{ "city": "oakland", "canonicalVideoId": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "source": { "meeting": { "fileName": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.json", "path": "data/cities/oakland/source/meetings/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.json", "sourceStem": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "variantCount": 1, "variantFiles": [ "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.json" ], "metadata": { "videoId": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "title": "Rules & Legislation Committee", "date": "2026-03-26", "committee": "Rules & Legislation Committee", "detailUrl": "https://oakland.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403", "videoUrl": "https://oakland.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403", "duration": "02h 03m", "attachments": [ { "title": "Agenda", "url": "https://oakland.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403" }, { "title": "Minutes", "url": "https://oakland.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403" } ], "videoProvider": "granicus", "videoProviderId": "7403", "rawData": { "date": "2026-03-26", "clipId": "7403", "agendaUrl": "https://oakland.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403", "minutesUrl": "https://oakland.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403" } } }, "transcript": { "fileName": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt", "path": "data/cities/oakland/source/transcripts/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt", "sourceStem": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "size": 166051, "variantCount": 1, "variantFiles": [ "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt" ], "rawHash": "d492296d8b49db2557cd85f832104ea845f20b7f5c46a4734aa5a59895323633", "textHash": "7f14ca2d2a89f0e2adadfbd0fa544e2626f869db1fdf34aa689abfdb2f80d8ea", "entryCount": 1969, "wordCount": 16671, "speakerCount": 0, "speakers": [], "urls": { "srt": "/oakland/api/source/transcript/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt", "text": "/oakland/api/source/transcript/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.txt" } } }, "parsed": { "persistedAt": "2026-04-13T15:56:52.283Z", "canonicalVideoId": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "meeting": { "title": "Rules & Legislation Committee", "date": "2026-03-26", "committee": "Rules & Legislation Committee", "videoUrl": "https://oakland.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403", "detailUrl": "https://oakland.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403", "attachments": [ { "title": "Agenda", "url": "https://oakland.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403" }, { "title": "Minutes", "url": "https://oakland.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=7403" } ], "sourceVideoId": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "sourceFileName": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.json", "metadataVariantCount": 1, "metadataVariantIds": [ "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee" ] }, "transcript": { "sourceFileName": "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt", "sourcePath": "/home/runner/work/seacc/seacc/data/cities/oakland/source/transcripts/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt", "variantCount": 1, "variantFiles": [ "oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.srt" ], "entryCount": 1969, "wordCount": 16671, "speakerCount": 0, "speakers": [], "hash": "7f14ca2d2a89f0e2adadfbd0fa544e2626f869db1fdf34aa689abfdb2f80d8ea" }, "tags": [ "city:oakland", "org:oakland-city-council", "meeting:oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "committee:rules-and-legislation-committee", "year:2026", "month:2026-03", "date:2026-03-26" ], "text": "Good morning.\nThe. Rules committee we do need a qorum want today is\nthat we can begin. Good morning and welcome to the\nrules Legislative Sheen\nCommittee media on this Thursday MARCH. 26, the time\nis 10. 31 in this meeting\nshall come to order. The more. I call roll, like to give\ninstructions on how to submit speaker card on items listed\non this agenda. If you are\nhere. A member of the audience here in chambers and would\nlike to submit a speaker card. Please fill out a speaker card, an attorney to a clerk,\nrepresentative. Either 2 minutes after this meeting\nbegan war before the eye.\nCalled it a record. Registration to speak via zoom\nwas do 24 hours before this\nmeeting began, noting that there we will no longer take speaker cards for online\nregistration. Once again, the\nmeeting began at 10. 31 and speaker cards will no longer\nbe accepted. 10 minutes after\nthe meeting began, which is at\nthat time will be 10. 41 with that council. PRESIDENT\nJenkins to do you have any\nannouncements before began a\nyes because of the potential issues. Speaker time will be\nreduced to 90 seconds as\nopposed to 2 minutes. With that. Thank you so much. And\nwe'll begin with roll on roll for this meeting. We have\ncouncil member Brown. True too\npresent. Thank you. Council\nmember Fyfe is excused.\nCouncil member Ahmed Chandran. I and chair PRESIDENT Council\nPRESIDENT Your Jenkins. I we have 3 members present won\nexcused. Now moving on to item number of the draft minutes\nfor the committee meetings of\nFEBRUARY. 26 2026 3/5/2026 in\nMARCH 12 2026. Move approval. I have a motion by council\nmember Brown second about Councilmember Ramachandran to approve the minutes. All 3 of\nthem as is. Council member Brown Eye Councilmember Fife is excuse council\nRamachandran. I and council\nPRESIDENT Jenkins. 3 one excuse for item number 2\napproval. A draft minutes now\nmoving to new scheduling.\nStarting with item 3.1 receiving information report on the Oakland Children's\nInitiative and its partners organizations, Oakland Promise\nand first, 5 Alameda County and this item is being request\nto be scheduled on the APRIL 13 2026. Special Education\nPartnership Committee agenda.\nItem. 3 point. Thank you so much. MADAM Clerk. I'm just\nwant to confirm the the slight\nchange in the title. It should\nbe Alameda County. First 5.\nSenator, thank you for that.\nMoving to item 3.2, it is an\noral report from the director\nof Public works Liam Garland regarding the illegal dumping mitigation. Your school\ncampuses. And this is also\nbeing request to be scheduled for the APRIL 13th Special Education Partnership\nCommittee agenda. I believe we don't have a quorum on the\ndays. Council member Brown. Thanks and thank you so much.\nWell, as the question. We just needed a quorum on the days to move forward. Thank you for\nthat. Moving to item 3.3 receive information report\nfrom the Oakland Youth Commission. And this is being\nrequested to be scheduled for APRIL just Special Education\nPartnership Committee agenda\nitem. 3 point for is information report from the\nOakland Unified School usd\nregarding current school safety protocols, funding\nstructures and strategic safety updates. This is also being requested to be\nscheduled to the special. APRIL 13th Education\nPartnership Committee agenda.\nItem 3.5 is from the auditors Office and Information Report professional services\ncontracts authorized by the\ncity auditor doing fiscal\nyear. 24 to 25 in. This is being requested to be\nscheduled for the APRIL 14th 2026. Special City Council\nagenda on consent. I will now\nread in the rule. 24. Nc states that the city auditor\nshall present to the city\nCouncil on an annual basis and report listing all professional service contracts\nauthorized by the city auditor\ndoing the prior year. Moving to item 3.6, which is also\ninformation report from the\ncity auditor. On the audit recommendation. Follow-up\nreport. As of DECEMBER 31st. 2025 this is being request to\nbe scheduled for APRIL 14th, Special City Council agenda on\non consent. The real 24 for this item is that the city\ncharter states that is the responsibility of the city auditor to submit a\nsemi-annual report to the\ncouncil in public on the extent of implementation of\nrecommendations for the corrective actions made in the\ncity. Auditor's report. Moving\nto item 3.7 resolution\nreappoint Lisa Raszler as the\ncity Oakland's trustee to the Alameda skews me Mosquito\nAbatement District board. And this is being requested to be\nscheduled for APRIL 14th has special City Council agenda\nconsent. And I apologize. Does\nthis require able 24? Yes, any\nitems that are bypassing\ncommitting going street to council require the body to\nstate a reason for your rules. Please items bypass committee and District Council on\nconsent. Thank you for that.\nMoving on to item 3.8 item, 3.8 is an information report\nfrom the city administrator on the status of implementing\npolicy directives past by the\nCity Council on the APRIL 21st him being request to be\nscheduled. Excuse me on APRIL, 21st 2026, Finance and\nManagement Committee agenda.\nHarden. I do see side. Through the chair. The administration\nwould like to request to move\nthis to that MAY 2012 meeting\nbecause the agenda is fairly impacted and staff will make\nthemselves available to do one\non with the committee members ensure the information is made\npublic in advance of the publication deadline for the\nMAY 12th meeting. Thank you\nfor that. So item 3.8, the status of the implementation of the council policy\ndirectives now be scheduled to MAY 12 Finance and Management\nCommittee agenda. Thank you\nfor that. Moving to item 3.9 adopt an ordinance authorizing\nthe city administrator negotiate and execute an\nagreement to purchase an easement for public right\naway. To purchase in these\nexcuse me to purchase an easement for public right away\nstreets and utility purposes over a portion of the real property located at 2.60,\nstreet. Case in family, limited partnership in the\namount not to exceed amount of\n$255,000 in adopting. California. Environmental\nQuality Act findings. This is being requested the schedule\nfor the APRIL 21st Public Works and Transportation\nCommittee agenda. Item 3.10, is an ordinance appealing\nordinance. Number 1, 2, 9, 6,\n0, and replacing it with the\naddition of mc Charter 15.80\nin Re referenced flood hazard maps authorize the city\nadministrator to designate a flood plan administrator to\nadminister and develop\nregulations in support of the\ncharter adopting appropriate, appropriate California\nenvironmental Quality Act\nfindings. And this is being request to be scheduled for\nAPRIL. 21st 2026 Public Works and Transportation Committee\nagenda. It is also noted to go\nto the APRIL 28th Special City\nCouncil agenda as a public hearing. But I believe staff has to make a question. Thank\nyou. My apologies. Can you speak closer to the mike so we can make sure that we can hear\nyou capture you. Is the mic,\nOkay. Thank you. Yes, through the chair. If I MAY request that we move the meeting to\nthat MAY 5th. Public works and Transportation Committee has. There's a special joint public\nsafety meetings already\nscheduled on the 28th. Some noted think and outside or if\nI could clarify the the item\nwould go continue to go public works and Transportation\nCommittee meeting on APRIL.\n21st. But the public hearing would be on the regular MAY.\n5th City Council meeting.\nThat's correct. Thank you. So no thank you for that. Thank\nyou. Moving on to item 3.11, this is from the public public\nworks. Mean, it is a resolution amending\nresolution, 8, 8, 3, 7, 9, to increase the professional\nservices agreement far. Architectural and engineering\ndesign services with k 2, a Marais make graft associated\nArchitects for the fire\nstation. 29 project by an\namount not to exceed $700,000 bringing the total contract\namount from. 1 million, 800 $1000 to 2 million, waiving\nthe request for proposal, competitive selection requirements and adapting\nsequel. Findings in this is being requested. The schedule\nfor the MAY 21st Public Works and Transportation Committee\nagenda. Item 3.12 Is a\nresolution authorizing the city administration negotiate\nand execute. A new exclusive negotiation agreement with the museum of Jazz and Art. But to\nthe London Museum and Art facility on the city-owned\nproperty located at 3.10, Oaks\nStreet for 8 months condition\non payment 10, $10,500 exclusive negotiating payment\nwith one additional six-month administrative extension\nconditioned on payment of an\nadditional $303,500 extension\npayment in adopting. California. Environmental\nQuality Act findings. This is being requested schedule for\nthe APRIL 21st Community and Economic Development Committee\nagenda. Item 3.13, is coming from the Human Service\nDepartment a resolution accepting the planning\nOversight Committee. Recommendations to one award.\n9 grants with the youth summer jobs. Mayor summer youth employment program, funding\nstrategy, tolling and amount\nnot to exceed 1 million,\n480,250 dollars and $0.60 for to summer program service. Its\nterm grant cycles, JUNE first\n2026 to SEPTEMBER. 30th 2026\nin JUNE. First, 27 through SEPTEMBER. 30th 2027\ncontingent upon funding Bela Bility and program\nperformance. 2 or 12 grants across for funding strategies.\nTotally amount not to exceed 1 million, 712,000 dollars,\n$12,558. Summer. To the chair.\nThank you. Can't is. I'm so\nsorry. This is Rob 11th in Children. Services Division\nHuman Services Department. Through that section, you\nhaven't even got to the change yet. A very small change in\nthe title every dot that section are directed please. Yeah, you would have to read\nout the pope's so sorry. Thank\nyou. Staff recommends that the city council adopt a\nresolution accepting the planning and oversight\ncommittee recommendation to one award 9 grants within the\nyouth summer jobs. Mayor Summer Youth employment\nprogram, funding strategy out\nnot to exceed 1 million,\n80,200 $53.60 4, 2 summer\nprogram service term Grant cycles JUNE first, 2026\nthrough SEPTEMBER, 30th 20 2026. In JUNE. First 2027\nthrough SEPTEMBER. 30th 2027 contingent upon funding\navailability and program performance and to award 12\ngrants across for funding Strategies Elementary school\nbased expanded learning middle\nschool based expanded learning youth development leadership\nand career access unemployment totaling an amount not to\nexceed 1 million, 712,558\ndollars. 4, 2 summer program service term Grant cycles JUNE\nfirst 2026 through SEPTEMBER.\n30th 2026. In JUNE. First 2027\nthrough SEPTEMBER. 30th 2027 continue to pump funding availability and program\nperformance. The 1000 was in\nthe place previously. Thank\nyou. I'm so sorry. Thank you.\nNo Thank you. Rep moving to item 3.14 This is an information report from the\ncity. Auditor on audits of the Oakland police oversight\nagencies. The Oakland Police Commission, the Community\nPolice Review Agency in Office of Inspector General. This is\nbeing requested the schedule for the APRIL 21st Public\nSafety Committee agenda item 3.15, is an information report\nfrom the Oakland Police Department. Federal Law\nEnforcement Agency Task Force annual report. And this is also being requested to be\nscheduled for the APRIL 21st Public Safety Committee\nagenda. Item 3.16, is a resolution authorizing the city minister to enter into\nprofessional services\nagreement with. So I 4\nprovisions of universal forensic extraction devices and related services for the\nOakland Police Department for a contract amount not to\nexceed $140,000 for the period\nof JULY. First 2026 to JUNE 30th 27 waiving the competitive multi step\nsolicitation process and local, small local business enterprise program\nrequirements and 3 accepting\nthe 2024. So you buy annual report and making\ndeterminations regarding\nwhether the city should continue using this technology. This is being requested to be scheduled for\nthe APRIL 21st Public Safety\nCommittee agenda. Item 3.17,\nis ordinance amending Omc 10.7 for authorizing the city\nadministrator at city to\nindustry to assess fines on sideshows, spectators, promoters and facilitators\nIxpe. Exempting law\nenforcement and members of the media engaged in their duties\nand non participating members of public. And this is being\nrequest to be scheduled for\nAPRIL. 21st 2026 Public Safety Committee agenda. I do see staff. Are you approaching for\nitem? 3.17? This ration. We would like to move this item\nending list. And will that be to the public Safety\nCommittee? Penniless? Yes,\nyes. So no date. And item 3.17, is end Orel Information report on the local police\ndepartments. Automatic resource locator policy. And\nthis is being requested to be\nscheduled for APRIL. 21st Public Safety Committee\nagenda. The administration and also requests that this item\nthe move to pending the pending less no date specific for the Public Safety\nCommittee. So noted that items 3.17, the Oakland Sideshow\nordinance in item 3.18, will the information report on the local police departments out\nof degree to store is located. Policy is both being requested\nto be scheduled to public safety and the list. No date\nspecific. Yes, please great.\nThank you so much. 3.19, is a resolution authorizing the\nsale of former Oakland fired\nboat known as the Seawolf has\na little group 4. 25 $25,000\nin a finding the sale is the best interest of the city.\nPursuant scene. And this is being requested to be\nscheduled for the MAY City\nCouncil agenda on consent in the rule. 24 for bypassing\ncommittee is due to the\nimpacted. APRIL 21st meeting\nagenda Now moving to the\ncommittees from MARCH 24th. Starting with the Finance and\nManagement Committee item 3.20, I'll be reading in the\nshort titles is a man\namendment to the ordinance. Number 1, 2, 1, 8, 7, cms, the\nsalary ordinance for various classifications exemptions and\nthe committee this consistent\n4 pieces of legislation. The first piece of legislation, the resolution was withdrawn\nwith no new date items. 2, 3\nof this legislation of the\nresolutions. The committee\napproved to move these 2 items along with the 4th item to\nAPRIL 14th Special City Council agenda at 3.30, on\nconsent in the 4th of item again scheduled for the APRIL\nrequesting to be scheduled for the APRIL 14th Special 3.30,\ncouncil meeting on consent had an amendment in part for\nupdating the title of the\nordinance to strike that says at the full time\nclassification of parking administrator in the body of\nthe ordinance on Page want to\nstrike section 2 that says the following classification is\nadded ordinance. Number 1, 2,\n1, 8, 7, in the unit, u k to pay great able to read as\nfollows classification title\nclass members step salary parking administration.\nDetails updating the related attachment a to remove the\npark em in a straighter on\nPage 8, 1, 18. Moving to item. 3.0 21, the information report\non the citywide staffing FEBRUARY 2026. The committee\napproved that this item be\nscheduled to the APRIL 14th Special City Council agenda at\n3.30, as a public hearing.\nItem 3.22 The salary survey\nresults. This item was also Rick because me was continue\nto the APRIL 21st 2026. Finance and Management\nCommittee agenda. Item. 3.0\n23. Is the Oakland's Pete Peepers investment portfolio\nin actuary valuation report. This item was received and\nfiled in committing. And item 3.0 24 the fiscal year. 25 to\n26 0nd quarter revenue and expenditures report this item\nwas also received and filed in\nthe Finance and Management Committee moving to\nrecommendations from the MARCH 24th Public Works and Transportation Committee\nstarting with item 3.0 25 is\nthe 2020 3, 2025 progress\nimplementation. Implementing\nthe 2030, equitable climate action plan and this was received and filed in\ncommittee. Item. 3.0 26 to 2025. Be packed. Annual report. This was also received\nand filed in committee. Item 3.27, the resolution in\nsupport of the California\nSenate Bill. 1218, this item was requested by committee to\nbe 42 the APRIL. 26 special City Council agenda at 3.30,\non consent. Item. 3.0 28, this\nwas the commemorative street renaming in collaboration with\nBeebe Memorial Cathedral Church. This item was\nrequested by committee to be\n42. The APRIL 14th Special City Council agenda at 3.30,\non consent. Item. 3.0 29, the ordinance to strengthen illegal dumping enforcement.\nThe the committee approved as amended the recommendations of\nstaff to be 42. The APRIL 14 special City Council agenda at\n3.30, on consent with the following amendments to page 7\nof the ordinance Section 5, 4 time calculations for\nassessment of penalties,\nadding a new whereas the dumping constituents and\ncommercial quality caught\ncontains harmful waste matter\nis a mattress upholstered furniture, appliances,\nfurniture or electronic waste, additional daily civil\npenalties of up to $1000 per\nday, maybe assessed. Into the\nnew section b, they have strict in the administrative\ncitation into the new section c they strict in the administrative fines or\npenalties. Moving to item 3.30\nthe resolution to authorize Arab its peak pilot program to\nstrengthen illegal dumping. Nations and remediation is my\napologies. And this is being requested to be scarred. The committee approved to schedule\nthis item to the APRIL 14th\nSpecial City Council agenda on\nconsent at now moving to the recommendations from the MARCH\n24th Saeidi Committee. The item 3.0 31 the lease\nagreement with the Oakland Parks and Recreation\nFoundation from maintenance of\nTyrone Kearney Park. The committee requested the item\nbe scheduled for APRIL 14th, Special City Council agenda at\n3.30, on consent. Item. 3.0 32, which consists of 2 pieces\nof legislation is amendment to the Rent Adjustment Ordinance\nand regulations. The committee approved a request to withdraw\nthe scheduling of this item to\nthe U.S. Economy and move to the Saeidi committee pending list. No date specific. Both\npieces. Now moving to the recommendations from the MARCH 24th life enrichment Committee\nagenda. Item. 3.0 33, the 2025 Library Commission annual\nreport this item was received\nand filed in committee. Item\n3.34 the citywide co-operative agreement. The committee approved as amended that the\nrecommendations of staff into before did to the APRIL 14th\nCity Council agenda at 3.30,\non non consent. The amendments were to the first resolve\nclass of legislation adding as reference in the agenda report\nand accompanying attachment. So spoke with the chair on this one. This one will go\nstraight to consent. So noted. Thank you for that. Chair\nJenkins moving to item 3.0 35, this is the purchase of real\nproperty at 31. 0, 5, San\nPablo Avenue for Hoover Library. And the committee approved the recommendations\nof staff to be 42. The APRIL\n14th, Special City Council\nagenda at 3.30, on consent. Now moving to recommendations from the MARCH 24th Public\nSafety Committee agenda item. 3.0 36, this is the let's\nthrow phone. Contracts and the committee approves staff recommendations to before\nAPRIL 14th, Special City\nCouncil agenda at 3.30, on\nconsent item. 3.0 37, the opd staff report the committee received about this item in\ncommittee. And item 3.0 38,\nthe opd gps tracker policy. The committee is proof staff's recommendations to be 42. The\nAPRIL 14th, Special City Council agenda at 3.30, on\nconsent. And that concludes\nyour item threes. And we have 3 most skinny. We have 3\nspeakers for the site. That\nwas a lot. Thank you. Clark.\nThat said the speakers. Thank\nyou for that. And calling\nthose speakers who are here in person or online, if you are online, please river. He and\nso I can easily recognize you.\nI have a regime and al Kevin Dally in Blair be committed\nany order and please state\nyour name for the record. All\nright. This is Kevin Dally. I've nit picky question on 3\ndot 20 on the salary\nordinances as you mentioned, salary for was amended to\nremove the part for the parking administrator the\nintent of the committee, too. Remove it in place it on the\npending list along with Section one or was it to\nstrike completely? I know the city administrator can add\nback in at a later date. Might\nmake sense to have a detach 2. Part one, which is the other\npart the city administrator. The item as amended, I guess\ncertain. Typically don't respond. But I can talk to\nSure. Okay. Thanks. Russian\nmodel district 4. I want to connect 3 items on your agenda\ntoday because they point to the same underlying issue.\nGovernance clarity. First 3.1 for the city auditor's report\non police oversight. The important takeaway is not just\nstaffing into structure. The\nreport identifies overlapping roles, unclear authority and\ngaps and accountability across\noversight bodies before adding resources. I would urge\ncouncil to consider a combined structural and performance review. So we are not\nreinforcing a system that lacks clear lines of\nresponsibility. Second item, 3.1, 8, the opd automatic\nresource locator policy. The city auditor specifically\nrecommended enabling gps location capability in patrol\nvehicles. So dispatchers can identify and send the closest\navailable unit. That is a practical operational improvement that can help\nreduce response times without\nadditional staffing. But we have not seen movements into\npack discussion in 2024. We're\nalso seeing policy drift. This technology was introduced as a dispatch to all but\ndiscussions have expanded into questions of discipline and\npersonnel monitoring. The Oakland Fire Department appears to have already\nimplemented a gps unable\ndispatch pilot without council approval. Could staff explain\nhow that program move forward operationally while the opd\npolicy remains pending. 3.1, 5\nfederal task force agreements\nunder a one c 9.7, the Privacy Advisory Commission must\nreview and publicly discuss and we'll use pd and federal\nagencies before they're\nexecuted. That gives that body significant influence over\ncomplex intergovernmental law enforcement agreements. But pack is a privacy body. It is\nnot a law enforcement body. It does not have operational\npublic safety or investigative expertise that creates a\nmismatch. These agreements\ninvolve violent crime,\nfirearms trafficking in multi-jurisdictional\ninvestigations. Oversight is essential, but we should ask\nfor the Oakland has given a privacy commission, outsized gatekeeping authority over\ncore public safety partnerships and in a way that\nfew other cities have. Across\nall 3 items. The issue is the\nsame. We are assigned responsibilities without\nclearly defining scope or aligning them with the\nappropriate expertise. Oversight is essential, but\nover state has to be aligned\nwith x, he's in scope right now. Authority is unclear.\nScope is expanding and\ndecisions are stalling. If we want accountability, we need to fix the structure. Thank\nyou. Thank you for your comments in our last speaker\nwho signed up for item number 3, is Blair be Continuara muted, please. I'm Beatrice.\nSomething you MAY begin. I\nthank you. Blair first time been around for a while. Good\nto see everyone. I wanted to\nspeak out about 5 items I want\nI can combine items. 2.1, 4\n3.1, 5 and then combine items.\n3.2, 6 to 3.30 and a few\nmoments. I guess only the full\n3 minutes. However, thank you\nto speak to item 3.1, 4 3.1,\nThank you for police\ncommission items for 3.1, 4. I'm still hopeful there can be\nsome ways to try to bring back former police commissioners\nwho retired, who I thought were I'd incredible service.\nImportant job. And I feel that, you know, as we have\nmade a shift in Oakland towards a more conservative\napproach to address City\nissues. I you know, I I think the previous commissioners,\nthey operate a progressive approach that's needed for the\nprocess and offered an important balance and what\nwe're trying to work towards\nus as find the middle ground of a conservative and\nprogressive values are open. So good luck that you can\ncontinue the efforts to consider the good work in the\nprevious commissioners. Their thinking is truly needed in\nhow move forward together.\nGood luck in those efforts about the federal task force\nthings. It's important to me that the pa see get an\nincredibly important service of oversight that can't be 9.\nI understand with the previous\npublic comment said they probably provide an incredibly\nimportant job of oversight that we have to certainly find\nanother. City department to opt for that oversight. We\ncan't just drop it and I hope they can continue the good work that the psc. They did\nincredibly important work.\nOversight for the federal task force agencies. We have to continue. Those efforts could\nlike how we find that and to\ngo into the cleaning items. You have a lot of new\nordinances illegal dumping. I was always from the point of\nview, if you really good tech accountability for all the\ntech around illegal dumping that creates kind of a\ncommunity effort towards positive that I hope can't be\nforgetting forgotten such a\ntime. And when you're be pack issues, 3.0, 2, 6, your yearly\nreview. Important reminder that tech accountability again\nin the importance of what the\npact tries to work towards. I hope they they understand the\nimportance of working towards tech accountability as well\nclues effort from everyone is how are community futures\nBill. And that's what they're going for to elect how we do\nthat together. Thanks for your\ntime. Thank you for that. Conclusion. Speakers for item\n3. Thank you to everybody who came out to speak. Thank you to the court for reading all\nthat. So noting 3.1 title\nchanged. 3.7 24 3 point APRIL\nto MAY 12 Finance and Management Committee. 3 point and dates going to be changed\nto a public hearing on MAY\n5th. 3.13 noting the title change 3.17 move to public\nSafety Committee pending lists. No date specific 3.18\nmove to public safety. Was date specific and 3.3, 4 move\nto consent entertain a motion\nas amended. Move approval. And that was a motion by council\nmember Brown seconded by\nCouncilmember Ramachandran to approve item 3 as amended,\nincluding time as amended on row for this is councilmember\neye on and run. And shared. I\nitem excuse Councilmember Fife is excuse item number 3\napproved as amended with 3 I's\none excuse Councilmember Fife. That now takes us to item\nnumber 4. Item. Number 4 is the review of the draft agenda\nis pending lists and the council agenda means the\ncouncil and committee\nmeetings. As we know, we are about to come up on a break.\nSo at this time it's a short list of the APRIL second rules\nagenda, religion that and the pending list for committees.\nAnd I have 2 speakers.\nCouncilmember gender. Thank you. I'd like to request to\nmake the APRIL 21st Finance Committee meeting a special\nmeeting, moving it 30 minutes\nup to 09:00am instead of 9.30, as we have the impacted agenda\ndon't want to set the entire day of meetings to delayed. I\nbelieve we do have we have confirmed with staff of other council members that will have\na quorum. Can you state the\ndate of the meeting and the time again, APRIL, 21st\nFinance Committee currently at hope would like to started at\n9 o'clock. Chair. Good morning. Trinity Hall from the office of the sort of like in\nHouston District 7 Council member. I am making requests on behalf of the council\nmember to schedule the encampment abatement policy\nfor the special City Council\nmeeting on APRIL 14th at\n09:38am. On non consent. Thank being that. This is an\nimportant item. My request would be that you guys get\nthat work with clerks items to\nget the items posted as soon as possible so that the council members have a chance\nto digest the changes as well\nas the public possible with the clerk's office 10 days\nbefore that be great. Thank you for that. And if I can just really quickly, just for\nthe public's knowledge, the\nitem that just was stated to be scheduled for this special, 90 a meeting APRIL 14th.\nThat's on the life enrichment Committee Pin De Lis. No date specific under item number to\nsell for clarity. Thank you. The administration also has a\nfew changes to the pending lists for that. Now, special\nFinance and Management Committee. The item under\nAPRIL. 21st item number 3, we'd like to request and\nthat's the information report\nfir the city administrator in response to the city auditor's\nrecommendations in substantiated whistleblower\ninvestigation regarding the\ncity of Oakland uses unauthorized formulas for calculating overtime. That\ndifferent from guidelines to move that the MAY 12 Finance\nand Management Committee meeting. Just because it's so\nimpacted. And then moving on\nto the life enrichment pending\nwest. We like to move item one\nunder the APRIL. 21st pending\nlist. The osc why 2024? 2025 final year and independent and not devalue Asian report to\nthe MAY 12th. And then finally moving on to the rules, ending\nless. Item number 4 under the\npending no date specific. We\nare requesting to schedule the reorganizing of the parking\ndivision recommendation from a 5th at the City Council\nmeeting. And noting that the parking administrator MAY come\naround then or later. And if I made use that MAY 5th on\nconsent or on on consent.\nThank you. Thank you. Seems\nlike that's any public\ncomment. Yes, I have Kevin Dowling and barely or plan come Please raise your hand if\nyou are on zoom. And I will take the in-person public\ncommenter spares. MR. Dalli is passing on his speaker. So we\ndo have big men in the queue. You're on muted. Please unmute\nyourself. And you MAY begin. Blair. Big Ben. I think I'll be I'll do the same as Kevin\nhas been a pass. Also, thank\nyou. Thank you for that. We have no more speakers for this\nitem. Thank More speakers. So\nmelting. For 21 finance and management committee will be a\nspecial meeting at 09:00am\nitem for on the pending Lewis for 21 Fmc item. Number to MAY\n12. At least see item moved to\nMAY 12. Rules number to MAY\n5th City Council meeting. Noting Elysee item number\nmoved to MAY 12. I will take a as amended. Take motion as\namended. Move approval. And that was a motion by\nCouncilmember Ramachandran seconded by COUNCILMAN Around to approve item for as amended\non role council member Brown.\nCouncilmember Ramachandran. I\nChair Jenkins. And Councilmember Fife is That\nmakes 3 has won excused as\namended. Item number 4 is\napproved. Thank you so much. That now takes us to our\ndiscussion item item number 5. It is an information report\nfrom the mayor, Charter Reform\nworking group and I have several speakers for the 32, I believe speakers for this\nitem. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for everybody that's come out to participate. I\nthink it's in. The public interest that we discussed this item when the mayor was\nelected, she. Came on and\nwanted to embark upon reviewing the charter and seeing what kind of charter\nchanges the people of Oakland\nwanted to see done. There's\nbeen immense public interest in this and the charge or\nhasn't been significantly changed with a structural of\nOakland's government for some\ntime. And so children and I found important to have this\nmeeting today take country and then I will give Spring League Women voters 7 minutes to\npresent. Thank you. Just\nechoing council PRESIDENT Jenkyns. I'm grateful to the\nmayor's office for spearheading and starting this\nprocess that a year ago, almost a year ago. And I look\nforward to discussing the recommendations hearing the\ninput of our residents. One of\nthe voters. Not sure that's\non. Good morning. Thank you\nvery much. Council PRESIDENT Council members, staff and\nmembers of the public.\nPresentation time to that. Yes, could we please have\nrepresentation be to get up? Thank you. My name is Gail\nWallace. I'm here on behalf of the legal voters. And I'm here\nwith Nicole manage from We were the co facilitators for\nthe mayor's working group. Next slide. Please. Know this\none's perfect. The mayor gave\nus and it the working group a very targeted assignment was\nto look at charter changes that could better define the\nrole of elected officials that would help address more\nresponsible. Citi Financial planning. And that would\nimprove government accountability and\ntransparency. Next slide. There was a process from last\nSEPTEMBER until this JANUARY. That as well as the\ndeliberations of the working group month after month. A\ngreat deal of community out\nreach that included in-person meetings in every council district. Thank you for those\nof you who gave us some assistance on standing those up. There were also 60\ninterviews with people extremely connected to city\ngovernment past and present. There was a survey put out and\nall of that input not brought into the working group's\ndeliberations. Just a little bit of background context. And we spoke with a number of\npeople, as Bill mentioned, and\nthey were kind of 4th key themes that kept surfacing.\nEverybody stated that Oakland's charter can't really\nbe changed without the broader\ncity context. So that's where the severe fiscal distress\nOakland is under the deep racial wealth and geographic\ninequities Oakland experiences across neighborhoods, the lack\nof sufficient authority to\ndecisively over time and a highly engaged and civic\nculture and Oakland where people want direct access to\ntheir decision makers. If you\nare the key findings, misaligned authority is creating a disconnect between\npublic expectations and actual\npowers week. Institutional alignment undermines long-term\nplanning, fiscal discipline, effective oversight and organizational complexity\nleads to operational efficiencies. That lack\naccountability and transparency. We heard from\nmany people that we talked to that everyone is in charge and\ntherefore no one is in charge.\nLuckily, there are 2 models that most city governments\nacross the country use. One is council manager where the\ncouncil acts as the unified legislative body and the mayor\nsits on the council council. The council appoints a\nprofessional manager to run city government. And there are a few examples of each of\nthese these types of care strong mayor government is\nwhere mayor is the chief executive and runs the city\ngovernment. This is a balance of power between the mayor\nwhich is the executive branch and the council, which is the\nlegislative branch, the council serves a separate\nlegislative branch of government and is responsible\nresponsible for oversight. Just a quick history. I'm we've operated in both of\nthese forms of government for a very long time. We had a\ncouncil manager from of\ngovernment in the 80's. There\nstarted to be some challenges with that form of government and some intense to start to\nmove towards a strong mayor\nform of government. Jerry Brown successfully championed\nmeasure acts 1998, which past\nquite quite well. And that gave a trial strong mayor system that was set to sunset\nafter 6 years. There is a commission formed and they chose to move forward with the\nmayor council from him government where the mayor and\nthe council were separate\nbranches. However, they did\nnot give the mayor veto powers and things like that. That would be typical in a strong\nmayor form of government. So\nthis has created a blended model at that that has\nelements of both of these models. But Lex, the benefits\nof both of them. The mayor does not serve on the council\nbut lacks the powers of the strong mayors. They can't vote\nfor Oviedo its decisions. The\ncity administrator manages agencies and operations. I apologize. You still have you\nhave 3 minutes. So make sure that you and to the rain going\nto yes, go straight to the\nrecommendations. First. And most importantly, the working\nGroup recommends that Oakland\nchange its charter to fully\nadopt one system or the other in an integrated and complete\nfashion. Next slide. Please.\nLuckily, there are there is research that tells you helped\ntoo. Identify which of these 2\nsystem actually is a match. But the character and history\nof your city. Next slide.\nPlease. The recommendation as\nto which system to adopt is to adopt the strong mayor system,\nwhich nickel has already the described in brief in which is\nmuch more fully described in our report. Next slide.\nPlease. I want to make it clear that that research and\njust referenced talked about what is the character of the\ncity that would be best served\nby a strong mayor system. So through all outreach I talked\nabout, we heard about fiscal\nstress and that's where a strong mayor system can help\nbecause it creates complex intergovernmental challenges. We heard about racial wealth\nand geographic inequities this\nalso is where strong mayors shines because it it serves best where there are\ndisparities across\nneighborhoods. You know, we've\ngot a highly engaged civic culture and strong mayor is appropriate voters expect that\nvisible executive leadership. Finally can't really see my last point there. But that's\nall right. We need someone to lead decisively and the that\nis what people were telling us\nover and over again and political fragmentation makes\nit difficult for collective accountability. Helps the favoring of the strong mayor\nsystem. So is the recommendation is based both\non feedback and on research.\nWe also recommend it balancing strengthening of the city\ncouncil with creation of a legislative budget. Analysts\noffice return of the council not number and clarifying\ncertain things in the charter about the city council's role.\nI want that close by pointing out just one thing says\nthere's reporting out saying\nthat the repair report recommends a salary raise for\nthe council. Want to clarify that because charter changes\nabout structural things. It's\nabout process. And so we noted that all the other elect did\nofficials auditor attorney mayor have salary setting\nmechanism within in charter that allows the entire package\nto be review. That's not the\ncase for the City Council. The provisions only allow for cost\nof living increases. So we\nsimply recommended that that process be changed to be\nconsistent across all of those elected offices and anything\nelse would be a factual evidence rebased thing as to\nwhat salaries any of the officials in any of these\nelected offices would receive.\nAlright, just to close out and there were a number of other\nthings that came up during the research. There were questions about the city attorney and\nthe city auditor and whether or not this should be elected\nor appointed positions around oversight bodies, including\ncommissions and and financial decision-making. Whether or not there should be some\nlong-range planning controller's office, things\nlike that. Those were all\nthings that we we recommend further analysis but went beyond the scope of this\nreview. And so some next steps, any charge, charter\nchanges must be approved by\nOakland voters and the mayor and the council are working\ntogether to determine which\nrecommendations to advance to a ballot. And we have done\nsome polling in which we we\nshared with the council\nmembers today that really shows strong support for the\nworking group's\nrecommendations any implementation of this needs\nto be there needs to be thoughtful transition periods\nso that we don't. At not fully implement all of the\nrecommendations and this should be a living document. The charter should be\nsomething that we come back to regularly and make sure that\nit actually meeting the needs of oaklanders. Just a quick\nnote, Turner from creates conditions for improvement but\ndoesn't substitute for effective leadership and management. There are a lot of\nother things that need to be done order to improve the way\nOakland works. This is just\nthe high level recommendations. The real floor report. We also\ndeveloped a full very extensive faq based on a lot of the feedback that we've\nbeen in questions that we've\nbeen getting are all available on the mayor's website. We encourage you to take a look\nat the full report. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you\nfor your work as well. Council members to you guys have any comments before we go to the\npublic Council member Brown. Thank I was gonna offer than 2\nminutes of my time. Just in case they would have because I felt like they were rushing through kind of the\npresentation. And so I just wanted to give you the\nopportunity if there was any additional input that you want\nto make sure members of the public weather here are watching virtually like you\nwant to make sure that the\nmessage just the hard work of the working group all of your efforts, there's anything else\nyou wanted to to say. That's very kind of you and I\nappreciate To the second\nrecommendation in the report.\nThere are 2 choices that almost all cities in the United States, all that we've\nlooked at and so what the committee really wanted to get\nacross was there is a problem\nwith Oakland's structure that it's a mix match that is\ndysfunctional. And therefore, the first recommendation is do\nsomething. Moved to an\nintegrated and complete system that is recognized as such and\ntested by used in multiple\nother cities. The second report, the thing I want, the second recommendation is tied\nto the 3rd. They are really recommending the street. What\nis called the strong mayor model, but it really is a\nbalance of an executive and\nthe legislative branch within the government. And therefore,\nthere are recommendations with respect to each and the final\npoint. I want to underscore is this is connected with the\ncharacter of the city of\nOakland. Otherwise it will. You could just toss a coin\nbecause they're both formal systems in deciding which one\nto choose. You really have to ask what's the history here\nwhere we coming from? What is the character of the city that\nwe have? Thank Any other comments from the council\nmembers. Okay. So you want to public comment? That's amazing\nof it. All right. Let's go to\npublic comment. As I call your name. Please approach the\npodium in any order. If you are participating via zoom, please raise your hand so I\ncan recognize you and as\nusual, I will call those who are present in chambers first. And then those who are\nparticipating via zoom after starting with Mark. So this\nguy, Kevin Dally, Jonathan\nCorn, Dina bill cough, Dory to\nBiden. George Species, Orlando\nPerez wild will whilst Taos Ski. My apologies but\nmispronounced that Blair, big\nmen, Mike Boak. John Kerr s\nRasheem and all Steve Coen.\nNaomi shift, Keith Brown amid\nAlibaba some zoo. Uber Charles\nlong. Dan Marks. That's blue.\nVeronica Garcia, Nancy folk, Steven Falk. David Vo, right,\nElizabeth Silver, Ralph Kantz,\nPamela Drake. Martell and\nimage. Millie Cleveland,\nRichard Fuentes in Libby shaft. Again, please approach\nthe podium in any order.\nPlease state your name before\nyou begin the those who are participating via zoom, please raise your hand. We'll call\nyou after we have those in-person purse. You think\nyou. Greetings. I'm Falk, co-founder of the Oakland\nCharter Reform Project and my comments are limited to 3\nquick and related points. My first point is that I urge you\nnot to adopt the strong mayor recommendation because there\nis a better way for Oakland.\nMy second point is that 97% of California cities have\nrejected the strong mayor\nsystem. With the exception of San Francisco, which is both a\ncity and county, every single\ncity in the Bay Area, large and small has rejected the\nstrong mayor model. Know California City has transition\nto a strong mayor system in\nthe last 20 years. Not one. So basically do cities are doing\nwhat the working group is asking you to do so you have\nto ask why is that? It's because study after study\nafter study has proven professionally managed cities\nwith a powerful city council are more transparent, more\nresponsive, more effective and more efficient and far less\ncorrupt. So my 3rd and final point, a lot of the public\nconversation around this issue in purse that you have only 2\nchoices, either a strong mayor or council manage or form of government. That is false.\nThat is not true. That is\nwhat's known as a false\ndichotomy. In fact, cities\ntoday rarely choose the pure.\nI apologize. Your time ended. The David Albright. Okay. You\nhave one more minute, MR. That is what's known as a false\ndichotomy. In fact, cities today rarely choose the pure\nversion of either one of those\nsystems. And instead craft a hybrid system best suited for\ntheir city. And that's what we're recommending with our\n3rd option, which features leadership by a powerful\nmayor. With a veto. Oversight\nby a more powerful city\ncouncil and the terrific public services. The professional management can\ndeliver. Thank you for your\nattention. Thank you for your\ncomments. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. My\nname is Nancy Fall. My primary\nmessage is that oaklanders need not settle for the strong\nmayor form as recommended.\nThere's the better proven 3rd option that includes several\nof the working group's recommendations while better\npositioning Oakland, given its\nunique nature for the future. This 3rd option has 3 key\nelements. Number one, it embeds a more powerful mayor\nwith the veto authority to\nserve as chair. To more powerful full-time city\nCouncil. That's supported by an independent budget and\nlegislative analyst office has\nrecommended. 3 who jointly.\nMayor plus council oversee a professionally trained\nexecutive. The city manager. There's no need to settle for\nthe strong mayor form because\nit's not the proven best structure for delivering high\nquality efficient and\neffective city services. Council manager of government\nupon which this 3rd option is\nbased is the proven best approach based on a lot of the\nresearch that is in the working group's great\nappendix. This 3rd option is 10%. And this Mayor Kemp Council manager formal\ngovernment is more efficient.\nThat strong mayor has stronger budget solvency, then strong\ntheir cities. And it's 57%\nless likely to have corruption convictions. Then strong\nmayors, cities, so lets not settle for the strong mayor option and instead adopt a\nproven 3rd option for a\nbetter. Thank you for your\ncomment. Speaker. This been a cop, I apologize. Can you please call go closer to the\nmike so we can make sure we\ncan. Accomplish? I live in district 3 I'm I'm here just\nto lend my support to the council manager system, the\nso-called 3rd option. And I'm\nasking the council to put that option. On the ballot and let\nlet the voters decide. Not the\nstrong mayor model. I'm opposed to the strong mayor model for the reasons that\nothers have expressed. But one is that with all due respect,\nI think the strong mayor system is too dependent on the\ngood faith of the person who\noccupies the mayor's seat, the structure of our government should include checks and\nbalances, continuity of professional management, accountability of the City\nCouncil. In addition to the mayor and we should look to\nwhat are other peer cities do\nall of this points to a council manager system with a\nstrengthened mayoral rule. The 3rd option. And and as others\nhave said, this is the model that is widely in use and we\nshould not ignore that. Thank\nyou. Thank you your comments.\nCurrently Indy 4. I appreciate the information report. I\nthink the the working group did a great job showing all\nthe options. And while they\nhave. Preferred choice. I\nreally appreciate their point.\nChange something, choose a new\nsystem. I suggest the council quickly set up its own working\ngroup so they can choose the\nbest options. Mention a couple\nof points. I disagree with. We\nneed an at large seat. I live\nin d for today. But I like\nmost oaklanders frequently\ntraveled throughout Oakland, 2 different districts. No 5\ndistricts in the last 24 hours\nfor me, I suspect. Other people have done better than\ntap. So we need someone who is\nable to look at the entire\nsystem and both Councilmember Brown and Council member Kaplan have done a good job\nwith that. I fear large\nmayor's election. The last 4 districts, they're sort of the last 3 district forced Yemen's\nall became mayor. We are not getting to geographical\nequity. By having large mayor's race. Only way we get\na mayor from Deep East Oakland is to have the council PRESIDENT P from Deep East\nOakland have recalled. We can't depend upon as a way of\ngetting a graphical equity Thank you for your comments.\nNext picture. Good morning. My\nname is Steve Cohn. I'm a long-term resident and\nhomeowner in Oakland my understanding try follow this\nhold process is that everyone\nbelieves that the system is dysfunctional. The city\ncouncil members have the power to develop policy, but no\npower to implement it. The mayor has the power to implement it but has no input\nin developing policy. So to\nme, if you just have a strong mayor, the city council still\ndoesn't have any. To implement the findings. By having a\nstrong mayor who can the doh?\nWork process work process of the council. That's the council in a weaker position.\nMinutes in now in respect, it,\npeople who've said that there's a lot of interest in\nhaving strong mayor. There was\na survey done by party for the\nworking group and the number\nitem was strength in the city Council provide city council\nwith more direct ways to hold administration accountable.\nAnd then put mayor back on the\ndice with the second with 82 p 82% support give mayor role on\nthe city council helps a\npolicy laws. So I hope you'll\ntake what's called the 3rd option. Having a strong mayor,\na strong city council and make Oakland the city that really\nwanted to Thank you very much.\nThank you for your comments. Thanks. Chair and council\nmember council PRESIDENT Mark.\nSo we residents of district one. I've worked for local\ngovernments for 23 years,\nincluding almost 5 years as Oakland's director of economic development. There's no\nquestion that we need charter reform. We have a dysfunctional system and I\nthink we all know that. But I disagree with the working group's recommendation find\nthere support of their\nrecommendation to be very strong. Their own website\nprovides a lot of material which if you haven't gone\nthrough it, you definitely\nshould. But I kasaan in particular pages, 7 to 9 of\nthe working group's report. Key differences between the\ncouncil manager and strong mayor, the strong concentrates\npower in a single elected individual. It heightens the\nrisk of put put it political politicization. That's a tough\nword to say. Misuse of authority decisions are driven\nby short-term electoral incentives and success depends\nheavily on the competence of the individual council manager\nlays the foundation for\nprofessional management. It insulates decisions short-term political pressures enables\nthe manager to make decisions\nthat are that are tough politically. Long-serving professionals provide\ncontinuity, stability, institutional memory and\nconsistency across election\ncycles. Most importantly, though, the council manager\nsystem will distribute political power across the\ncouncil and ensure that district representatives have equal standing in shaping\npolicy in advocating for their communities. I urge you to\ntake charter reform. Thank you\nfor your comments. All right. I'm good Morning Council members. I'm Keith Brown,\nexecutive secretary treasurer of the Alameda Labor Council.\nI'm speaking to you this\nmorning as a lifelong open resident and resident of\ndistrict. And I want to first of all, thank the work of the\nworking group. I think one thing that almost all\noaklanders agree that the city is slow to provide basic\nservices. Another thing we all agree on is that the structure\nof our city is not working. Currently, everyone is in charge would mean which means\nno one is in charge. We must establish clear lines of\nresponsibility. We must ensure\ndata structure of our\ngovernment can deliver for our\ncommunity and for better use\nof limited resources. The\nstrong mayor position. Offers clear direct accountability\nspeeds up decisions, strengthens coordination and\ndelivers results on\nhomelessness. Public safety in fiscal responsibility with\ngreater oversight and legislative capacity to better\nrepresent districts. So our community has made it clear\nthat they want us of city government to be decisive on\naction and results and a strong mayor. System allows us\nto deliver for all open neighborhoods faster and more\nefficient. Thank you for your\ncomment. Hello, I'm Mike Polk. And John Currie says with me\nhere is ceding his 90 seconds\nto me. John and I have lived\nand worked in Oakland for over\n40 years. We're part of neighbors for progressive action and Oakland Group with\nover 500 members, we support charter reform as Oakland's\ncurrent charter system. Surely\nclearly doesn't work. We do not support the strong mayor\nmodel recommended by the\nworking group. Only large cities in California have a\nstrong mayor system in entire\nstate. 2 of those San Francisco in la are special\nbeing also counties. There's a better alternative and\nempowered mayor embedded in a\ncouncil manager of government. This approach features a\ncitywide elected mayor with significant leadership\nauthority, including veto powers as recommended by the\nworking group. But also features are professionally\ntrained city manager overseen by the council in Manatee,\nMayor working together as recommended by the national\nCivic model City. City\ncharter, some variation of\nthis charter is used by 96 or 97% of the largest cities by\npopulation in our state, including 3 that are larger than Oakland and they run the\nslide that we saw just a few\nminutes ago. And that's a long\nbeach, Sacramento. And a South So this would this method would give our city council\nthe leverage it needs to help get things done in Oakland\nthat something that 83% of the people that the working group\nsurveyed said they they think is the most important, the highest percentage of anything\non that survey was that they want let the council to have the leverage to get things\ndone in the city and you won't have that leverage in the\nstrong mayor system. So one\nother thing that 82% of those surveyed said is that they\nwant the mayor to attend council meetings. Now, Barbara\nLee has said she doesn't have\nany problem with that ending mayors. But the strong mayor\ninitiative doesn't require that. And a future MAY or MAY\nnot want to. That's in fact\nhow we got where we are partly let's pay attention to what\nthe voters asked for in the in\nthe survey some of you MAY have seen maybe chefs a letter\nto the editor with Council\nmanagers widely used because most of that's mostly sauces,\nsmall cities. It's not it's\nthe opposite. As we just saw, there's there's a lot of large\ncities that have that so mindful of the upcoming\nchantelle trial. It's unlikely\nthat voters will vote for. Thank you. Your time is that.\nThank you for your time. Good Morning. Council members. My\nname is Pat Martell. I'm here today representing the\ninternational City County Management Association, a\nprofessional organization that advances transparent, responsive, effective and\nefficient local government through good governance\nleadership management,\ninnovation and ethics. As the West Coast regional director\nof I want to urge your consideration of a viable 3rd\noption. To move more effectively to deliver the results and vision by the\nmayor's working group recommendations. A strong\nmayor with veto power actively\nparticipates in city council\nmeetings leading a fully engage city council city\nmanager structure. This option creates clear lines of\nresponsibility and\naccountability. Elected officials set policy and a\nprofessionally trained managers accountable to the\nmayor and city Council for\nexecution. Local governments\nhave become larger and more complex over time and benefit\nby having trained professionals manage operations that best serve the\nneeds of the community. This structural model clarifies the\nrole of the mayor and city\ncouncil and eliminates politicizing administrative decisions while preserving\nstrong democratic control. It balances strong political\nleadership with results-driven professional administration\nallowing the mayor and city\ncouncil to to focus on community vision policy and the priorities while leaving\noperational decisions to the\ncity manager. Thank you comments. I apologize before\nthe next speaker goes. If I\ncan take one person threw the\nchair with his discretion to take one of the members of the\npublic that are participating online. I'm going give them their 2 minutes. Thank you so\nmuch for your patients for\nMonica. You are a muted. You\nMAY begin your 2 minutes. 90 seconds. Thank you so much for\nthat changes for me. Yes, you\nMAY begin. Ok? Thank you. Good morning. Council members free\nOakland in the room. I just want to start by saying that I\nreally appreciate the work\nthat's gone into this and the effort to improve how the city\nof Oakland operates. I don't think anyone with this agree\nthat Oakland, it's a faster action and more clarity around\nwho is responsible when things\naren't working. That's a I do\nhave some real concerns about the recommendation to eliminate the at-large council\nseat. If that happens, the\ncouncil would be made. Made up entirely of district 3% of and\nsystem aired Dustin Vote on legislation. We would lose\nstate only citywide elected voice and the legislative\nbranch and that matters because as we all know, Oakland, U.S. And just deal\nwith district issues, we deal with things that impact the entire city that need a\nbroader perspective. The at-large t helps connect\nneighborhoods. Bring attention\nto citywide needs and make sure no community gets\noverlook like Melrose, which\nsits in both district 5 and\ndistrict 6. From where I stand\nremoving that creates gaps at the time when we really need\nto be more connected, connect\nthat asked the city. So I just\nwant to hurt you to move forward is that in prank you for your comments? Your time\nis up. Thank you for your patients. Member of the\npublic. You MAY approach state, your name for the\nrecord. Thank you so much.\nThank you. Good Morning. Council members. My name is\nAhmed Ali. Bob Muddy 6\nresident, a dad. And I've had the chance to serve both\ninside the city and in the private sector working with\nOakland businesses. I was part of the mayor's working group on charter reform and got to\nhear from hundreds Oakland residents and the biggest\nthing I heard over and over was the need for clear\naccountability. Residents expects that when they vote\nfor a mayor, the buck stops\nthere. At my house, my home\nwhen accountability is unclear. My five-year-old just\nruns the whole house. Speaking from experience. That's not a\nmodel that we should replicate\nat City Hall. Right now, our system spreads responsibility\nacross too many places when\nsomething goes wrong. It's not\nalways clear who owns it. And that makes it harder to\nactually solve problems on\nbehalf of our residents. This\nis about aligning authority\nwith responsibility. So when decisions are made, there's\nclarity on who is accountable.\nAnd when outcomes fall short. It's clear who needs to answer\nfor. At the same time, these recommendations strengthen the\ncouncil's ability. To provide stronger legislative and financial oversight, which is\njust as important. I believe\nthis most Oakland in the right\ndirection. Thank you for your comments and thank you for\nyour patience. Speaking. Hi,\nmy name is Charlie. Long 21 year, resident of city of\nOakland in District 4. And I\nhave city manager 4 times, but\nalso I've invested 100 million dollars into downtown Oakland\nwith 2 of her projects. I\nserved on the bill go,\ndevelopment advisory Committee. And let me tell\nyou, my observation, based\nupon my awareness of how\norganizations work. And how\ndevelopment works. Oakland's or organ Oakland's\norganization is broken. There\nis no sense of common purpose. Departments are silos. They\ndon't talk to each other. They don't they don't have a sense\nof common purpose. I am here\nstrongly request. That you\nreject the strong mayor option\nbecause all it does is it\nsays, okay, we've got a broken system. Where do? We're\nbasically there are silos. Let's create another broken\nsystem where there are silos. Where the mayor basically is\nnot a participant. The council\nmanager of government. Makes\nthe city manager accountable\nthe mayor to the council and\nthe mayor sits on the city council. It has veto power and\nis an active participant. Let's create that kind of\nunified approach. 2. Thank you for your comments next.\nSpeaker. Good Morning Council members. My name is Denmark's\nexcuse me. I can resident in district 2 and of work in and for local governments for more\nthan 40 years. I'm a employee in the city former to committee velvet director in\nthe city of Berkeley. And it worked as as a ploy in several\nBay Area cities. And for the\npast 15 years, I've been a management consultant on local\ngovernment effectiveness all around the country. And in\nCalifornia. I want to thank the mayor for putting forward\nthe the mayor's task force and bringing the issue of charter\nreform to the city's attention and carry it forward as issue that we have to address in\nOakland. Clearly we need a\nmore effective government that can deliver the services that\npeople have open want. And in my opinion, did not received\nover the last many years. And I think most local residents would agree with me that we\nneed a more effective government. Not a political\none. City managers are trained in and spend their whole careers making local\ngovernment more effective. Mayors were elected for their\npolitical You meant not their organizational skills. It's for this reason that almost\nall the cities in California has been spoken earlier, adopt\na city manager form of government and I along with many of the other people have\nspoken here today based on our long experience in local\ngovernment. Believe that the 3rd option is the best option\nfor the city of Oakland and urge that you carry that\noption in some fashion forward to the citizens of Oakland.\nThank you so much. Thank you\nfor your comments. Rajon Rondo District 4. I want to start by\nacknowledging the effort here. Easier to point out what's\nbroken that to try and fix And appreciate that this process\nis attempting to do that. What I hear from my community is\nvery consistent. People want basic things to work like roads and public safety and\nmany residents don't feel we\nhave that. Charter reform is part of the solution along with fiscal in broader\ngovernance reform. But my\nconcern simple. Who is accessible to the regular\nOakland resident. When something needs to get fixed and how do we ensure that it\nactually happens? It's already difficult to get regular\nresidents. Voices heard. That makes be cautious about\nconcentrating more power in a single office where access can feel even more limited to\nthose without influence and\npower. We need a balance clear leadership with accountability and full representation,\nincluding the at-large seat. That's why I'm leaning towards\na balanced approach. Like the 3rd option. But I really urge\ncouncil choose a structure that will truly deliver\nresults with accountability and transparency and accessibility to all\nOaklanders. Thank you. Thank\nyou for your comment. Thank you. My name is Elizabeth Silver activated that the\nsilver. I I've lived here for\n48 years. Am a retired lawyer. I was city attorney of several\ncities for a total. Of 37 years. So I know what you\ndoing and I thank you for it. I'm in favor of the council\nmanager of government. The\nmost important thing that the city council does, that the\nwhole city does is its budget. And the budget is the\nblueprint for what gets done\nin the city. Council. Then house to put a point somebody\nis going to implement the budget. Just doesn't happen by\nitself. So the city administrator or city manager,\nwhatever you want to call the position is the person who\nimplements the budget. The budget includes the council's\ngoals, how many will be spent\nbut programs will be adopted.\nIt cetera. And it's important to have a professional in the\nrole implementing budget. The mayor can be on the city\nCouncil. The city manager. Really works from council\nmeeting. Council meeting. So\nthe council has control. The implementation of its\nobjectives because the council points and can fire the city\nmanager. Thank drinking, does\nnot speak. My name is Millie Cleveland. I also live in\ndistrict 4. And move one plot 30 years ago, District 5.\nEnded up in 4. I want to throw a little twist to the\ndiscussion about the\nunderlying assumptions about the council developing policy\nbut not being able to enforce\nit. The mayor can't develop\npolicy, but it's responsible for enforcement. My\nobservation coming to council\nmeetings is that our council\nrepresentatives have abdicated their responsibility,\nenforcing things that in making sure the city manager\nfollow through. The macro. A\nunit, the chief of the fire\ndepartment change the scope of work and not one council\nperson race issue. We've had\ndecades of city auditors making recommendations on how\nto deal with opd over time, which have been dismissed by\nthe council. The council voted to civilian eyes almost 40\npositions in opd, putting 40\ncops back on the street. And\nthe council. He's done nothing to force a city administrator to speak on the work that he's\nbeen accomplish. So I am\nagainst Philly. My time is up.\nI'm against the strong. Thank\nyou, Emily. Naomi I'm only\nspeaking for myself. I support something like the 3rd option,\nan effective mayor and\nineffective counsel. I got to Oakland when John reading was\nMayor. And before district elections. And I've attended\ncity Hall meeting since Lana Wilson and his city manager\nHenry Gardner. I served on a commission that vainly\nattempted to fix Jerry Brown's unworkable, incompetent\nmeasure acts. People want\neffective and accessible district representation\npublicly accountable. Mayor. The word strong shouldn't be\nused here. It's pejorative\nbecause it implies week. We've had way too much talk about\nstrong stuff at the national\nlevel. Let's get rid of that. Most cities our size used council manager system. And\nlastly. I support a point of\ncity attorney and auditor.\nBecause those posts are not\nfor anybody to run for. You\nneed somebody who has very specific qualifications. It's\nnot the same as running for\nother political offices. I really appreciate the work\nthat's been done. I vehemently oppose the strong mayor\nconcept. Thank you. Thank you for your comments called on\nnames. Ralph former chair of\nthe Public Commission. Commenting that this whole\nprocess is corrupt. That\nsection 601 requires 6 inches from 6 or the charter requires\nan advisory group. The created by resolution of the City\nCouncil. That didn't happen in\nthis case. In addition with\nthat doesn't meant there was no public meetings of this\nworking group for the public to observe the process and\nunderstand what took place.\nWell, minor detail there, but the only way you can literally\ndo this is. Do what they did 2003 and by City Council resolution create a working\ngroup that the public to participate and understand\nwhat's going on. I'm a public records request of the mayor's office back DECEMBER. That yet\nto responded to evolving\nthings like were the agendas and minutes of the meetings of\nthe working group. I'm still\nway. I was reserve Quest is.\nWere shot. Do guards contract\nwho paid for all this? Who\nactually did the work? None of\nthat is public. It's all be in bed done by a private group\nwith private money and secret\nmeetings. There's been no public process that the law\nrequires. This is a violation of the Constitution of the\nBrown Act. And a disgrace that it's been functioning. That's\nwhy. Thank you for your\ncomments. Was trying to get Levy chef to come up with me\nso we could any debate. Want\nto hear that right? First of all, I need an extra 10\nseconds before you start counting time. I need to ask\nsomebody to translate to sign. Doesn't make sense to anybody\nso far. And I want to complain about mobility issues for that\nfor this building. Please don't take my time for that.\nPlease. Please stop the time. And we time actually in\nseconds. All right. When you\nget out of the day garage and you're walking with a cane or at whatever pace to state your\nname for the red. Oh, sorry, Pamela. Draped with the\nWellston Club. You have to go all the way around. Like about an extra blocker and a block\nand a half. Somebody should be\nat the door at the other side, there's you have somebody sitting at desk there that\ncould come over and escort you over to the security. So you didn't have to go all the way\naround. Hope this not\nviolation, but seems like one. All right. Let me let me start\nmy name. How much time I going\nto get to talk. 10 seconds\nmore. 20 seconds. You know, I'm a post of the strong\nmayor. I'm not in favor of the\nwhole move movement towards authoritarianism that this country's been involved in. I\nthink we're backing off of\nthat now on top of that, there's really 2 issues that\nare the ones that are up for\nconcern. One is that when the council members have a complaint from their\nconstituents, they don't have\nany place for it to go so higher. Some assistant city\nadministrators who work directly with each council\nmember with each district MAY be giving district 7 their own\nand the other districts to to council districts for one administrator to get your\nspecial. Want to say, Ken need\nspecial anyway, that would that that person would then\nwork directly when they have a complaint say, ok, we'll see\nwhat we can do about your complaint and we'll work\ndirectly with you say you can talk to your constituents\nabout what's being done. The other issue seems to be the\nmayor should be sitting on the council. The mayor should be\navailable for people to see how she thinks how she organizes her thoughts and\nmake sure decisions. Thank\nends. Thank you, MR. Inc. You\nwere given by the Chair 10 extra seconds. So allow the\nmike to stay on long enough. Thank you for your comments.\nNext. Speaker signed up. That's PRESIDENT First. Thank\nyou. Windows. Yes, my name Richard Fuentes. I'm a leader\nin the union movement with asked me council 57\nrepresenting 26,000 workers. Also small business owner here in downtown Oakland in a\ndowntown up and resident. I'm also a member of the mayor's\nworking group for the charter reform. And I want to speak in support of our recommendations\nfor storm Mayor. We did a\ncommunity outreach. We heard throughout Oakland from every\nsingle district from working people that they wanted to\nhave strong mayor form of\ngovernment. We have serve ace. We're brown and black communities got to\nparticipate. You're hearing\ntoday about a 3rd option, a 3rd option that is not recommended by the working\ngroup. A 3rd option that has\nno input from working people from black people from Brown\npeople lets be cleared. A 3rd\noption is a privilege option working. People don't have\ntime to come today. At 10:30am, in the morning to provide their perspective.\nI've worked for 3 municipalities. I work for a special district. I've served\non a e pension board federal oversight committees where\nI've served. Let me tell you, Oakland is diverse. And because of that, the diversity\nthat we have within our city,\na strong form former government is really an\napproach that was served up lenders because Oaklanders\ndon't know who is responsible. Oaklanders don't know who's in\ncharge. Oaklanders want to know who is responsible for Philly, their potholes. Thank\nyou. Thank you for your\ncomments next. Speaker. Well, hello, my name is Libby\nSchaff. I'm a lifetime. Oakland or I am a 24 year\nveteran of city Hall and I\nspeak to you as a private citizen today. I do. I am\nprobably the only person alive\nwho was and East Oakland Council staffer under Jerry Brown, strong mayor form of\ngovernment. I was a council\nmember of district 4 and I, of\ncourse, was the mayor for 8 years. So I do bring a unique perspective on how these\ndifferent systems actually\nhave worked in the asked and happy to answer any questions.\nIf you have any. I want start by saying I was disappointed\nto hear citations of the survey and suggesting that\nthat represented voter sentiment, the survey that was\ndone by the working group was\nan opt-in survey and the demographics of respondents\n16% of respondents didn't even\nlive in Oakland. And an interesting 23% were city of\nOakland employees. So I just please do not regard those\nsurvey results as voter\nsentiment. 3 polls now have\nbeen done about how do oaklanders feel about this\nproposal? All 3 have turned\nback very clear mandates that\nOakland voters want a strong\nmayor. 61% in the polls. The polls of Pulse of Oakland pull\nin the fall. 60 4% in the East Bay Polling institute results\nand then. Mayor or other\ninsights. You want to offer. I\nI do have questions about how\nthe system worked. Yes, okay. You know, under Jerry Brant\nthis working group's proposal is essentially the same as we\nhad under Jerry Brown's strong mayor before the council took\naway the veto power. You might not remember Jerry Brown had a view to power because he\nhardly ever used it. The one time I remember was a piece\nlegislation. I actually wrote\nwhen I was the legislative aide to Council member De La\nFuente district 5 the council\nhad a lot of power in my experience. It is actually\nwhen the council and the mayor\nhad the best collaboration and the council offices\nconstituent work, which was my passion. When I worked in the\ncouncil offices actually got\ndone. There was more\nresponsiveness from the administration wall. It is not\nclear that this proposal requires the 3, 1, 1, or\nconstituent response to be\nunder the mayor at that time. It was the Oaklanders\nAssistance Center was actually part of the mayor's office and\nit was much more responsive\nthan our current system. The council had a full-time\nlegislative in budget analyst\nthat allowed us to write good legislation, proactive legislation and to have our\nown independent budget analyst\nto actually be an independent validator of financial\ninformation that we were getting from the\nadministration. So those were some of the qualities I remember from the strong\nmayor. Finally. Everyone agrees that a hybrid system is\nfuzzy and does not serve\nanyone. Option. 3 is just\nanother hybrid proposal. I would prefer to see Oakland go\nback to a council manager for of government rather than swap\none fuzzy hybrid for another.\nI know that. That that would based on my experience in\nthese 24 years in these\nvarious roles. And if anyone doesn't have any other\nquestions. I appreciate the\nopportunity. All right. Thank\nyou. Thank you for your Speakers have been called if\nyou are participating here in\nchambers and signed up to speak in her name was called please approach the podium. If\nnot, we will move on to zoom\nspeakers. I see no one rising. So we will go to those who signed up to speak in zoom. If\nyou are. And America extra time and ice speaking about\nlow mobility issues, not about the strong mayor and I would\nlike 30 seconds to finish.\nChanging it. You're out of\norder. I signed up in time. Yes, and I had to listen to\nall that stuff. If I give you extra time, I got to give\neverybody else know, if you're giving people who've been involved in government, I\ndidn't give extra time because he was involved in government.\nI didn't say All right. Well, I didn't get all my time because I'm having a problem\nwith the mobility issues and\nthe city hall. And that doesn't seem okay. So because\nthis is an issue. I will allow you that the extra seconds.\nThank you. Okay. So the strong mayor, the real issue, if you think about strong Marin, you\nthink about a corporation, you know that the idea person is\nnot the same as the detail person. There's nobody who can\ndo both. Well. And it's really\na place that ends up it was change because of all the\ncorruption. Now the current mayor is not going to be\ninvolved in corruption, but\nwhoever comes after her could use this as a real power grab.\nThat's that's what it essentially is. But the other\nthing about the legislative\noffice, I don't want a plan\nfrom the administrators the city council office. I think\nthat's a bad idea. Thank you.\nThank you for your comments. Now moving to the zoom\nspeakers. If signed up to speak for this item and you\nwish to use your time. Please raise your hand in the queue\nso I can recognize uic Blair, man. You have been muted. You\nMAY begin. I blame Beekman.\nThank you a lot for this item. I'm living in San Diego. That\nalso has a strong mayor system. And that also is having a lot of questions around the strong mayor\nsystem. I was originally from\nSan and they had a quite\ncommunity process few years ago to decide the future of strong Mayor versus Council\nmandate. City manager, ways of\nworking and easily. The community came out in supporting the future of\ncouncil manager system and created a very clear case of\nits importance. The strong\nmayor simply is there to you know, real estate interests.\nAnd those of the ridge. And I think the majority of the people are going to be for\nthis measure in Oakland are going to be either in real\nestate or rich people. And we\nhave to acknowledge that the\ntech accountability ideas that would create that whole new\ncharter ideas were created for\nback in 2014 15. It was with\nthe intention to work towards the future of community\nparticipation and open democracy as how to talk about\nour future of how we practice community together. And I think we have to be committed\nto those goals that the I've been learning. This is a\nlearning process for my so but the you know, council manager\ncity manager, way of working works towards open\nparticipatory democracy. The strong mayor form does not. It\nserves the weekend. Thank you\nfor your comments of the next speaker. In you have unit mud\nor I mean, don't eat about time and I'm in district 6 in\nhave been here for many years. And why appreciate the work\nthat the working that I\nsupport council manager\nsystem. We had one before we step mean and worked pretty well before we start to\ntinker. Now we have a system\nwe all agree is not workable.\nBut with a council managers\nsystem where we have. With the mayor sitting on the council\nand leading the effort. We\nhave a strong career, strong\ncouncil and we have the professionals, city\nCOUNCILMAN. I mean, meant I'm\ncity manager who as professional and can last\nbeyond just one administration\ndon't know exactly what that don't want to depend on the\ngoodness of And the mayor. Depending on who gets elected.\nSo I strongly support. Council\nmanager. With Strong Mayor\nSystem. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. I show one\nlast hand raised in Zoom was\nlisted under iPhone. When you to please state the name that it's written on your speaker\ncard that you signed up for.\nNeeded iPhone. Hi, hello. My name is Fernando Perez. I did\nfind up yesterday. Great.\nThank you. You MAY be my the I was raised no plan. I live\nthroughout the Bay area at Livermore. I lived in Hayward.\nI just bought a house 2 years\nago. Not back and I love open.\nI love you. I love it I'm kind\nof tired I'm kind of tired of always kind of the unique politically wise and all of\nthat and why can't we just do what our neighbors in the Bay\narea are doing and they're doing great. They They're\nfollowing. The council manager says do and I I've moved out\nof open for over 15 years. So I got I got an opportunity see\nwhat a good strong city does\nof basic track meet car\npickups are done a timely manner. So why can't we just\ndo that? Why can't we just who\nis the system that has been working for our neighbors here\nin the Bay area as well. So those are my $0.02 to nothing\nfor your time. Thank you for your comments. Again on the\nnames have to called. If you\nsigned up to speak for item 5, please approach the podium or raise your hand in the queue.\nAt this time chair. No more Thank you. Thank you. To\neveryone came out to talk about or opinion on the way that Oakland goes forward. I\nknow it's. That's because you\ncare about Oakland direction that we go. And that's the commonality that we have\nbetween us. So this won't be\nthe last meeting that we have to discuss. Potential charter\nchanges. Think it's important that everybody has an\nopportunity to weigh in in the public forum. And so I work\nwith the mayor's office and\nthe council members too schedule one other item at some point in time so that\npeople have a chance to weigh in with that. I'll open it up\nto council members. If you\nguys have any comments. Council member Brown at-large\ncouncil member Brown. Excellent. Okay. Well, thank you all so much. So I would\njust want to first start off by thanking the mayor's\nworking group. Everyone who\nwas involved. I know it's it's\nnot easy to, you know, put\ntogether the community engagement events and disorganized. You know, all everyone's thoughts and\nopinions. And so just want to offer my gratitude and thanks\nfor for that. And then in addition, really grateful for everyone who showed up today\nto kind of speak and share about whether it was their\npersonal experience. Navigating Oakland City\ngovernment and went in and how you all think that we should\nwe begin to move forward. And\nso, of course, you know, my goal in all of this is a chain\nthat we are moving forward with a government governance\nstructure that is based in\naccountability. And we're also\nensuring that we are listening\nto the concerns of our constituency. Right? And a lot\nof times, it's it's really\nbeen very consistent around. You know, at the end of the\nday, community members want\ntheir concerns to be addressed now we get into the weeds of\nhow that takes place. At the end the day, it boils down to\naccountability. And so that is what interested in. And so I\nlook forward to working with\nmy council colleagues. So Councilmember Jenkins council\nmember entendre in to to ensure that we move forward in\na path that is supportive of\nour entire city. Of course,\nthere is a larger conversation around just overall\nrepresentation. I just don't think that in our day and our\nday and age and just in this\nmoment that we should be at\nany point overall representation. One of the\npublic speakers talked about. About investment like and how\nwe are investing in our communities in it is the whole\nreason why I ran for the\nat-large seat had to do with\nthe the the blaring\nobservation of how communities\nboth in east and West Oakland\nhave underrepresented for decades. And the truth of the\nmatter is, is that in this moment that that is what we're\nliving through, right? And so\nI just I can't I cannot get behind and a recommendation\nthat seeks to eliminate\nrepresentation for for the community and I have not ran\ninto any community members\nthat say they don't understand, you the role of\nthe at large seat or there's confusion between the mayor of\nour amazing city. And so I just wanted to make sure that\nI see that on the record that I just don't believe that that\nis the direction we should be\ngoing. The report also states I guess the talking point is\nthat moving the council back\ni've number of votes. I do think that there's a simple\nfix as far as that, which we can all move forward with,\nwhich is a simple as 5 votes\nand the legislation passes. And in the event that there is\na tie breaking vote, the\nmotion fails. And so in this moment, I think more than\nanything we should be 100%\nfocused on solutions to\nimproving how our city cling governance works works. The\nbest for the people of Oakland and so that is something that\nI want to get behind. I'm\ngrateful for the the group that presented their findings\naround this 3rd option. I do\nthink that is important for so many of the important\ndecisions that we make as a\ncouncil. I do think that there is some value in ensuring that\nthe mayor can also weigh in on\nthose. And so I am supportive of that door to option. I just\nwant see that on the record.\nAnd as always, I'm always open\nto engage further with members\nof the working group. If they\nwould like as well. And that\nalso would know during the working group's process and\nwhen they met with me, I\noffered multiple recommendations of how I\nthought that we can employ\nimprove the city of Oakland's government structure. And I\ndid not see a single one of my\nrecommendations make it to the recommendations. And I think\nthat that is something that in my something that has been\nmissed, right? Because I think all of us on the council we\nhave valuable insights that we\ncan share around how we can\nimprove city of Oakland, governance. So that's that's\nall in this moment. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Councilmember\nHouston. I'm not on the rules committee. So I like to pass\nthat to councilmember around the child first before a\nstate, what I want to state. But I do want to say something. No, I do want to\nsay something about the timely\nof scheduling item. 3.1, 3, 0,\n2, 3.3 3.4 h# something up so\neveryone can see real quick. And why health that up is that\nI need to schedule a council member Brown and you're doing\nexcellent job. Everything you do work with me to an\nexcellent job. But yesterday I said I need to schedule\nbecause yesterday sat with the\nPRESIDENT, the principal of cast much and I had 150\nstudents in Castle month\nhomeless. Are you guys talking about the charter? We were\ntalking about the charter and\na charter we form because a\nshare this my district. 10\ntoes down for the mayor more\nthan any other district. My\ndistrict was for the recall. Of the mayor and of of of the\nd a more than any of the\ndistrict and everybody out here knows I've been 10 toes\ndown for the mayor from day\none. Go back to my counsel to\nmy district because they're waiting for what? How I feel\nabout this charter read by Tri\nReform. And I remember back if you go back to rob or by how\ngood it was with proper Bob, I\nmean, with that strong\ncouncil, manager. So my\nconstituents in d 7. They wait\nnon. My opinion, but I want their opinion. But if they\nlive it to my opinion on the charter reform, it would in\nline with council member Brown\nof the 3rd option because I'm tired going outside. I'm a\nscope of work in doing things that shouldn't be doing\nbecause we're not able to do\nit. Be kuz. Council members only legislation and policy. I'm tired of going to remove a\ncar myself. I'm tired of\nrelocate an encampment myself and that the city\nadministrator report it's to the mayor but doesn't report\nto us as a council right? We\nshould have that same. Authority that the city\nadministrator reports to us right? Unlike what Ryan, which\nyour son is I can just go on\nand on and But I said I was going pass it to you that you\nput to you. But I got a couple more days to say so no use\nthat as my time PRESIDENT.\nThank you. I think today is this meeting was very enlightening myself and\ncouncil PRESIDENT Jenkyns\nwanted to schedule this item specifically to continue the\nprocess of gathering community input. Today we heard plus or\n-20 comments that. We're\nopposed to the strong mayor system and open to some\nalternative. We heard about 4\nthat were for the system, but\napart from what we hear here, I can only speak for myself and I know many of my\ncolleagues who are out and\nabout the community. I have\nsaid at least 17 times in the past month when I'm in people's living rooms in my\ndistrict, on their street\ncorners and the business districts that I am\ninformation gathering stage and this is very valuable\ninput. And I'm continuing the process of listening to our\nconstituents and hearing very different perspectives for\nforgot to someone that mentioned you can't come at 10:30am, that? That's correct.\nWhich is why after 05:00pm, out in our communities talking to people in meeting them\nwhere they're at. And I've heard very different\nperspectives. And I think this\nis important to us. I\nappreciate the mayor is working group in scheduling a\nfirst round of community outreach late last year near\nthe holidays. And I think a\nlot of those sessions service information to show ask what\nis the charter? And now a couple months into this process, people are starting\nto form an opinion one way or the other. So I think this is\nvery helpful and I will take all of this into\nconsideration. Plus, all of the conversations that I have\nand this is not the last time this will be heard in council.\nWe will bring this to an evening meeting at the full\nCity council as this process\ncontinues. And I look forward\nto continuing hear what people have to say from not just my\ndistrict but all over the\ncity. Thank you. Some of the I\ncan speak in closing, I want to say them have community meetings from Sheffield\nVillage to the heels to the flat to my Latino brothers and\nsisters. This waiting for me\nto speak about spoke in front\nof 300 last week and I'm\nspeaking front 300 again this Sunday. Getting pinion, get,\nyou know that what they want because I'm I want to purple.\nThey won a green. If they want to green us, want go no\nmatter. Even found one purple. Talk to my constituents. But\nI'm definitely gonna give my\nopinion my opinion, 4 with influence on how I feel and\nwhatever they decide to decide be a community meetings for sure about this for sure.\nThank you. Thank you. Councilmember Houston Kuzma\nBrandon. More comments can on track. So make sure that I\nwork with city attorneys office to send out a timeline\nfor and which things need to\nget on the ballot. We need to\nhear them at 2 regularly scheduled meetings and that\ntimeline is tight. Encourage people to continue doing the\nresearch and continue reaching out understand that's\napparently women voters will\nbe available for questions. As Councilmember Robert Rinder and said we will hear this\nagain at a regularly scheduled\nmeeting. During council so that more people have the\nopportunity to weigh in with that, I'll entertain a motion to receive and how this in\ncommittee. Some of And that was a motion by Councilmember\nRamachandran seconded by councilor at Brown to receive\nand file item number 5 on row for that is councilmember\nbrown eye now to number 5 is excuse Councilman Ramachandran. I ensure\nJenkins. Item number 5 is received and filed with 3\nguys. One excuse Councilmember\nFife that now takes us to open\nI will read the speakers who signed up for this item. If you are participating via\nplease raise your hand. So you'll be recognized. And for\nthose who are here and chambers in person, please\nline up behind the podium in any order. I have Blair\nBeekman Kellie Kevin Dally regime and Al David boat\nright? Ralph cans, Millie,\nCleveland deal. Comey low and\nany order. Thank you. David Boatright district I agree that council member should be\npaid more. But only if the\ncouncil eliminates this city. General purpose fund deficit.\nThey contributed to without\nadding more taxes. The council members dedicate their full to\nthat. Council members dedicate\ntheir full time to their council member responsibilities as they\nimplicitly agreed to when they\nran for office. The council members attend all city\ncouncil meetings and their\ncommittee meetings with rare exceptions for healthcare,\nserious, personal reasons. It's amazing that the city\ncouncil won't allow seeding\npartial a new speaker time and then allows only part of a\nspeaker's time to be seated.\nHow can multiple city residents be given preferential treatment, especially if they didn't sign\nup to speak by that deadline and others were not allowed to\nspeak. And if cancel member Houston wants to speak without\nsigning up to speak committees\nnot on. I don't understand the\nrules. Thank you for your\ncomments. Rushdie Mundell District 4. I want to connect\ntoday's charter reform discussion to another area that deserves the same level\nof scrutiny. Police oversight. Right now council is asking\nfundamental questions about governance rolls authority and\naccountability and those exact same questions apply to our\npolice oversight system. The recent city auditor report\nmakes it clear the issue is\nnot just resources in a structure, including\noverlapping roles, unclear authority and gaps and\naccountability across multiple oversight bodies. And we're seeing the consequence of that\nstructure in practice decision. Stall responsibilities are diffuse.\nBecomes difficult to determine who is ultimately accountable\nfor outcomes. But also like to note that a significant number of the city attorney public\nopinions actually one in 4 in\nrecent years have focused\nexclusively on these oversight agencies that suggests ongoing\nuncertainty about scope and\nauthority, not just capacity. The mayor is charter former King Group provides a useful\nmodel here and brought together community members,\nexperts and stakeholders to\nevaluate governance and develop clear recommendations. Encourage council to consider\na similar approach for police oversight. Thank you for your\ncomments next. Speaker. Million Cleveland to street\nfor I would like you place on\nrules over time. Opd overtime\nfor public safety. This is\nsignificant effect on our budget. I understand that it\nwas placed on the agenda for\nit. Finance, but it is not\njust a finance issue. It is an\noperational issue for decades.\nCity auditors have made very concrete recommendations on\nhow to control opd over time that the city administrator\nhas never implemented. And you\nguys ignored. I also think\nthat other issue that needs to be placed on the agenda peel\nways m o u. It has a lot of\ntweaking that needs to be discussed out in the open.\nPeople are trying to be at the negotiating table, but there is no law that would stop you\nfrom putting that. Thank you for your comments next.\nSpeaker. Well, you. I'm hoping that you'll follow up on the\nsuggestion from the member of\nthe public Ethics Commission\nto investigate whether you whether the council it's\nlegally required to set up public hearings on the charter\nreform or whether we can just.\nMove directly to a vote in in counseling committee and\nhoping that we have public. Public forums for more than 90\nseconds. Discussion out. Looking forward to the answer from the city attorney and\nthanks. Thank you for your\ncomments. Good morning. And\nyou'll low. I me I'm a brown guy. I'm a former resident.\nI'm a former employee home hr director here. Cardio city\nmanager and I've got 32 years\nin public sector governance. For me, the kid political\nissue is how is the city going\nto be managed? I care about\nthe city I run here every week. I come from an to run it\naround Lake Merritt every\nSaturday morning. My point is I really, really care about\nthis city. I can in my hometown cause have been home to for the last 40 since I got\noff 10:00am flight governor\nsays the key issue. And\nplease, please, please do not double down on a failed\nsystem. Strongman system is a failed system. What does work consistently around the\ncountry local city governance\nis council manager from a government. I can tell you with 32 years of service,\nincluding 3 years yet the city\nof open and Cardiff, City manager, that system works.\nPlease go to option 3. Thank you for your comments next.\nSpeaker. Afternoon, Ralph remembering the tension of house flippers. Your attention\nagain. He keep ignoring those the mayor's office will respond. I don't know what's\ngoing You're losing millions\nand millions of dollars. Permit fees are being enforced. The leads don't that\nplaced on the property. There's no actual constructive\nnotice to a buyer. Therefore\nthe fuse never get paid. The city is losing millions and\nmillions of dollars. It also adds to garbage being dumped\nbecause the rules are out. Disposal by under during construction are being\nfollowed. Why don't you want do something when you have a\nmoney trouble? That's all\nabout money. You're being\nripped off like crazy. Almost none of these people are even from Oakland. It's all money.\nLeaving the city that you\nshould be getting a cut of because of what the city does\nfor those people. And Jake, as you're saying, oil, look at me\nagain. I mean, what is this? You got there's a screen out\nhere. Thank you for your out.\nThere's a screen right here. That's right. Thank you for\nyour comments. Brief said it\nnext. Speaker. I next. Next. My next speaker is Blair Beekman. Please unmute\nyourself. You MAY begin. All right. Thank Really\ninteresting meeting today. Thank you. Really good public\ncomment here in open form. Thank you. Good luck in\naddressing the overtime pay\nthe MARCH committee meetings overall seemed like a really\ngood session. Good learning\nexperience for myself. Really happy just to learn things\nfrom the MARCH 10 session and overtime was a part of that.\nSo good luck. And that I think\nit's going to take much longer 2028 carted changes can be can\ncome to a to a vote. Good luck that we can have a community\ndiscussion. I'm encouraged by\nwhat people have said. Thank\nyou. And I wanted to comment just another. Thank you for\nthe work of the flock issues that we've created a compromise process. We can\ntalk about a new flock vendor. And that's an important concept for all of us. We can\ndevelop a good future. It's\ngood example California. Thank you for your comments. That was the last open Speaker.\nThank you. This meeting is" }, "summary": null, "hindsight": null, "urls": { "meeting": "/oakland/meeting/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee", "raw": "/oakland/api/meeting/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee/raw.json", "sourceMeeting": "/oakland/api/source/meeting/oakland-2026-03-26-rules-and-legislation-committee.json" } }