through the chair.
Since I chaired the committee that saw this item,
I just wanted to provide some context
to the rest of the body about why we actually proceeded
with this with an amendment for this to be advanced
to this full body as a two-year contract
rather than a three-year contract.
But before I get that, I do wanna thank DVP Dr. Joshi
for her just amazing work that is always on the forefront
of community violence prevention.
But we had this lengthy discussion in the committee
around how there was an aberration
that was really more around the upfront procurement process
that resulted in not one but two times
that the RFP was conducted
and there was discussion about it.
And so anyways, this is how we landed on advancing it
to this committee with an amendment of two years
instead of the three years that was originally proposed.
And the other thing I just wanted to mention
is that there were included in this just more information
on how people were evaluated and what were the criteria.
And so I wanna thank the team for just providing
some of this additional information
that sheds more light and transparency
into what happened with this procurement.
That being said, I have just a couple of,
actually just one question to Dr. Joshi.
Just looking at the, this is Supplemental Attachment A,
this is on the healing on gun violence strategy.
I just noted that I think one of the recipients
here was rated, this is the SARE group,
they were rated a little further below,
but they got the funding, was there a reason?
And I have, to be clear, the people who ranked above
and I have no relationship with these groups,
I'm just asking out of fairness for the process.
Sure, absolutely.
Thank you for the question to the chair.
We, in that particular instance,
we chose to recommend skipping down to that entity
because they specifically represent immigrant rights
and have significant language access for survivors.
Okay, great, yes, and I was actually very happy
to see the consideration for those items
in the evaluation criteria.
I know there were some comments in public safety committee around are we being culturally responsive and I saw that that was evaluated
So thank you. That made sense. I suspected that was the reason why but I just wanted to clarify
For gender-based violence specifically. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Great and I'll I'll actually make a motion to adopt the
recommendation with the amendment
Thank you councilmember
Houston and then
them Brown
Mr. Ramsey
Mr. Miss Ramsey
Okay, go ahead
through the chair
These are my folks talking they from that foreign country that Daryl said is East Oakland and
I'm gonna look at each and one of my council members and I'm gonna ask you
the crime
That is happening is not happening in your district like mine your district
Your district president
Yo, it is but it's not like DP. So it's not like my people
I have friends and family that have been murdered and have murdered right and it's what's economics
It's economics. They don't want to commit. They don't want to be in the underground economy
right and
My question is this if we can find money for everything else
Why can't we find money for my people and what I mean by that is a find additional monies
You know, mr. Hazard said equitable truly equitable. Let me share this with you
the organization that did not
qualify for the technical services, right
Just because they didn't qualify for the technical services the people that are doing at working for them will not be able to work
it's not their fault that that organization didn't make it through the
technical service and then then it went to the scoring and review so my thing is
I want to ask I want to talk to every council member on here how you gonna
help us find some money some additional money for these young men and women that
came up here to speak that's gonna be affected because that organization
didn't qualify how are we gonna do this I mean if we can find the money you
heard them speaking you could find the money for overtime for police you could
find money for illegal dumping you know and that's my thing we could find but
but I'm saying we got a list let's find some money for my folks this is my
people I was elected to represent District 7 and I'm going to I'm going
I'm gonna represent like they want me to and I'm gonna say this I'm serious too
I'm serious just like they are and I tell people I just look like this. I'm from a different cloth
Right, so I'm saying how and I'm a baby and I'm not I'm threatening. I'm not pushing. I ain't bully and I'm saying
Can you help me?
Can you help me find some money that's gonna help the individuals that's gonna be affected because the organization?
Didn't qualify you heard them speak
You know, we all human right? It's like
Let's help them you heard him shot
it is a
Young man that came up here said he just what was his name country was his country that came here last time was a country
He said he's works for Boston. He's in school. He's about to get his his degree and he want to come and work for you
Let's be humane. Come on you guys. I know we could do something if we can find some money for Oh over time off police
So I'm just saying what I'm saying is this what I'm saying is this let's find some additional funding. That's all I'm saying
mr. Mr. Ramsey
order in the chambers
order in the chamber
Okay, council member Brown then Kyle
Right. Um, well as council member Wong stated in public safety
we had a very robust conversation where we really
dived into the details of just the process,
and I think we all were able to determine
that there were definitely some areas of opportunity.
But one of the biggest takeaways, of course,
including all of the public speakers that came
and recognizing some of the gaps in services
that we will see as it relates to some of the East Oakland providers also the
Lack of a service provider specifically focused in on the LGBTQ community. We also heard from the African resource
community as well
and so we
So we heard those comments and then also at the same time there was kind of this awareness that was made around
how in the past
So I think there is a lot of
the general fund used to
supplement some of this
violence prevention work and so
I think that to answer your
question councilmember Houston
I think as a body we really need
to of course we don't want any
we need to really ensure that there's no, you know,
gaps in service as it relates to those
who are providing services in East Oakland
and some of our other vulnerable communities.
And so that's why in the amendment that we made,
we're moving forward with a two-year contract instead
and a request for, I just wanna make sure
I say this on the record,
and a request for a six month report back from the D. P. D. V. P. on the impacts of funds granted in the impacts of funds not awarded to the current grantees in our current cycle. While we as a body. Work to try to identify additional funds that may actually be out outside of the current scope that it that we're moving forward.
Thank you council member and then we're gonna it was at a second.
Okay, there's a second and then council member Gallo. Yeah. Thank you and thank you for the opportunity
And I want to first of all, thank some of the speakers that were here this evening youth alive
Restorative justice that the pick
representatives from the private industry council and
Also Missy I haven't seen Missy was extremely helpful in my district for many many years
Assisting the girls that are on the street
Teenagers, you know, young people.
We do a lot of talking about what happens in our neighborhoods
in East Oakland, throughout the city, with our young people.
And I think we need to create some leadership, some support,
and I'm going to ask you, well, for example,
the youth employment program on 23rd
and International didn't get funded.
They've been around for many years,
but they have youngsters not only providing their training,
the job opportunities, but also their high school degrees.
And these are kids from the neighborhood
that if they weren't at YEP,
well, they wouldn't be in our schools.
So for me, it's, you know,
what I guess my request is how did, you know,
what do we need to do to include programs?
Because my understanding, some of the evaluators
have no understanding what Oakland is all about
or have lived in Oakland and understand our behavior, right?
And that's what I see a lot of people that are working in Oakland,
well, they're commuting to Oakland.
And so for me, it's really important that you look at the organizations
that have delivered a service because YEP not only are there in school,
learning how to build, how to construct, but they're also out in the neighborhood,
helping me clean the neighborhood.
And these are African-American youngsters.
All right, they're not white people.
They're people from the neighborhood.
I don't want to give you excuses.
Because we are full, all we do is make excuses.
So anyways, YAP, I would love to, you know,
us to reconsider and find a different way
to support the young people that are there
running in East Oakland.
Thank you.
So through the chair, I think there are a few questions
in there from Council Member Gayo.
The first thing I'd like to address
is the fact that the competitive bidding process
is a competitive bidding process.
It does not ensure that the same agencies
get money for decades.
Because on the flip side of the conversation,
the critiques that we often hear
from community-based organizations
and that we often hear from African-American led
organizations and smaller organizations
is that the city's competitive bidding process
consistently favors what is called legacy organizations
that have been receiving money from the city
for 20 to 30 years.
So what the DVP endeavored to do
at the direction of the city administrator's office
is to run a true competitive bidding process
in which everyone had an equal chance to get money.
In that competitive bidding process, I wanna be clear,
43% of the agencies that we are recommending
to this council to be funded are black run,
19% are Latino run.
So the very large majority of the organizations
that we are requesting to be funded are run by black and Latino people who we all know
in this city are disparately impacted by violence. Black folks are murdered in this city at a
higher rate than anyone else and unfortunately Latinos are catching up to us and so the investment
in the organizations that we are asking to fund considers that fact. The other thing
that I'd like to say specifically about YEP Mr. Gayos since you brought it up is that
the benefits of O. F. C. Y.
O. F. C. Y. which is the
challenge that we absolutely
honor the work that they do
with at risk kids they are
receiving funding from the
workforce development in the
city and from O. F. C. Y. they
did not score the highest in
the D. V. P. is our P. process
which was specifically focused
on finding a partner that could
serve ceasefire lifeline
clients that are the highest
risk for violence you heard
opaque discuss the sixteen week
fellowship that we've designed
thank you with that we'll call the roll there was a motion by councilmember
Wong second by councilmember Brown to approve this item with the amendments
made from the public safety committee councilmember Brown aye councilmember
five aye councilmember Gallo aye councilmember Houston councilmember
Houston I know don't tell me to come on because it's principle to hear no
councilmember I'm a Chandra hi councilmember under hi councilmember Wong
I and chair Jenkins I motion passes with the vote of seven eyes one no Houston
that completes your non consent portion of this agenda moving to item six which
is the consent calendar noting an item 6.1 and 6.2 have been removed from this
this agenda. If you signed up for these items, you still would be allowed to give public
comment. Are you taking that separate or with the consent calendar? So you can come up for
the consent calendar. So just noting that the GAD items, item 6.1, which is the Leona
Quarry GAD annual budget for fiscal year 26-27 and item 6.2, the Oakland area GAD annual
budget for fiscal year 26 and 27 have been removed from this agenda and are
going to the next meeting reading in item 6.3 approval of the draft minutes
from the meeting of June 1st and June 2nd Adam 6.4 resolution regarding the
declaration of a local emergency due to the AIDS epidemic item 6.5 a declaration
of a medical emergency due to due to cannabis Adam 6.46 a resolution for a
declaration of a local emergency on homelessness. Item 6.7. Is final passage
for an ordinance amending the fiscal year 25 to 26. Master fee schedule fiscal
year 26 through 27. Item 6.8 final passage for ordinance for measures M and
C in N D Q A A and Y and M M for fiscal year 26 through 27 cost of living tax
adjustment and six point nine in ordinance amending in reenacting Oakland
Municipal Code chapter three point zero eight and six point ten a resolution for
Becker boards agreement adjustments I'm six point eleven a resolution for
retirement for nakola desberg I'm six point twelve a resolution for National
Caribbean heritage month I'm six point thirteen a resolution for national
homeownership month. Item 6.14 a resolution condemning the war on Iran.
Item 6.15 includes multiple pieces of legislation for a settlement for a city
of Oakland versus Stephen O. Kerner. Item 6.16 a resolution for settlement for
Raven Loke versus the city of Oakland. Item 6.17 a resolution for Oakland
connect fiber network partnership legislation.
Item 6.18, a resolution for summarily
vacating public utility easement at 747 52nd Street.
Item 5, I'm sorry, excuse me, 6.19,
a resolution for Owen equipment sales ink purchase contract.
Item 6.20, a resolution from MLK Junior Way
streetscape improvements.
Item 6.21, an ordinance for Oakland Ice Center
and capital projects.
Item 6.22, an information report for the general plan
and housing element annual progress report for year 2025.
Item 6.23, a resolution for camps
and common rental agreement.
Item 6.24, a resolution
for multi-purpose senior services program.
Item 6.25, an ordinance for bike share franchise amendment.
And that was your last consent item.
You have approximately 58 speakers on this item.
Let's go to public speakers first.
As I call your name please approach the podium.
Wait, I saw a hand raised.
You said just because you have a Rolex.
Oh.
I just wanted to register a no vote on the billboard item
just because I don't believe it should be on consent.
I think it's something that should have been discussed
in the full council.
And I also wanna just express again my support
for the Oakland Eye Center
and everything they do for Oakland, thank you.
Thank you.
And yes, on the rest of the consent calendar.
Yes, on the rest of the consent calendar.
Council Member Wong.
I actually wanted to pull S6.25 off consent.
We discussed this in public works and transportation
and I remember at the time feeling like
when we were looking at that map of the bike share stations
that they weren't equitably distributed around the city.
It was notable how much those bike shares
were really skewed towards North and West Oakland
and how few stations were out in East Oakland.
And that was confirmed by a note
that was then sent in by Tanya Love.
And I think it's worth at least a discussion
with this wider body.
Thank you, council member.
The appropriate time is item number three,
modifications to the agenda to pull things off a consent yeah so no vote for
six point two five councilmember younger I'd like to register a no vote for item
six point ten thank you thank you anybody else
councilmember use a no vote on six point two five I registered no vote on six
point one oh I believe the city should get a hundred percent of the money all
right with that let's go to the public speakers moving to the public speakers
as I call your name please approach the podium in any order please state your
name before beginning please raise your hand on zoom if you still wish to speak
and as with the council rules or procedure there is no seating time on
the consent calendar or open forum Isaac cost read Blair beakman I have you with
multiple items. Derek Barnes, I have you with multiple items. Kevin Dalley, Mrs.
Sada Olamala, I have you with multiple items. Ayers Renee Lilly, Mr. Hazard, I
have you with all the items on consent. Christopher Powell, Carla Guerrero, I have
you with two items. Kathy Adams, I have you with two items.
Kahiri Gutierrez, Colin Hughes, Latasha Perry, Randy Munmun, Semia Ramsey, have you with
two items, Alex Isseran, sorry if I said that incorrectly, Gary Z., Stephanie Tran, I have
you with two items, Kathy Adams, I think that was a duplicate, Petra Brody, Kahiri Gutierrez,
items Alfred Lee two items Jennifer trans duplicate Peter gammies Preston
pinkly two items Ali Obad two items land is it candy Martinez two items Daniel
So Swafford two items, Chadwick Spell, Ryan Nolan, two items, Ari Curry, Ryan Austin,
someone from Cocoa Breeze, Joe Pertita, Amber Childress, hey, Amber, Bridget Cain, Roseman
Velasco, sorry if I said that incorrectly, Amelia Wilson, Sherry Vance.
Marisa Marissa Lyons, Nima Link, Vanessa McGeehee, Petra Brady, Tiffany Jordan,
Chris Hellyer, Heather Siglin, Angela Hackney, Kimberly Miller, Christine
Tostado, Arthur Leviskey, Wan Gong Lee, is it Renice Johnson, Elizabeth Winn,
Supreme Ayahi, Charles Johnson, David Walker. Mr. Haslan have you multiple
items you have three minutes. Thank you. I don't know why you keep carrying
6.5. Adopt a resolution renewing the City Council's declaration of a local public health
emergency with respect to safe affordable access to medical cannabis in the city of
Oakland. Why do you keep having this? And you don't put a medical public health safety
around Fentanyl. Cannabis, if you didn't know it that you approved, is legal. You approved
the cafe. It's legal. So why are you carrying this? That's the negligence on your part.
I gave you all what I filed on Friday in opposition to the city's demure, a demure for those who
don't know. It's trying to dismiss what I filed back on May 19, 2025 on the special
election regarding Measure A, the transaction use tax, and the city attorney altered the
tax on the ballot measure. And so, 366 days, I've been dealing with this procedural crap.
But they weaponized me by filing this demurf on June 1. I was waiting for that. Now we'll
to be in court on June 25.
Let me read what's here and how hopefully it's going to,
we shall prevail.
Responded, Ryan Richardson's demure
should be overruled in its entirety.
The demure ignores the unusual procedural posture
of this case and attempts to capitalize
upon the clear career.
Well, let me tell you what happens with the clerical error.
The clerical misclassification, despite being a writ proceeding,
the clerk of the court improperly classified the matter
as a general civil action and assigned it to Department 23.
Should have been Department 24, not 23.
They handle writs.
Let me go to the legal argument.
The court must correct the court's administrative misclassification
because the law respects substance over form.
Substance is the risk.
California Civil Code 3528 provides a fundamental maximum
jurisprudence the law respects form less than substance.
This principle is.
Thank you, Mr. Hazard, your time is up.
Kathy Adams, President of the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce.
To President Jenkins, it's my time started, and Oakland City Council,
thank you for your service and thank you for your commitment and your time.
Becker Boards has provided enormous opportunities for our members to advertise their businesses.
The billboard programs have brought enormous exposure to the community.
The visibility is invaluable.
We need the billboard program.
We need something that's positive for our community
and our businesses.
Businesses increase customers.
They grow revenue.
They create jobs with the billboard.
We urge you to vote yes
and know that you're making an impact.
I wanna say thank you to all of our members
of all the multicultural chambers.
A lot of us arrived here by 3.30,
and a lot of people had to leave because of the activities.
But we urge you to support, it is important.
A lot of our businesses don't have the money to advertise.
It's truly something good for our community.
We stand in solidarity and ask that you support this
to continue our businesses an opportunity
to thrive and grow in our community.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, or maybe even good evening.
My name is Peter Gammes, President and CEO for Visit Oakland.
At Visit Oakland, our job is to tell a story,
to visitors, meeting planners, sports fans, investors,
and future residences.
We know that perception matters and visibility matters.
If people don't see Oakland, they don't think about Oakland.
If they don't think about Oakland,
they don't visit Oakland.
Last year, Oakland welcomed approximately
3.4 million visitors who generated
more than 583 million in visitor spending and nearly 779 million in total
economic impact supporting over 5,500 local jobs. Tourism is one of Oakland's
most important economic engine and it relies effectively on ways to reach
people where they are. Brecker boards helps us do exactly that. Billboards are
often the first invitation someone receives to attend an event, visit a
restaurant stay in a hotel or simply take another look at Oakland to help
business grow they help organizations communicate and they help tell us the
city's story as someone who spends every day competing for visitors and
attention in a crowded marketplace I can tell you that visibility is not a
luxury it's a necessity Becker has been a strong community partner and visit
Oakland is proud to support their continued investment in the city thank
our community thank you.
Good evening council members my
name is Kerry good year is a D.
six resident and I'm here on
behalf of the unity council to
express our support of the
Becker boards partnership.
I have a lot of wonderful
examples to share with you all
about the impact of Becker
boards partnership to the
community the first one that
I'd like to share with you is
that we've used this platform.
To promote our annual the other
over a hundred thousand people from all over the Bay Area to the Fruitvale in
Oakland. This boosts our local economy and it preserves culture. During these
especially challenging times this billboard has also become a critical
public messaging tool. In collaboration with our resilient Fruitvale partners we
shared Know Your Rights resources, legal support, and safety planning for
immigrant families. Most recently we also partnered with El Tinfano to make sure
that the messages that we shared were also in Spanish and the native language
of a lot of our immigrant communities. I'm proud to say that we also thank you
your time is up. Thank you council president and council members like I said
my name is Eric Oliver director of community engagement for Becker boards
it has been my pleasure to work closely with Oakland small business nonprofit
and business improvement district community. I'll keep this brief since
three million. I'll say it
again three million dollars in
free advertising through five
hundred eighty two free ads to
over a hundred local small
businesses. Non-profit
organizations and business
improvement districts in Oakland.
Over the last week you have seen
support pour into. From every
corner of the city from only a
small fraction of the people who
have directly benefit from this
program. We do good work in
Oakland and we are proud to
contribute to the work of the
we're proud of it.
The decision in front of you is clear.
A vote, yes, is a vote for the community.
Thank you for your community support
and all your hard work.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, council members.
My name is Lily Ayers, and I am a business owner in D3,
and for some reason my council member won't face me.
Moving on, so here we go.
I was born at Highland Hospital, I went to Casa Mont,
And yesterday a meteorite hit my shop.
The sky is falling, the sky is falling.
The sky is falling.
What does this mean?
At least that's what the people are thinking these days,
right, with everything they see in the media,
all on television, right?
So what am I here for?
For nine years, I've been in downtown Oakland,
helping to heal people.
And I would like to tell my story
about the meteor in my store.
I'm here today to tell you a
The Oakland Chinatown Chamber is part of a coalition that supported the creation of the billboard program because it represented an innovative partnership between public, private, and nonprofit sectors.
It's demonstrated that we can create solutions that benefit community organizations, small businesses, and the city of Oakland at the same time.
And over the years, Becker Boards has become more than just a billboard program.
It has become a valuable asset and community resource that helps promote local businesses,
public awareness campaigns, and neighborhood initiatives.
And for many organizations and small businesses, this type of visibility would otherwise be financially out of reach.
And as a chamber representing hundreds of small businesses,
we know how important it is for small businesses.
We know how important it is to help local entrepreneurs
reach customers and compete in today's marketplace.
And Becker Board has helped us connect residents
and visitors with businesses, events, and organizations
that make our city unique.
And as Oakland and the city continues,
and you all have to navigate this fiscal challenge,
We should be looking towards really opportunities
to support partnerships that promote economic activity,
strengthen community engagement,
and contribute to the long-term success of our city.
And so for these reasons,
the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce
respectfully urges all of you
to support the Becker Board's agreement.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, good evening, council members.
My name is Alex Izvaran,
and I'm a co-owner of Oakland Fortune,
one of Oakland Chinatown's oldest
among outstanding businesses.
Next year will be our 70th year.
And as a small business owner, I can tell you
that billboard advertising traditionally has been
not accessible to small businesses like ours.
We're not a big corporation, even though we've been around
for a long time.
And we don't have a marketing team,
so having an opportunity to work with Becker Boards
and have access to something that a lot of people get to see
is a great opportunity for us and my family.
So through Becker Boards, for the first time in 70 years,
we were able to have an advertisement go up
and have people along the 880 and 580 see it
on their way to work and I was lucky enough
to see it maybe once or twice.
So, just wanted to urge the council members
to support this and thank you very much for your time.
do I start now?
Wong Gong from Hong Kong that went to elementary school
here in Lincoln.
But I'm here as a member of the chamber
and also a member of our Chinese school in Oakland
that's been around for 70 years.
Pandemic really killed us.
Our enrollment from a thousand kids went down to 500.
With Becka Board, let us expose ourselves
to the general public that come down the freeway
that usually don't stop in Oakland anymore
because there's Ranch 99 and other large box store
that sells Asian goods.
And put us back on the map,
there is an Asian culture in Oakland Chinatown
that you could participate, send your kids too.
So I really thank Becker Board for letting us preach
to the public that drives down 880.
We, as a non-profit, we can't afford this type of advertising.
It's been very effective for us.
And our enrollment right now is up to 600 kids a day.
So thank you, Becker Board.
Thank you for Chamber for supporting all of us.
Good evening, council.
Thank you so much for hearing this item.
My name is Nima Link with Becker Boards.
Unfortunately, a lot of our speakers had to go.
Most of them are small business owners,
and so they had to go.
And I think in fairness to them,
I'd like to read their names.
Twenty-two speaker cards here that filled out their cards and weren't able to speak and we understand the reasons
There's pressing issues that the council had to discuss Heather Siglin
Chris Heller
Tiffany Jordan
Vanessa McGee
Petra Brady
Ryan Austin
Joe Partita
Bridget Cain
Amelia Wilson
Rosemary Velasco
Sherry Vance
Marissa Lyons, Ryan Nolan, Ari Curry, Chadwick Spell, Daniel Swofford, Candy Martinez, Ali
Obad, Preston Pinkley, Jennifer Tran, Gary Shee, and Angela Hackney.
I want to thank them for not, they're not here, but thank them.
health center that was affected by this and we understand that they'll be affected in
the next few years has sent a letter of support stating their acknowledgement and acceptance
of this change. It's unequivocally better for the city and the city will make more money.
Thank you for support. I urge for your yes vote. Thank you.
So let me clarify something. 68% of the victims of homicide and the suspects are African-Americans.
I don't know what the rising Latino rate is,
but presently, that's the number.
Stop thinking that it's appropriate
for other people to take care of black people.
Asians are not gonna let black people take care of their needs.
Latinos are not gonna let black people tell them what to do.
So why do you think it's appropriate
that other people like the Lau family
and all these other groups, your unity council,
can take care anything having to do with african-americans items six point eight
cost of living adjustment what that means is you're going to increase the
amount of money
people pay on all of these measures on their property taxes
and you don't take under consideration some of the challenges people are going
through with mortgages with home insurance
with foreclosures and so forth every year you just you just increase it
with no consideration of the challenges for homeowners
item six point nine you're deleting something related to the bad ballot
measures having to do with the city manager and the I'm sorry the city
attorney and the city clerk no discussion you're just changing it six
point ten nonprofits that benefit all the time or Asian and Latinos very few
african-american nonprofits get the same attention that was demonstrated with
this violence prevention thing you just dealt with.
6.15, if you own property, this is a lawsuit,
but you're allowing property that you bought,
you're allowing the person that you bought the property from
to stay on the property for 12 months.
Now that's the way you're supposed to be building
the fire station, and you're also extending
that you can do it in six more months
that the owner of the previous owner of the property
can stay on the property.
I don't know what that's about.
That's crazy.
6.21, Oakland Ice Center.
Now, y'all, this leasing, parking, validation of parking,
who's paying for that?
Where's the money?
You also hired a refrigeration engineer
to go work on the problem we paying for that,
to go work on the problem at the ice rink.
River Camp, Feather River Camp, 6.23.
You got some inequities going on,
who's going to those camps, mostly white people.
That's who's going to those camps.
Now going back to the, I got time, yes.
Going back to these fees, your fees have to make sense.
When you buy a piece of property for $125,000
and then you have a fee for $900,000, make that make sense.
When you have a vacancy tax, add.
Thank you, Ms. Olobalo, your time is up.
If your name is gone and you're in chambers
and you wish to speak, please approach the podium.
Otherwise, we will be moving to the Zoom speakers,
starting with Christopher Powell.
I have you with one card for one minute.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Chris Powell.
Yes.
Good evening, President Jenkins and council members.
My name is Chris Powell.
I'm an attorney at Hanson Bridget.
I'm speaking on behalf of Alfred Foster Interstate.
We asked you to pull item 6.10 from consent.
This is not a routine contract amendment.
It's a fundamental retrade of the 2023 Becker deal
on terms far worse for the city.
It cuts Becker's guaranteed payment from $750,000 a year
to $250,000 a year,
dependent on unaudited self-reporting.
It reuses takedown credits Becker already used once
to add new billboards,
a net increase that contradicts
your own general plans billboard reduction policy.
It eliminates Becker's roughly $500,000
poll cover obligation and clause back payments
already made to community health nonprofits.
It also cannot lawfully be approved as exempt from CEQA,
raises equal protection concerns,
and also risks an unlawful gift of public funds.
I submitted a letter yesterday by email
that I asked to be included in the record.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Powell.
Moving to Isaac Cosperid, I have you with one card.
You two have one minute, please unmute yourself
and begin your comments.
Good evening, can you all hear me?
Yes.
Council President Jenkins and amazing council members,
first of all, thank you for your hard work
listening in tonight, the whole meeting.
I appreciate more than ever your public service.
Thank you also for considering the Becker Board Revisions
and for recognizing what Becker has done for Oakland.
$3 million in free ads for nonprofits and small businesses.
Anyone who works in communications or politics
shows how huge that is. Over 100 small businesses and community-based organizations served
as well. This is something that has never been done before by the big two corporate
billboard monopoly here in Oakland. These revisions will ensure that the free ads continue.
They will also preserve the city's money and most likely lead to greater funding for
both the city and community over the life of the agreements. That's why every one of
the nonprofit community health centers supported and why you should too. Thank you and hello
from my wife's home country of Guatemala.
Thank you for your comments moving to Mr. Buechman.
I have you with multiple cards.
You will have three minutes.
Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Hi, Blair Buechman.
I had comments for item 6.8, 6.9 and 6.14.
6.18 is first the working on NN issues,
many of the measures.
I wanted to quickly comment that with measure NN,
Thank you that in the month of June,
you're gonna be working on the financial matters of NN.
And I hope those can be important lessons
of accountability.
We're really trying to understand accountability.
I've learned a lot from your previous meetings on it,
and I hope those conversations are open and clear
and good work that you're doing it very openly overall.
Also for item 6.9,
is items about you're going to create a more efficient
process for voting and the city clerk's job can be easier.
But I don't think it's necessarily that much easier
in what you're doing.
I think you're actually limiting the public process.
You have a few cute rules that allow the city of Oakland
to somehow have some sort of power over the public process
of information and that's somehow okay.
And I think that should be questioned.
You don't want to put information on voting ballots because it's the City of Oakland item.
I really seriously question that as being sound, efficient government, and it should
be questioned.
And finally, to conclude, thank you much to Councilperson Unger for his initiative and
wanting to limit war and to follow the examples of our current U.S. congresspersons.
I feel Councilperson Unger's initiative, along with many people in Oakland and across the
country are working much the beliefs that peace
and dialogue are just as important as current U.S.
Israel and other Middle Eastern country
beliefs in using continual war terrorism and violence
as how to solve their differences.
The Councilperson Unger's initiative I hope Oakland
in Oakland we can continue to more
extensively balance and address and share
clearly Israel's existential worries the future
of Gaza with an inclusive Muslim in see my terms
and to develop Oakland's own city government
projects and policies more and more within the ideas of peace, open participatory democracy and
dialogue. This is the depth of Oakland's love life philosophy and that can simply be good examples
of best practices and sustainability for our California state and national level and is good
help for Israel and then for the Middle East itself at this time. Good luck in these good
efforts to peace not war. Thank you. Thank you everyone for your comments at this time all names
call for the consent. Thank you to everybody who's participated today today
has been quite a long meeting on quite the meeting but this is what democracy
is about people being out being able to come and participate councilmember Gayle
or well to approve the consent council member Brown excellent I'll also second
that but I also wanted to call attention to two items 612 and 613 similar to what
one of the public commenters mentioned there were community members here just
speak on 613 around the resolution that I brought around it being home ownership
month in the declining home home ownership within the city of Oakland
and just and and it being more of a call of call to action on our part and city
to move this along in a more positive direction.
And so working closely with the office of Councilmember Unger
as well as the office of the mayor
around what we can do around home ownership in our city.
And the data shows that this is,
these declining levels are mostly found
in black and Latino communities.
And then I also wanted to call attention
to it being National Caribbean Heritage Month.
And then we'll have an event
for Heritage Month.
Chef Anne was here from Cocoa Breeze,
and I'm sure you all also know Nigel Jones of Calabash,
and so there is an event that will be taking place
on June 28th in Brookdale Park.
Hopefully all of you can join us
as we celebrate Caribbean Heritage Month.
Bradley.
attorney would like us to read into the record the supplemental materials
related to item 6.7 in your agenda packet which are supplemental
attachments a and attachment B reflect your four floor edits from your first
council reading of this ordinance no further edits are being made to the
materials today and the council may vote to adopt the ordinance as previously
amended upon adoption the changes in supplemental attachment B will be
reflected in your final exhibit a and that's just a clarification for the
record. So do we need to do anything else just clarification for the record.
Just want to highlight 614 thank you councilmember Unger and I'll be hopefully
going to see councilmember I mean our representative in DC. Thanking her for
her support and with that let's go to the roll call. On the consent calendar
was a motion by councilmember Gallo second by councilmember Brown noting
on item six point ten by council members five hunger and Jenkins and on item six
point two five knows by council members Wong in Houston councilmember Brown aye
councilmember five is excused councilmember Gayle
to consent. Right? Yeah consent. Yes. Aye. Councilmember Houston. Aye. Councilmember Ramachandran. Aye.
Councilmember Unger. Aye. Councilmember Wong. Aye. And Chair Jenkins. Aye. No one in the
consent calendar passes with a vote of seven ayes one excused five. We are now on councilmember
announcements. Let's go to open forum. Open forum as I call your name please approach
support him in any order please raise your hand on zoom if you still wish to
speak councilmember I'm sorry mr. Hazzard miss missus Ida ola bala
Millie Cleveland similar me Jeffrey a Nia I can't read the last name
Amaz Yidego, Foto Zim, Ushi Juliette, Yili, Mavis Maeve Griffin, Ann McLean, Blair Beakman,
Robbie Ayala, Kevin Dalley, Desmond Jefferies, and Joyce Clingen in any order.
You're not going to out-talk me on anything that's legal because I'm going to do my research.
Let me read the conclusion that 366 days delay resulting
from the clerk's administrative misclassification
of petition of ex parte rec proceeding cannot be permitted
to extinguish substantive rights.
California law is equivocal that the law respects formlessness substance.
Civil Code 3528, CCP 473D, and California longstanding
jurisprudence required the correction of clerical errors
whenever necessary to ensure the court's record
accurately reflect the reality
and the litigants received due process.
Therefore the courts should order immediate correction
of the record, recognize the matter according
to its true substance and grant all appropriate relief.
So the city has an illegal sales tax
that was enacted on October.
Thank you Mr. Hazard, your time is up.
Thank you Mr. Hazard.
Good evening again.
So I just wanna also address Councilmember Gayo,
Councilmember Houston, Councilmember Brown,
all of you, actually all of you,
you already know that when we came here
we are African Americans.
And the debt that the violence also affects all of us.
Also, our organization is not on the east or in the west.
We are serving the whole Oakland
and Alameda County community.
So please, I know you passed the bill,
I mean the grant for the Department of Violence Prevention.
However, as you promise, as you promise,
you need to look for other funds
to support the organization left out.
You know, all this my friends that they've been advocating
here from East Oakland to West Oakland,
and then the African immigrant, and then Messi,
all of us that we left out need to be supported.
So you need to do.
Thank you, ma'am, your time is up.
I'm going to address two matters.
One is regarding GCA, the African Resource Center.
She is advocating for funding because one thing she
is passionate about is there's been violence and death
in the community.
There has been one individual that's
But that's what the coroner and the police OBD ruled.
There's been multiple shootings,
individuals that are shot, domestic violence.
So we are advocating for funding,
some of the violence prevention funding.
Next, once you give up power, it's hard to give it,
get it back.
If you look at the top cities, Beverly Hills,
there's been multiple shootings,
individuals that are shot, domestic violence.
So we are advocating for funding,
some of the violence prevention funding.
At the top cities, Beverly Hills, the city of Piedmont,
even Lexington, the founding of the,
or the founding of the nation was,
they have a council manager form of government.
You guys might wanna give yourselves more power
so you could be more effective and efficient,
and you guys could do away with the manager's office.
Thank you, your time is up.
Hello.
I am one person resident of Oakland,
but I know there are four African
who are killed in East Oakland.
Yeah, and I know one person by name
that I'm close to, so yeah, let's not forget them.
So one thing that I always say,
as African immigrant, we get,
by our melanin, we get blood problem
by being immigrant, we get immigrant problems.
So yeah, so don't forget us.
We're living in this great city
from North, East, and West.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mrs. Sada.
Announcement for people to pick up their trash.
There's illegal dumping going on in here.
South Africa is having a tremendous issue
dealing with the protests that are going on
related to the South African community
believes that unemployment is high
because of the number of illegal migrants
who are taking their jobs.
So the South African president has intervened this week
with some measures to deal with it.
They're gonna crack down on immigrations
who are not in their country legally.
They're gonna strengthen the border security.
They're gonna stamp out corruption
within the immigration system that's allowing this to happen
and some other measures.
All over the world, people are talking about this,
particularly in Europe.
Y'all not talking about this.
You got illegal immigrants, a percentage of them
are criminals that you are protecting
from being held accountable by the legal system.
You have to deal with it.
Thank you, Ms. Olibala.
Thank you, Ms. Olibala.
Moving to our Zoom speakers,
starting with Mr. Bikman,
please unmute yourself and begin your comment.
All right, we're at Bikman.
Thank you for the meeting today, important meeting today.
Yeah, I hope we can, yeah,
I'll save my comments for Thursday
on today's meeting for the rules.
For this, I just wanted to quickly comment
that good luck with NN things
and that you really are,
can be working towards accountability.
And that city councilpersons can have a part
in that accountability process.
The commission process is really important for NN things.
It'll be interesting to see how city councilpersons
can add their two cents to it.
And I think that may be helpful if it's positive
and constructive to look how to define
and consider those terms.
And I thought I'd heard earlier if not I think last week
that by putting parking citations
into the transportation department's job
instead of the police department
could save a lot with overtime issues. Man it was so nice to hear that. I don't
know how accurate that is. It sounds like it could help a lot and I just wanted to.
Anne McLean you are next. I have you under two people with Anne McLean. I'm
guessing one is Robbie but please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Am I on? I'm Anne McLean, rental property owner on 35th Avenue and one of 18
property owners newly added to the Laurel bid last July 1st. We comprise 61 rent
control departments, 7 condos, 3 single-family dwellings, 1 property in
transition to housing and 1 Chevron gas station by highway 580. Last year all 18
of us were forced into the bid district and were built a new additional
assessment. We were never asked if we wanted to join. The San Diego company put
us in the district. We were added without so much as a hearing. Of the 18 of us, only
one condo owner voted yes. If you owners didn't vote, the remaining 95% of us voted no. We
want out of the district now. If you can't carve us out, then I am requesting a disestablishment
of the entire district. We on 35th Avenue do not want, need or derive benefits in any
any way commensurate with the duplicative assessments, we are charged for belonging.
Thank you, Robbie, please unmute yourself and begin your comments.
Hi, can you hear me?
Yes.
Okay, perfect.
My name is Robbie.
I attended the city council on July 1st of last year.
And when is Daniel Swofford, executive director of the Laurel Business Improvement District
live by mislabeling the 35th Avenue corridor as commercial.
While the board president also falsely accused a 35th Avenue properties abandoned, both last
year and this year I compiled the photos included in the packets provided to you.
The 35th Avenue properties have consistently presented as a well maintained residential
neighborhood while the Laurel consistently presents as slums.
Property owners on 35th Avenue are paying double assessments after being forced into
the district.
35th Avenue property owners are doing an excellent job maintaining the properties and see no
reason to support the McArthur commercial district through additional
assessments. In your packet you will find petitions from other 35th Avenue
property owners requesting removal from the Laurel business
improvement district. Thank you for your time. Thank you, I don't see any more
hands on Zoom if your name was called and you're in the chambers, please.
oh sorry it's gonna cut me off no no no please well why don't you thank you no
thank you this meeting is adjourned