Good morning and welcome to the finance and management committee meeting of Tuesday, September 22nd
2026 the time is now 9 30 a.m. And this meeting may come to order before taking role
I will provide instructions on how to submit speaker cards for items on this agenda
If you're here with us in chamber and would like to submit a speaker card
Please will win out and turn one into myself or a clerk representative
No later than 10 minutes after the start of this meeting or before the item is read into record, whichever will occur first
Registering to speak via zoom is now due 24 hours prior to the start of this meeting time
This meeting came to order at 930 a.m. And speaker cards will no longer be accepted 10 minutes after making that 940 a.m
We'll now proceed with taking roll
council members Brown
present
younger here long present and chair Ramachandran
Thank you. We have four members present chair before we begin. Do you have any announcements at this time? No, welcome back
We have a long set of impacted agendas all day today in various committees. So we will try to run this as efficiently as possible
Thank you. Thank you
Starting off with item one approval of the draft minutes from the committee meeting of July 14 2026
We have no speakers on this item
I'll move the item
Cal second
Thank you
That's a motion made by Councilmember Brown,
seconded by Chair Ramachandran to approve the draft minutes
from the committee meeting of July 14th, 2026.
On roll, Councilmembers Brown.
Aye.
Unger.
Aye.
Wong.
Aye.
And Chair Ramachandran.
Aye.
Thank you, item one passes with four ayes
to accept the draft minutes from July 14th, 2026.
Item two, determination of schedule
about standing committee items,
also known as your pending list,
we have one speaker on this item.
Ramachandran, and oops, and committee members.
David Jones of the Treasury Bureau, just west this morning
that I believe that Director Johnson is not here today,
but he has spoken with Chair Ramachandran,
and she seemed to be OK with it.
We're requesting to have the quarterly cash management
report and the quarterly police and fire retirement system,
are known as peepers their performance report go to informational memos that will be posted
on the city website. This will allow you more time you know to manage your your meetings
on an ongoing basis knowing that your calendars are so uh so you know full and give a little
bit of relief there and just as a note uh we did this during the pandemic so it's pretty
pretty seamless and the peepers report actually goes to its board so it gets
approved there as well but that is you know all I had to say this morning thank
you colleagues any concerns about that all right then I will entertain a motion
sorry we have public comment calling in the name that sign up to speak on item
to that's missus out all of a lot. So you have. Schedule
annual reports. And you haven't had an annual report. From the
spending of the city administrators ability to spend up
to two hundred and fifty thousand dollars with our coming
to console. Since twenty twenty three. The next schedule report
related to that is scheduled for 2027.
Now this is what happens when you don't have the ability
to have checks and balances related to any capacity
to do that.
Last Wednesday at the meeting of the ethics commission,
the Oakland Police Department was held accountable
for misspending of $12,000 using then measure Z funds
to go to Washington D.C. for a memorial.
They stayed a week.
And in the report, it said that the city administrator
signed permission for the $12,000,
which he shouldn't have done,
because that money should not have been used
for going on a trip.
That money is supposed to be used for violence prevention,
911 calls, and for recruitment.
And because you had no checks and balance,
you couldn't hold the city administrator accountable
in 2024 for spending that money.
So I encourage you if you are legally obligated
to have reports on spending of funds in this city to do it.
And so we could have possibly a lot of misspending
of funding related to that capacity
of your city administrator to spend without coming to concert.
Thank you for your comments.
And we have a motion made by Councilmember Wong,
seconded by Councilmember Brown
to accept the determination of scheduled outstanding items
as amended, noting the two changes
to withdraw the cash management report
and informational report regarding police
and fire retirement systems off of the pending list
and to be posted as informational memos
on the city's website.
On roll, Councilmembers Brown.
Onger, aye, Wong, aye, and chair Ramachandran, aye.
Thank you, item two passes with four ayes to accept the pending list as amended.
Reading in item three, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator or designee
to enter into a cooperative contract agreement with governmentdrops.com, Inc., DBA, Neocov.
For human resources information systems, subscription services for a two-year period starting July
first two thousand twenty six through June thirtieth two thousand twenty eight in amount not to exceed one million seventy seven thousand five hundred forty seven dollars and ninety eight cents and waving the competitive multi multiple step solicitation process and the local small local business enterprise requirement and we have one speaker on this item.
Thank you. I believe staff would like to withdraw this item. That's correct. Okay. And to the
parliamentarian then they would need to come to rules to be scheduled back, right? Not right
here on this item. Can we postpone it or can it just come back to rules? Yes. To comply with
your own rules, I do recommend that you vote as a body to postpone this item and also take
public comment on this item okay we will take public comment calling in the name
that sign up to speak on item number three missus out of olavala anybody
what's the reason for not having the item addressed after public comment I
can ask the question well it might be a part of my comment but after public
we'll call public comment after that we can answer a part of my public comment
might be to deal with why you pull the item have you started to talk ma'am can
Can I see the clock please?
Lack of accountability.
So within the report, you have a section that deals with a chart where you identify applicants
by ethnicity.
And you have ethnicity as identified as black, African-American.
Black is not an ethnicity, it's a race.
White is not an ethnicity, it's a race.
Then you have European, you have white European and Caucasian.
What's the difference between white and Caucasian?
Why do you bring all this crazy stuff up?
Then you have Asian as an ethnicity group.
Asian is a race.
And I don't understand all this trickology to group people in ways, and we're all just
human beings.
race is not a social construct ethnicity is legit it has to do with culture and
language and history of a group of people but for whatever reason you all
choose to give all these groups and in the report are we gonna see anything
that says how many people will hire because in the report the highest group
that is applying to work is African Americans and I want to see foundational
black and then the lowest number of people coming in looks like I don't see
too many black people over there in that little corner see less and less of them
so at some point a report on who applies and who gets the job based on thank you
thank you for your comments sure that includes all speakers on this item okay
thank you staff would you like to explain why he pulled the item requested
to pull the item we will vote on it through the chair good morning my name is
Amber Lidle HR manager with the human resources management department I'm here
to request that we pull item number three there are a few outstanding
questions that need to be addressed and we also need to make a change to the
title based on feedback from contracts I anticipate that we will bring a very
similar item back to FMC on October 27th, the following review of rules on October
1st. And I did want to note that there are no service impacts by pulling this
item. Thank you. Okay I'll make the motion to go ahead and postpone this.
Thank you, we have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by
Councilmember Unger to withdraw this item from the agenda on roll. Council
members Brown. Aye. Unger. Aye. Wong. Aye. And chair Ramachandran. Aye. Thank you.
Motion passes with four ayes to withdraw item three from the agenda. Reading in
item number four receive an informational report from the city
auditor on the performance audit of the vacant property tax and there are four
speakers that signed up to speak on this item. Thank you. Auditor Houston please go ahead and we
We will put five minutes on the clock of exhibition.
I'll try.
OK.
Michael C. Houston, City Auditor.
Good morning, committee members, members of the public, city staff.
I'm here to present the findings and recommendations from my audit
of the city's vacant property tax.
This was a first audit required by Oakland Municipal Code 456070,
which requires the City Auditor's office to review the vacant property
tax on a regular basis to ensure accountability and proper
disbursement of all revenue collected from the tax.
We issued this audit report in July.
So I'm grateful to the audit team,
assisted city auditor Stephanie Noble Wilson
and performance auditor Claire Sullivan,
and they are here with me this morning.
The audit sought to review the processes for identifying
vacant properties subject to the tax,
to examine the exemption process to ensure compliance
with the meaning code and to understand the frequency
of different exemptions.
To identify the revenue the taxes generated,
to identify the benefits the taxes produce,
and to compare the cost of administering the tax
against the benefits it has produced.
The time period of the audit was the five years between
and including fiscal years 2020, 2021, and 2025, 26.
So, Oakland voters passed Measure W in 2018.
Measure W established a special tax on vacant properties
to generate revenue to reduce homelessness,
blight, and related issues.
The City Council Resolution that authorized
Measure W on the ballot states that
Oakland is experiencing significant vacancy of property,
and that properties that are vacant or undeveloped
deprive the community of economic opportunity in housing
that can be provided if those properties were put to use.
The resolution further states that vacant properties
deprive the city of the revenue needed
to provide public services,
and that vacancy encourages blight,
crime, and illegal dumping.
The tax on vacant properties is intended
to fund solutions for homelessness,
illegal dumping remediation, and related programs.
Our audit considered the original intent
on desired outcomes identified
during the ballot measure's conception.
The first of the three findings
was that administrative process
that the administrative process appears
to effectively identify vacant properties in Oakland.
The city administrator has assigned
the city's finance department
with the administration of the tax,
but other entities are also involved,
which is illustrated in exhibit two of the audit report.
So our audit used the definition of vacant provided
in the Oakland Municipal Code, section four, five, six, 20.
The property is vacant if it is in use fewer than 50 days
in the calendar year, and use is broadly defined
to include lawful physical occupancy,
as well as civic, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
extractive, or religious activities.
This exhibit, exhibit four from the audit report,
shows properties that appeared likely vacant,
confirmed vacant, and those that were ultimately taxed.
Since initiation of the tax, numbers of taxed properties
were lowered in numbers of likely vacant
and confirmed vacant properties due to in-use declarations and exemptions.
Properties can be exempt in specific circumstances, such as being under active construction or
other exemption criteria include properties being owned by nonprofits or low-income seniors
or people with disabilities.
So this exhibit shows that properties that have been identified as likely vacant have
gone down, but the properties that were confirmed vacant have actually increased since the inception
of the tax. So there are fewer false positives. The city contracts with an outside consultant,
SEI consulting group, to identify likely vacant properties using multiple data sources, including
data on water usage, parcel ownership, and aerial imagery. To assess the city's compliance
with the Munich code in administering the tax, we assess documentation for nine properties
over the years of the tax. Three identified as vacant properties for which the vacant
property taxes paid, five properties were exempted from the tax and one property went
through the legal process to appeal the tax. For these nine properties, we checked for
whether applicable meaning code requirements were met and we assessed the appropriateness
of evidence provided for tax exemptions. Our review of those nine properties throughout
the multiple years covered by the audit found that the city's handling of these nine properties
was in compliance with the meaning code. During the course of the audit, the finance department
developed and provided written policies and procedures for tax administration, which document
the specific minimum documentation required to approve exemptions and detailed requirements
for each step of the administration process.
We considered that methods for identify, we concluded that methods for identifying vacancies
are reasonable and appear to have improved over time as highlighted in exhibit four that
I just went over.
Auditor Houston, five minutes is over. Is three more minutes sufficient for them on the clock?
Okay, well we have an impact agenda if we can set the timer
So
13 of the 18 properties were found in the tax database and have either been taxed as
vacant or exempted from tax, so we
We did our own kind of field work to see if what visibly appeared to be vacant
was on the database.
Yeah, let me go to the second finding.
Measurable goals in regular reporting
would allow the city to assess the effectiveness
of the vacant property tax.
So the city raised 29.8 million for the vacant property tax.
Okay.
From 2021 through 2425.
So between 4.7 and 7.5 million was generated annually
from tax vacant properties.
Expenditures from the vacant property
have funded Oakland Public Works, the finance department,
the city administrator's office, the housing and community
development department, and the human services department.
Public works accounted for $20 million, about 73%
of tax expenditures.
66% of all expenditures has funded illegal dumping
initiatives.
And that's by far the largest use of the tax funds.
Despending meets the municipal code requirement that 25% of revenue in the vacant property tax fund must be used for blight
blight
elimination
illegal dumping and code enforcement of blighted properties the muni code
states that no more than 15 percent of tax revenue can be used for
Administration and the city spent 15 percent of revenues on administrative costs on average for the time that we reviewed
And exceeded this percent only in the first year due to start-up costs like adding staff positions and starting up contracts
As coded the city's financial system does not clearly distinguish administrative
expenditures relevant to the vacant property tax
Which led us to recommendation number one?
That the finance department should administer should define administrative expenses
City Council resolution
87319 stated that the tax was imposed for the sole purposes of raising revenue
Necessary to support and fund services for homeless people and affordable housing in related programs
The finance finance department has also acknowledged the goals of discouraging
Vacant properties and reducing slight crime and ill illegal dumping the use of tax revenue does not reflect
The broadly stated goals and multiple allowable uses of the tax the city has spent much of the vacant property tax revenues on illegal
dumping and it has not consistently funded other programs relating to the
taxes goal of supporting and funding services for people experiencing
homelessness and affordable housing. So we recommend that the city administrator
develop a plan to assemble and report data to establish a baseline of vacant
property trends and causes in Oakland and performance metrics and goals for
the vacant property tax. This should be used to regularly assess effectiveness of
the tax and reducing vacancies minimizing the negative impacts of
of blighted properties and funding programs
aligned with the city's approved uses.
California government code.
I apologize.
Okay.
Extra three minutes is up.
Do you wanna go to the final recommendation?
I believe there's three.
The finance department should provide an annual report
to the city council on commission on homelessness,
detailing revenues, expenditures, and the status of projects
funded by the tax as required by California
government code sections, just as a critical transparency and oversight was lacking so
far.
And we presented this to the Commission on Homelessness.
The finance department has agreed to this recommendation.
The last one, but there are no recommendations, but it's just about the design of the tax.
The tax may fall short in maximizing the productive use
and development of vacant properties
due to design constraints.
Ours is a fixed rate no matter how big the property is
or how valuable the value of the property is.
$3,000 for residential vacant properties
and $6,000 for commercial.
And that structure doesn't reflect the different impact
that different vacant properties will have on that city.
And it also cuts the revenue generated.
And that different from other cities,
like San Francisco's empty homes tax,
Washington DC's, and Vancouver's.
So taking into consideration things like the size
of the property, the length of vacancy,
whether blight is observed on a property,
those things might improve the effectiveness
of the tax in disincentivizing vacancy.
Thank you
Excellent, thank you so much. The report is definitely very comprehensive
So thank you so much to your team
to you and the team for
Preparing this information for us. I just I had I did have one question. I know that the report
Especially on the last slide that you were sharing
About like I guess comparing other cities, but I was curious were you all able to?
kind of dive in a little bit deeper as it relates to okay, so you got the property type whether it's residential
Which the tax rate is about six thousand dollars
Compared to some of the other ones being three thousand and also within the report
There are some numbers that show
Refund requests as well as hearing requests. I guess I was curious
You know over the it's documenting over the years what those numbers were but I guess like I would be curious
was it residential
or
parcels
Like who are like giving like who's making the inquiry?
To either get a refund or needing some type of hearing versus just the total number
between the two I
Do know that most of them were residential properties I might
Defer to the team or have the team answer more detailed questions
Thank You councilmember and we don't have a breakdown by who it was
But I think that that's data that we could get so if that's something you're interested in we could follow up separately
Yeah, cuz I think I would just be curious
As we are, I guess, you know, I think that there's clear criteria that you all were able to find around like, you know, who qualifies for these various requests.
And just kind of getting being able to get that data to see, you know, are we, because I think that, you know, and correct me if I'm wrong, I think that a part of the goal here is specifically around parcel activation, right.
I think that there are, you know, across our city, especially in East Oakland, there are a lot of vacant parcels which contribute to blight, etc.
And so if we are, you know, giving waivers to, I guess, like the parcels, I think I would be concerned with that given, like, if the cost is only $3,000,
and how much does it cost to actually like clean,
clean up those parcels from illegal dumping, et cetera.
So I would be interested to see how that breaks down.
Okay, I think we can get you that.
I can tell you in the meantime though
that the vacant lots without any sort of structure on them
are the ones that are most likely to be identified
because they're among the easiest ones too.
And all of the waivers are issued
according to reasons specified within the law.
And so when we did that case study approach,
we were checking that they were implementing
that appropriately and we found that they were.
So we had some assurance in that area.
Excellent, that sounds good.
And then of the case studies that you were able to do
of those properties, were they across the city
or did you concentrate in just one area?
Across the city.
Excellent, thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Wong.
Thank you through the chair.
As always, this is excellent work.
Two questions.
You had noted in exhibit 14
that undeveloped residential properties
make up the most of vacant properties in Oakland.
What does that look like to a layperson?
Is it just like a piece of grass?
Like I'm trying to picture what that looks like.
Is it that a lot that's residential,
intended for residential use?
Okay, but there's no building structure essentially?
Apologies if I missed part of your question.
My sense is that it's based on zoning.
And so a lot of Oakland is zoned residential
and has not yet transitioned to residential.
So it could look like a lot of different things,
especially if you're looking in West Oakland, for example,
where there's a lot of formerly industrial
that's currently zoned for residential.
Okay, gotcha, thank you.
My other question is on the expenditure side of things.
You had noted that the majority of funding
has been going to illegal dumping.
I think the statute says that 25% of the funds
should be going to illegal dumping,
but it says at least.
So is it your understanding that the expenditures
are actually, say, violating the law
or just not in the spirit of the law
and what voters had intended
when they agreed to be taxed on this?
The latter, Council Member.
So we didn't find that any of the uses of the tax
was outside of what's required.
It's just people were very surprised
to find how little the money, for instance,
was spent on homelessness services and housing services.
Yeah, me too.
All right, thank you so much.
All right, I have a couple of questions.
Firstly, I will second Councilmember Brown's request
for some data on the residential versus commercial.
I think that's an important conversation
as we think about how to activate,
Specifically they can commercial spaces of which we have many throughout the city
So if that could be in a supplemental before this goes to the full council
Just the breakdown of numbers that would be great
Secondly, I found the map very interesting at the end of the spatial vacancies and seemed like
Perhaps the most vacancies are in my district in a lot of the hills and I wanted to understand what this map is
Is this just vacancies or vacancies with exceptions?
So for example, I know that in some of these areas it's,
they are vacant because you can't build,
do certain kinds of developments
because of the wildfire maps.
So can you explain the regional differences?
I think there was an explanation
of the West Oakland side and the zoning,
but why the certain areas of spatial vacancy clusters exist?
Yeah, I'm gonna hand the mic over
to performance auditor, Claire Sullivan.
Yeah, thank you.
To answer your question, the map that's on page 50 that shows the vacant properties includes
both properties that are vacant as well as those that are vacant but exempt from the
tax.
Did that answer?
So this doesn't break down what are exemptions for that?
It does not, yeah.
Okay.
Is it, would it be too soon to include that data in the supplemental as well to counsel?
Yeah.
Because that would be helpful.
Thank you.
And then to the administration, when is, I know that finance reports on the vacancy
tax as well, do we have a regular report on that?
We have reported, I believe the report went out earlier this year, I'll just confirm with
staff.
Okay, thank you.
And is it an annual report or every couple of years?
I believe it was every couple of years.
Okay.
Thank you.
If there are no other questions we can move to public comment, thank you.
in the names that sign up to speak on item number two,
oh sorry, item number four, Madeline Stacy,
Asada Olavala, Kevin Dally, and Derek Barnes,
in no particular order, you can come up to the podium,
state your name for the record, and then begin.
Madeline Stacy, first of all,
I know I say this every time, but Mr. Houston,
I'm always so impressed and grateful for your work.
I just, I don't think I'll ever get over
how great a job you're doing.
I was fortunate enough to see the full presentation
on this audit report at the Commission of Homelessness.
And I think the Office is doing a great job
of identifying, as he stated, the vacant lots,
but we're not fully fulfilling the intent of the tax,
both in capturing the revenue that we could be capturing
to kind of offset the blight and make it not worthwhile
to have vacant property, make it more expensive to pay the vacant tax than it is to maintain
the property, and then also in where the money and how the money's being spent.
So even though there are caps on, like Prop 13 does have some caps on how much you can
tax based on assessed value, San Francisco is still doing fees that are not a flat rate
and we're really missing a lot, a lot, a lot of revenue that wouldn't be any more like
administrative cost.
the lots and and charging them is already happening and we could capture a
lot more revenue if we were doing it based on like you said the size the
assessed value but especially I think it is relevant to do how many years it's
been vacant and the blight and then very importantly where it's being spent so as
the report says only 4% of the property tax just as a little under a million
dollars has gone to the housing and community development department and so
the money really needs to go to homelessness services and housing
services really really really important that we shift that money to where it's
intended and where it's needed and I can guarantee that sweeps cost over a
million dollars a year so we really need to put more money into homelessness
services. Thanks for the report this is amazing to start to work on the vacant
taxes and now I have a challenge I think this is both for the auditor and for the
City Council beyond what the current report is can we look at property which
is underutilized and some of that might include say a parking lot I know this
is coming up on the agenda soon you know a parking lot in some cases could be
turned into housing and while it technically is utilized it's not the best
possible usage. How can the council encourage property owners to use their
property in a more effective way for following the goals of the city? And is
it possible? Big challenge for the auditor to look into that as well. This
was not an easy audit, I suspect, but what I'm asking is probably even worse.
The report says it's possible that some vacancy properties got undetected.
The report also says that the amount of money spent from 2020 to 21 to 24 or 25 collected
21 to 24, 25 collected was 29.8 million,
spent was 26.8 million, so what's happening
with the rest of that money?
Based on what the money could have been spent,
I don't see why all of it wasn't spent.
The report says that the city oracle system
does not clearly distinguish administrative expenditures.
I don't, I don't know how you deal with that. Uh,
the city could improve oversight of the tax procedure.
Now San Francisco has a similar tax called the empty home tax
proposition. M in September of 2026,
California state appeals court struck down the tax entirely.
The court ruled that the tax is a violation of the state
That means that landlords are protected and have the right to exit the rental market without any consequences.
So, is it possible that you are in violation of the Ellis Act as it relates to renters, landlords, who decide to leave their property?
I think somebody needs to check on that and
Determine whether those those landlords are covered under the Ellis Act
Thank you for your comments. Sure. That concludes all speakers on this item. Thank you. I will entertain a motion to
Move this to the full the next full council meeting with two additional requests as
clarified by the clerk
So much second
Thank you
We have a motion made by councilmember Unger seconded by councilmember Wong
To approve the recommendations of staff and to board this item to the October 6th
City Council agenda with the request to staff to provide in a supplemental report
request for data on the residential versus commercial specifically vacant commercial spaces and why certain areas of spatial
Vacancy clusters exist and the breakdown of exemptions in each vacancy cluster on roll council members Brown. Hi, Unger. Hi Wong
Hi and chair Ramachandran. I thank you item number four passes with four
I support this item to the October 6 City Council agenda and to the maker of the motion. Is that on consent or non consent?
Okay, consent's fine. Okay. Thank you on
consent reading in item 5 receive an informational report from the city administrator or their designee on the special
Revenue collection project including hiring and activating the work to bring in additional revenue from non-filed businesses
And there are two speakers on this item
Good morning finance chair and council members
Nicole Welch revenue and tax administrator. I am pleased to present the biennial special revenue collection report in
In response to questions raised by Councilmembers Rama Shandran and Brown, finance has compiled
key data summarizing the Revenue Management Bureau's core focus areas.
Business tax delinquency management, community outreach and compliance, identification of
unregistered businesses.
Under business tax delinquency management, we continue to analyze business tax delinquency
rates to ensure that renewals and subsequent collection activities are identified early
and address through sustained efforts.
Community outreach and compliance,
the Bureau is actively engaging the community
to improve overall understanding of business,
tax responsibility, and to support compliance
in registration and payment requirements.
As far as the identification of unregistered businesses,
we are prioritizing the identification
of unregistered businesses and working
to bring them into compliance
with the City Business Tax Ordinance.
As of the date of this report,
the Oakland Business Tax Renewal Rate is 83.9%.
Regarding property tax-related delinquencies,
updates were presented to Council on January 20th
and July 7th, 2026.
These efforts resulted in property liens
that have now been transferred
to the Alameda County Secured Property Tax Roll
on August 10th, 2026, totally $5.4 million.
For non-property business accounts,
RMB staff, Revenue Management Bureau staff,
continues to conduct field work
and outstanding balances are being referred
to the City by Collections Division for further action.
Our community outreach remains a major focus.
Revenue Management Bureau staff have participated
in several events, including First Friday,
the Oakland Chinatown Lunar New Year Bazaar,
Lakefest, the Lowell Street Fair,
the Outdoor Vendor Support Clinic,
additionally an updated Public Service Announcement video
in conjunction with K-TOP has been completed.
To strengthen data integrity
and identify unregistered businesses,
approximately 6,879 landlord audit notices
were mailed on September 11, 2026.
These notices support verification
of existing landlord accounts
and help identify unregistered multi-unit parcel owners,
guiding them through registration
within the business tax system.
This concludes this special revenue collection report.
I am happy to answer any questions.
Thank you so much.
I will start with a couple of questions.
And firstly, notice my city of Oakland
Revenue Management Bureau swag from the Laurel Street Fair.
Thank you for being out there.
I think the progress is incredibly noticeable.
And I personally really appreciate the efforts
to get more businesses in compliance and paying
because that's revenue that we need.
Firstly, I want to get a sense of the delinquency.
So in the past, between 2025 and 26,
you mailed about 15,000 delinquency notices.
Is it, do you know if that's about the same as last year
or was there a decrease or increase?
I think that last year there was a catch-up,
meaning that there was an effort to catch up
on multiple years so it may have been an increase.
This year I want you to understand that delinquency
can fall into three different categories.
There are individuals who will start a business
with the intent, I call them I have a dream,
but never go through with the actual business.
Then you have the ones who actually start a business
and they legitimately forget to renew.
Out of any delinquency, and this is just industry standard,
you're going to get anywhere between 80 to 85% compliance.
15% of that population are the ones
that you're going to have to actually do extra efforts
in order to bring them into compliance.
What my team and I have been doing
is that we have been individually calling
these individuals to find out,
are you still currently in business?
Visiting the ones that have commercial locations,
the residential, obviously we can't visit them,
but making phone calls, sending emails,
and doing the additional effort.
But to go back to your question, is the rate of delinquency
from last year to this year, I believe
that the previous years were a matter of catching up
on years that had not been collected or noticed.
That makes sense.
Thank you.
I also noticed that the high number of businesses
that were closed, and I see that chart, Table A,
and specifically reflecting those months
where you see a really sharp increase
because of your outreach efforts,
and that makes a lot of sense of these businesses.
I just have to go through the formality
and close their accounts, so thank you for that.
I have a question about the non-property section.
For the property renewals,
I understand that there's a very clear threat
of this is gonna go on your tax roll,
your property tax roll, so if you don't pay now,
going to have to pay soon enough, but I understand that the non-property renewals are more difficult
to collect. So again, looking through these numbers, after the number of notices were
You did a bunch of extra effort that ended up in a total of 3,517 outstanding accounts,
but only 300% for collections, 927 paid their obligation, 650 were closed.
So of this remaining 3,500 non-property accounts, what is the plan, and why can't those all
will be sent to our collections department of the city?
To refer over to our collections department, which is a team of five, would be overwhelming.
So the plan is that my supervisor of the business tax customer service is actively calling
on these individual accounts, fielding the ones that are within Oakland, and the follow-through
process is that if we hear back from you, the question is, are you currently in business?
If you're not, we send you out an affidavit and then you close out the account.
We close it out on our end right there.
We're finding that within the population of every 100, about 50% of them never actually
continue the business.
So the accounts that are paying are paying online or they're paying in office or they're
legitimately in never, they never paid the registration fee.
So we have come in with some internal policies on not paying with your initial application,
on not even establishing the account.
That was not the case in previous years.
You were allowed to establish an account, and the account had a registration fee was
never paid, but we treated it as an active business when it actually wasn't.
Okay.
So that's why there's a lot more businesses on the rolls that have never really operated.
Yes.
And what about the reverse?
I know this is a more difficult compliance issue.
Have you been able to engage in efforts
to get businesses registered that were previously
not registered as businesses but operating as businesses?
Absolutely.
Our field work has been a strong.
It's been, I would say, very enlightening.
The business that we were looking for may not be there,
but we've been able to find a new business that
did not register, so we've been able to register them on in a field activity way.
Our activity that we've done with the 75,000 postcards that I sent out in, and that was
in a previous report in April, that netted 900 new rental accounts that came into fruition.
The effort that we've done at our different community events, we've seen an uptick of
of people registering, so by my people being at,
meeting people where they're at,
we've been actually getting an increase of registration
for people who would not normally have registered.
And in the recent mailing that we did of 6,879 notices,
we've actually gotten an uptick of about 150 property owners
who did not formally register.
That's great to hear.
I will move to my colleagues in just a second.
That makes a lot of sense when it comes to new registrations.
So going to my last question on the property side of things.
So 4,400 something parcels went to
the Alameda County property tax rule
that we approved a couple of months ago, I believe.
What happened to the rest of the parcels
that were not sent to the rolls?
Did they end up paying or did some of them,
were they also out of business in a way?
There were a combination, some paid,
some were not renting,
and that is how they were taken off of that,
from the approval to the tax roll.
Got it, and final question is funding.
I think the efforts that you've taken
the past year and a half I believe is you know showing momentum. Can you
keep this special revenue project going with the resources that you have? To be
very clear it may be called a special revenue collection process but it's
really our normal day-to-day business. Revenue Management Bureau this is part
of our I would say the nexus of our business of what we're supposed to do.
It is all ordinance-driven. The timeline is pretty solid, especially with the
incorporation of Measure T and in the subsequent Measure C, which will be
happening, this is what we're supposed to do. This is not an anomaly, not a special.
This is what should be happening all the time. Great. And are you fully, is the
Revenue Division fully staffed or are there still they can say? Absolutely not, but I
that I believe.
But we're making, we're being supported
as best we can by the administration
and looking at all city departments.
So we're doing what we can with what we have.
And my motto for the team is all gas, no breaks
at this point.
Thank you.
Council Member Wong, then Brown.
Oh, thank you so much for your work on this.
I have a couple of questions.
So one is just around the rental units, right,
that are not registered.
What's the relationship between not having a licensed,
like multi-unit, for example, apartment
and registration with the rent registry?
Are you working with the RAP team just to coordinate
and identify whether there's landlords
that maybe are not registered
and therefore charging whatever rent they want
because they're unlicensed?
Are you seeing that thread or theme here?
I believe this is mixed shoes.
We did run a rent registry project last year
where we identified property owners
who were registered with the rent adjustment program
but not registered with business tax.
We have done a couple of mitigations
where we have our information linked
on the rent adjustment website.
they also put it in their literature.
We are as a matter of business.
When we register a property,
we automatically register them for rent,
the rent adjustment process.
Why property owners do not know
that they are supposed to have a rental
or a business tax account,
it could be a matter of this.
You're not told by your real estate agent,
or you lived in a property,
you moved out of the property, but you did not know,
or you did not do the research to say,
hey, do I have another obligation?
Back from my IRS days, I would say that
if you're reporting anything on a Schedule C or Schedule E,
there is local jurisdictions that you need to look at
as far as your obligations are concerned.
What we are doing and what our role is,
especially with the Landlord Audit Project
that just went out, is that that project
is going to be ran every two years.
Along with the postcards, notifying people,
just as an FYI, that if you are renting out your property,
if it's an Airbnb or you're doing a sublet,
you are required to have a business license.
So it is a matter of us and our outreach and engagement,
and informing the public,
our public service announcement video
that we will be rotating on K-Top that will be out there.
And then there are a couple other things
that we're workshopping internally on how to get out,
get this information out to the public.
And our postcard, well, I will say our billboard
in the BART station is still present,
so it's still informing people.
Okay, that's great.
I would say, I think there's a need to really dig
into the landlords that are both unregistered
on the RAP system as well as the business license section.
I'm sure some may just not know,
but I have concerns that there are a number
who are purposefully doing that in order to avoid,
kind of, to avoid our rental, you know,
our rent control laws.
The other question I just have,
I also picked up on the same thing
that Chair Ramachandran picked up,
which is just the number of closed accounts at 10,376.
Is that typical or are we seeing, kind of,
concerning trends with overall business activity going down,
more closures than openings,
or I just love to see some more historic data
to understand if the fact that 10,000 closed camps
compared to 6,491 accounts reflects
just really concerning trends in our economy
or our local economy.
No, these were accounts that should have been vetted
four or five years ago.
So we're now, we went to the process of vetting them
currently, meaning that we are actively calling,
we're actively engaging, and actually talking
or reaching out to the actual taxpayer
to determine if they are still in business.
These accounts would have been,
if we had been doing things the way it needed to happen,
they would have been closed out in previous years.
But now that there's been, since I've been at the helm,
yes.
Okay, because you've been proactive,
you've identified that they closed.
Great, okay, thank you so much.
Councilmember Bratt.
Excellent, thank you so much for your work on this.
Definitely appreciated getting the update.
So a couple questions that I had,
I had a lot of questions similar
to Council Chair Ramachandran as well.
I was curious about,
I know that you sent out like mailings to folks.
I was curious if you all are using a digital outreach system,
whether that be via like email or text?
I am looking into text.
I just saw the HR department for that.
I have my team looking into seeing if we can actually
what that process would look like.
We also want to, it would need to be integrated
within our current database.
So there is a matter of an API and a discussion about that.
But absolutely, I have been pondering text messaging,
I think it would be a little bit more.
As the policy that we have of meeting people where they're
at, I think people are more responsive,
especially generationally, to a text as opposed to an email
or even letters.
So absolutely.
Yeah, I think that that would be a good recommendation.
I know whenever I get a text message about something
and there's an easy link and it's like, oh, go on and pay
this here I feel like that kid helps support because my other question
because the full title of this item is including hiring right and so in order
to support you know the the five staff members that you listed I feel like
some type of digital outreach could be effective whether that is a you know
whenever is the main time that we're collecting those fees that you know
there's an email and then the follow-up is via text and then maybe the last
thing that we're doing you know I don't know what the quarterly system is like
how you all are collecting these fees but maybe the last thing is the phone
call right to to help support this work and then I definitely had a lot of
questions about the closed accounts but I think your explanation was definitely
being proactive and so I really
it really made sense.
Around the pro act being pro
proactive I guess like in
October and then also it looks
like April twenty twenty six a
decent amount of accounts were
closed as well and so you know
thank you so much to you and the
team for you know really
focusing in on this but I guess
maybe my last question is I
no breaks right and so I appreciate that I appreciate that and also at the same
time how how can we ensure you know whether it's five years from now or a
decade from now that we've really put in like the structure in place so that
there's kind of no there's no kind of bumps in the road when it comes to this
work. To answer your question in leaving or building an infrastructure you have
to look at the entirety of what the process, what the end goal is. My policy or our philosophy
is to utilize technology because that is where we're at, making sure that our processes are
consistent, conforming with the audit that was done by Auditor Houston's office in the
recommendations that were there that are sustainable, and making sure that there is a legacy. So
We're we're at right now is directly documenting our processes
Ensuring that we have a timeline a calendar that is you know
It is what it is. It just doesn't deviate from there and ensuring that
Motivating the my team members that this is what we are here to do and making sure that we do it and that's
Absolutely leaving that legacy and I understand where you're where you're coming from. Excellent. Thank you so much
and on the city's website do we have a page that's like dedicated to this where
it's like you know in the month of March we do X Y & Z and you know expect this
communication from us like do we have anything where we're explaining the
process we don't but that's the very good idea I think we can make that
happen awesome thank you so much okay we will move to public comment calling in
the names that sign up to speak on item number five miss Asada Ola Bala and
and Derek Barnes.
So before I speak, do sidewalk vendors and mobile truck
vendors pay business tax?
Just shake your head, yes or no?
OK.
So it's estimated that over 200 vendors
that come under that category, sidewalk vendors, mobile
vendors, operate here in Oakland.
How are you able to keep up with the sidewalk vendors?
because I think we have quite a bit of them who are operating not only without paying
the business tax but also without paying the business license.
Now, I think you have to pay the business tax in order to get the business license.
Okay.
So, not only do they not have the ability to be accountable for the tax, they're not
getting the licensing.
They also are not getting the health permit,
they're not getting the fire inspections,
and they're not getting the state seller's permit.
And this is overwhelming.
Now you say to, in your documentation,
in order to hold people accountable for paying the tax,
you put a lien on the property.
So that's the property of the business owner,
because a lot of businesses,
They rent for their businesses.
They don't own the property.
So what are you putting the lien on?
Their homes?
Yes.
Okay.
So in the case of sidewalk vendors, you put a lien on their property, their homes?
No.
So we don't have that ability to collect for sidewalk vendors and mobile truck vendors
based on this formula of putting liens on people's property.
Thank you for being so cooperative so I can understand
because this body, it just operate within their own bubble.
They were required to have public comments.
Thank you for your comments, Ms. Olibala.
Sure, that concludes all speakers on this item.
Thank you, I will entertain a motion.
And would that just be to receive and file?
Yes.
Yes, I'm so moved.
second
Thank you. We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown seconded by Councilmember Unger to receive and file this informational report and committee on rule council members Brown
I under I Wong I and chair Ramachandran
I thank you item five passes with four eyes to receive and file this informational report and committee
item six regarding the implementation and performance of the city of Oakland's prompt payment policy has been withdrawn from this agenda pursuant to rule 28 of
of the council's rules of procedure
and placed on the finance and management committee
pending list under no date specific.
Item seven, receive an informational report
on the operational and financial status
of city-owned parking garages,
evaluation of parking operator performance
and review of the city's parking operations alternative,
and we have four speakers on this item.
Thank you, please, hi.
Good morning, finance and management committee members
through the chair.
My name is Osas Sayura.
I am the assistant revenue tax administrator
with the finance department.
Thank you for the opportunity to be here with you today.
Before you, it's an informational report
that focuses on four key areas related to the city's
parking garage and parking lot portfolio.
The report provides an overview of the operational
and financial status of the city's parking garages.
It presents a brief evaluation of the city
of Oakland Parking Partners.
The current contractor responsible for managing
it's not in the city's parking
garage operations since 2014.
It provides an update on the
part maintenance needs and the
investments needed to upkeep
this important public assets.
And finally it outlines a
road map over the next year
including the evaluation of
parking operation alternatives.
Opportunities to increase
increase utilization and
revenue and the upcoming
competitive procurement process
for future parking management
services.
As outlined in the report the
city's parking system continues
program and service services
that supports downtown activity
and generates revenue to support
operations and maintenance.
While parking revenues have
declined approximately 17% since
the pandemic, the city still
generated over 8.5 million in
off-street parking revenue from
the city-owned garages and lots
in fiscal year 2025-26.
In response to the decline in
demand following the pandemic,
the city worked with city
development parking partners or
to identify opportunities to reduce operating costs
while maintaining service levels.
One of the changes was moving from a gated
to a gateless parking model system,
which eliminated much of the equipment
and ongoing maintenance associated
with the gates and ticketed systems.
The trade-off is that the gateless model
relies more heavily on wireless connectivity
and automatic license plate recognition technology.
Because garages are dense and closed structures,
Connectivity challenges can sometimes affect the system performance and enforcement.
As outlined in the report, staff will evaluate technology improvements and alternative operating
models as part of the next RFP process, including whether the current model continues to provide
the best balance of cost, reliability, enforcement, and revenue collection.
With respect to the City of Oakland Parking Partners, staff's evaluation found satisfactory
performance in managing the city's parking facilities and supporting the operational
changes implemented over the past several years.
They have been instrumental in helping the city reduce operating costs while maintaining
customer service throughout the garage portfolio.
With respect to the department maintenance, staff has received estimates for required
maintenance and repairs across the city-owned garages and lots totaling approximately $7.8
million.
Addressing these investments will be critical to preserving the city's parking assets, improving
the customer service experience and supporting long-term operational reliability.
With respect to the RFP, it will provide an opportunity to evaluate a range of alternatives,
including enhancements to the current gateless model, a potential return to a gated model,
new revenue control technologies, expanded operating strategies, and other approaches
designed to improve customer service utilization and long-term financial sustainability.
And with that, I am available to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you.
Thank you.
A quick question before I go to come some more on this, so I know that I think there's
a big question of why the city doesn't make a lot of money off of these garages.
And I did do some research and saw that very few cities make a lot of money off of their
city-owned parking garages, which is different from private garages for reasons that I don't
quite know.
Can you explain a little bit about the fallen revenue for the money that we do make?
Kind of broadly speaking, and then we can go to specific questions.
So broadly speaking, there has been a big decline in the demand for parking, especially
like in the downtown area, since the pandemic.
So following the pandemic, there was a big decline in revenue that hasn't really come
back to its prior levels.
So in general there was a big decline that was again led by the pandemic.
Also noted on the report it looks like the if you look at the numbers that relate to
the citations that were issued on the enforcement side after we went from the gated system to
a gated system the number of citations that have been issued only represent about 1% of
the overall revenue from the garages.
And so it appears that that system may have also affected
the revenue generation since our enforcement revenues
are not keeping up with what we would expect
to be the total revenue for parking fees.
Well, the note of citations,
I think the table two is very interesting.
It seems like in some years,
there weren't any citations issued, like 2022,
which is after the pandemic.
And some garages seem to have a lot more citations
and others, which I know the sizes vary.
But comparing apples to apples,
for example, City Center West,
2026 just so far, there's been 445 citations
as there was back in 2023,
but then 2025, last year there was only 15.
Can you explain a little bit about
why the fluctuations in citations have been so much?
I'm not sure that I have the information to explain the fluctuation between garages.
I do know that we have had some technological challenges in some of them in terms of having
a reliable signal to enforce at times and things like that, but this is one of the issues
that we are evaluating and that will be evaluated at length in the upcoming RFP process.
So the RFP provides an opportunity to evaluate a range of alternatives which may include
a better technological system or other things.
And so this is something that with the current contract expiring on the RFP that we're planning
to issue is something that we definitely want to look into and see what are our better options
out there.
Okay.
Councilman Branger.
Hi.
You know, I've got to say it kind of seems like the gateless system isn't working out
the way we hoped.
It's a bit of an honor system which works if you have stringent enforcement, but we
don't have enforcement.
Is it your sense that the gateless program is working or should we try to move to something
else?
With the RFP, we can try and identify better technology that maybe will help us enforce
the gateless system better, meaning that if we're able to actually utilize the technology
and identify vehicles that are not parked there legally
or that have not paid at the point of entry.
But no, just looking at the numbers in general,
yeah, it seems that it's not working.
Like I said, the revenue from the citations represents
about 1% of our overall revenue.
And so it seems that we're, there's an opportunity there
to gain more by maybe utilizing the gated system.
Yeah, I'd just like to sort of put a marker down on my preference
either dramatically ramp up enforcement or go back to a gated program because we
can't provide free parking services you know we need the revenue or or else we
need to you know put people on the street where they have to pay the the
parking meter so my sense is that gateless is not working. Agreed, this was noted, thank you.
Councilmember Wong. Yeah I just wanted to reinforce that I just in the report it
it seemed that you're seeking to evaluate a range of options
that really looks at enhancing the existing gateless model.
And I just wanna put another thumb on the scale
to just look at gated.
Can you explain the rationale
for why gateless was even considered?
Because I don't get it, to be honest, yeah.
So when the pandemic, at the onset of the pandemic,
We noticed that revenues were declining at the garages and in parking in general, folks
were working from home, so they were coming into the office downtown, a lot of the businesses
downtown were closing and so there was a reducing demand and a reducing revenue and the city
of Oakland as part of the cost saving measures at the time, we actually instructed our COPP
and to go away from the gated model, what it does is that it reduces costs mainly in
terms of the infrastructure and the machinery that goes into it, and the maintenance, the
upkeeping of those machines, and actually also anytime, for example, there's any issue
with pulling a ticket when you're trying to enter and you cannot access the garage, then
you need someone to be there and attend.
So there's also like more attention that's required
in terms of the personnel.
So that was the idea to redo some of those costs at the time.
And hopefully the idea was that we will be able to enforce
with our improved technology
with the automatic license plate reader, for example,
and be able to fully enforce and still generate the revenue.
But it seems that it hasn't really been working.
Okay.
All right.
Councilmember Brown?
Oh, sorry.
So I just want to add, I just got some clarification,
but also at the time, the park system,
which is our old system that we used in the garages,
was outdated and needed to be replaced.
And it was determined that it would cost about $2 million
at the time to replace the system that we had in place.
So that was another thing that was considered at the time.
Thank you.
I see.
OK.
Are you coming?
Yes, yes, we can move on.
Okay, excellent.
Thank you so much for bringing the report back.
Definitely has a lot more details than the original one.
So thankful, thankful for that.
I definitely have a handful of questions.
In the report, it does list in great detail
what each of these properties,
each of these garages needs
as it relates to capital improvements.
And so with the, I guess, the new RFP coming out,
like what is our plan to make some of these modifications?
I mean, some of them, I feel like there's some that list
like security needs, cameras, replace signage.
I feel like a lot of those are low-hanging fruit.
Can you explain what the plan is there?
Sure, so for some of those low-hanging fruits,
as you referenced, they, so we just have to identify
proper funding for them, so basically just looking at the available resources that we
have and just identifying the proper funding for it.
We have started working.
The first things that we're tackling right now, for lack of better terms, is in response
to the Oakland Fire Department inspection.
They had recommendations for one of our garages and those resulted in approximately $600,000
that we did not anticipate in the budget.
And so we had to find proper funding for it.
And that's the first thing that we're working on currently.
But we plan on doing the same and continuing either
through existing resources or through the budget process
to identify funding for those low-hanging fruits.
And then for the major, for the larger items,
such as an elevator repair,
items that are at least $100,000 or greater,
then we're gonna look to see if we can incorporate them
in our CIP process, so through the budget process.
We also have the CIP process that goes side by side
and along and we'll look to see if we can incorporate
some of those larger items into that process
and hopefully secure funding as soon as the next fiscal year.
I see, and then I guess one thing that I wasn't able
to quite understand from the report.
So for example, one of the listed parking spaces
is the Grand Walker lot and like one of the charge items
is remote monitoring.
So I was curious if you could,
I mean I know what that means,
but I guess like contract wise,
what's the difference between like
if you think of this garage that we have right here
where we know that it's managed by,
you know there's folks there that kind of monitor
the coming and going, make sure people pay,
I think that's what they're doing.
And so in this RFP process, are we going to ensure
that all of these garages are actually managed
in the same way as this one?
Or how is that determination made?
So it's my understanding that they're all managed
in person per se.
I can maybe confirm if that's the case.
One of the options that we're looking at in the RFP
is installing certain safety and security systems
through technology as well.
for example, installing a camera where you're able to monitor it from far, and basically
you can communicate. So if you notice anything suspicious, you can talk to the camera, and
it will, through a speaker, it will alert them or ask them questions like, hey, do you
need help finding your car? Like, what are you looking for? Things like that. So that's
an alternative way of monitoring. But let me see if I can confirm if in fact all of
the lots in the garages are actually, one second.
So yes, I wasn't just able to confirm
that there was a pilot done a couple years ago,
similar to what I was describing
in terms of like installing the camera system
with speakers and things like that.
And that pilot was done at the Grand Wake Lot.
And so that may be what was referenced in the report.
I see, and you know, I feel like, I think this item,
like parking, managing parking garages
is just now under finance again or something, right?
So I understand that you may not have
all of this information, right?
But was there actually a time where all of these garages
actually were managed by individuals
Monday through Friday, nine to five?
And like, or was there, and was there like a scaling back?
Cause I guess like, as we are working to ensure
that these garages, like we're collecting the revenue
as my colleagues mentioned around the, you know,
having the, you know, these specialized gates, et cetera.
And it doesn't seem to be working.
I guess I'm just curious, like, should we actually go ahead
and move towards ensuring all of these spaces
are actually managed?
So, we do have members from our COPP parking partners here
who would be able to confirm if that management structure
was previously in place.
I'm not able to confirm.
I don't have that information in front of me.
I can return with that information.
I'm not sure if there's an appetite for that information,
but I think that I can confirm in two seconds, one second.
Okay.
Through the Chair, CLPP, which is parking partners,
will be able to give you a granular detail
on how each of the lots are actually operated.
They will also be able to provide background
and context on pilot programs that were done
from the pandemic up until now.
Where we are at as far as the finance department,
we took over the operation on July 1st.
So there's a lot of background work
that we are bringing ourselves up to speed on.
And there are different things that our approach
on getting things done in the parking garages
is more accelerated.
So a lot of these issues that have been there
have been there for years.
Our actual goal is to actually make sure
that we are bringing back the gates,
bringing back the level of service
that was happening pre-pandemic
and making sure that we have the material
and doing that in a process of doing
what is actually out there as far as technology,
which is the RFP process.
Yeah, I think that that sounds great.
I think that that's a great idea.
And you know the one thing that,
both in the report last time and even this one,
I think it's great that we have a full number
of how much the garages are bringing in.
Like it's like a total, hey, this is so many millions.
Do we actually have the breakdown per garage?
I know this report says citations,
but I think I'm more interested in,
across all of these garages,
what is the revenue that's coming in?
So that was actually requested in our prior presentation,
and we provided it as a supplemental report on,
I believe it was July 21st, City Council meeting,
so that was provided at that time,
and we can speak. Okay, I'll have a look.
Okay, thank you. Okay, thank you.
I will move, well my recommendation to this body
if there's interest is to hold this in committee.
I understand that there's a RFP process going on,
but I think there's a number of unanswered questions
and I've written a few of them down.
So if we could hold this, continue this in committee
till the November 10th, finance and committee meeting.
Hopefully that's enough time to gather this information.
The things that I've written down is one,
a discussion of whether or not to bring back
the gate technology, move away from gate lists,
and an exploration of other options.
I see there's kind of a brief summary in this report,
but a little more of what else we're considering.
Number two, I'm interested in the usage per garage,
so we can compare each garage within years,
what the numbers, if we have of revenue per garage
over the years because that table that shows
the citations is one indicator of citations,
but also how much was it used?
Maybe in 2025, no one did use City Center West.
So it's an example of being able to compare
those citations to usage would be helpful.
Number three, why the citations have varied.
You said you weren't able to explain that today
of why one year there's a few,
one year there's a lot more.
Usage could obviously be one of those things,
maybe there's staffing issues or safety issues or something else going on that I
would be interested in knowing. Four, I think I prefaced this saying I
understand that parking garages don't always make a lot of cities money, but
what lessons from cities that are doing it right can we follow. From the data I
was able to pull I was able to get net revenues it was harder to see you know
what sorry gross revenues it was harder to see what cities were actually netting
But I'm just that's all public information. I'm sure and I would love to see what lessons we could learn from other, California cities
Was that four I think that was four or five and
Finally I would as a couple of council members suggested
There's a lot of deferred maintenance, you know several million dollars worth in your
Recommendation. What are the top priorities for the consideration of?
Well this body but the full council as we go through future budgeting cycles
Not it. Well, we'll prepare for that. Thank you. Okay, and we'll hear public comment and then I will make that motion
Thank you calling in the names assigned up to speak on item number seven David boat right Kevin dally
Asada Obama and Derek Barnes
Even dally guess what I'm going to talk about parking policy and I am disappointed
That there was a decision made to move the parking policy for garages to the finance department
Which I don't know has any expertise in parking policy
But for a city, it's not only the revenue that's generated. It's also the business if prices are too high say
Yeah, you get a whole lot per hour
But what you want to do is you want some turnover you want people to come to Oakland you want them to spend money?
enjoy life
walk around the lake and not spend money. So good news is street parking is still
part of Oak Dot and Kirby Olsen as part of that is rolling out dynamic pricing
for street parking. You adjust the price if there's no parking available on a
block you have you raise the price. If the block is empty you lower the price
until there's roughly one empty spot per block.
San Francisco, about 15 years ago,
did the same thing with parking lots.
Goal was about 15% vacancy per parking lot.
So I definitely appreciate the follow up you guys did,
adding some extra information on the lots.
I'd also like to see an occupancy and a goal
on how you will be changing the hourly pricing,
both time of day, weekends, spatial events
to have roughly 15% occupancy.
Also concerned that some empty lots or some parking lots,
should we consider turning them into housing.
Diamond parking lot in district four,
my local parking lot,
it was donated so that there'd be free parking.
Is that sensible when you charge street parking prices?
Can we change that?
What's the occupancy there?
Thanks.
They have been throughout the country lawsuits
based on the pay by plate meter system.
And some of the lawsuits have to do with typical errors,
getting unfair parking tickets,
and dealing with privacy tracking concerns.
There is a case in California, Bartholomew versus
parking concepts where they did not develop a privacy policy
related to the reading of parking plate reader systems.
It results in a statutory damage of 2,500 per violation.
You also have pay by phone class action suit filed in 2026.
This federal class action lawsuit filed pay by phone alleges that there's deception because
you start paying before the final pay button has been pressed.
In other words, people are overpaying with that system.
I have asked you several times to explain how the City Ice Center has validated parking.
And I just found out that you have an arrangement where they pay a set amount of money per month
to you.
I don't know how it works, but the people parking that garage, they get out and go straight
to the center
and there's no
uh... use of the uh...
meet uh... the
kia's
you have to explain things
and i've said this i've seen this over and over again how does this work
you give the appearance that you avoid dealing with financial issues in some
cases
david boat ride district four
uh... i recommend the city makes public it's planned for monetizing the clay
Street parking lot if city doesn't have the funds to utilize this property has a private development been
Attempted thank you
Thank you for your comments. Sure that concludes all speakers on this item
Thank you. I will move the item as previously stated to the November 10th council meeting with a request for additional information
on the five questions mentioned
second
Thank you. We have a motion made by councilmember Ramachandran sorry chair Ramachandran seconded by councilmember Brown to continue this item to the new
To the November 10th finance and management committee meeting with the requested staff to provide in a supplemental support
The following whether or not to bring back the gate technology or move away from gateless
The usage per garage to compare each garage within years why the citations have varied what lessons?
Can we learn from other California cities? And what are the top deferred maintenance priorities for the consideration of the full council on?
role council members Brown I
hunger I
Long I and chair Ramachandran. I thank you item 7 passes with four eyes to continue this to the November 10th
Finance and Management Committee agenda
item 8
Adopt an ordinance amending the salary schedule of ordinance number one two one eight seven CMS to amend the title of the full-time
classification of exempt limit limited duration employee to exempt limited duration employee and
Be amend the title of the full-time classification of exempt limited
duration employee of 80 hours to exempt limited duration employee of 40 hours and
and C amend the title of the full-time classification
of employee relations analyst principle to employee
and labor relations analyst principle.
We have one speaker on this item.
Good morning Chair Ramachandran and members of the committee.
Jamie Pritchard, principal human resources analyst
with the human resources management department.
The item before you is routine maintenance
to the city's classification plan.
This is the kind of item we bring to you a few times a year.
It usually results in creating new classifications
or making changes to existing classifications.
This specific ordinance is requesting title changes
to three items.
Two of them are for temporary classifications,
exempt limited duration employees, ELDEs.
We believe that adding parenthetical references
to 37.5 hours and 40 hours will clarify the nature
of the work week.
For the third item, it is currently titled
principal employee relations analyst,
and we are recommending a title change to align it
with recently created classifications
in that full job series,
so the name would change to principal employee
and labor relations analyst.
I'm available to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, colleagues, any questions?
Okay, we can move to the follow-up speaker.
Calling in the name that sign up to speak
on item number eight, Ms. Osoto-Olivala.
and labor analyst, nobody wanted to ask what is the duties and responsibilities and is
this a new title position or is this a frozen position that's now being brought back?
Come on guys, you need a little bit more than this.
And at some point a discussion needs to be had that only 32 percent of your city employees
live in Oakland.
You spend a lot of time talking about you have an ordinance that says you prioritize
doing business with businesses in Oakland, but you have people who are making major decisions
about the welfare of this city and what's best for this city, but you don't feel you
We need to live in this city and we got 92% of our police officers that don't live in
Oakland.
Eighty-something percent of our firefighters don't live in Oakland.
And they don't spend their money in Oakland because they go back to the places where they
live and they don't generate much revenue.
So again, I think a little bit more detail on principal, employee, and labor analysts.
Some discussion.
Thank you for your comments, Chair.
That concludes all speakers on this item.
Okay.
Thank you.
I will entertain a motion to forward this to the next council meeting on content.
So moved.
Second.
Thank you.
We have a motion made by Council Member Unger, seconded by Council Member Wong to approve
the recommendations of staff and support this item to the October 6th City Council agenda
on consent on rule council members Brown I under I long I and chair Ramachandran I thank
you item eight passes with four I support this item to the October 6th 2026 City Council
agenda on consent moving on to open forum calling in the names that signed up to speak
David Boatwright, Kenyatta Obelson,
Asada Olavala, and Kevin Dalley.
David Boatwright, District 4.
I recommend the city council provide more oversight
to projects and measures it authorizes.
To authorize without follow-up reviews
of status and performance is allowing
such authorizations to be wasteful and or unsuccessful.
An example is Measure MM, which is almost two years
after the public's approval is just,
just now developing means to meet MMS requirements
and support the wildfire prevention commission.
Last Wednesday, your budget advisory commission
had a meeting, and in that meeting,
they produced and reviewed a document
that's eventually gonna come to you.
The purpose of the document is to get a real good head start
on the potential budget for 2728, and in the document they are looking at budget stabilization
issues.
My recommendation is that as soon as possible this document comes before this body with
some type of presentation related to budgetary issues because it goes into other issues of
how crime and economics are related,
how you develop a budget based on Oakland's culture
and diversity.
So I will see when this document comes before this body
and if it's being done in a timely manner.
Thank you, that concludes all speakers for open forum.
Thank you, this meeting is adjourned.