The city of Oakland is facing a very difficult budget situation. We believe that the mid cycle budget amendments will be more like the adoption of a whole new budget. Join us in this Digital Discourse with Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf.
Co-presented by SPUR and the League of Women Voters Oakland.
Photo: Sergio Ruiz/SPUR
Posted in Uncategorized
The COVID-19 pandemic is creating financial challenges for all levels of government, and the City of Oakland is no exception. Numerous revenues will decrease, if they haven’t already, as the need for municipal services continues. This downturn occurs at a time when the city was facing very significant financial challenges due to underfunded long-term obligations and the emergence of new challenges such as homelessness.
(Read Berkeleyside’s recent coverage: Looming budget crisis ‘like nothing Oakland has ever before experienced’)
Two important reports outlining the state of Oakland’s finances were recently published. We’ll discuss both reports and what they suggest for our city finances. This post summarizes the two reports and provides more details on the City Auditor’s report. The second post will provide more detail on the Finance Director’s report and the Council reaction at its hearing on April 21st.
These two reports are:
1. City Auditor’s report
“City of Oakland Financial Condition For Fiscal Years 2012-13 to 2018-19” was prepared by the City Auditor before the advent of COVID-19. (Its original objective was “to examine the City’s financial well-being by calculating financial ratios, analyzing trends in the City’s financial data over the past seven-year period, and comparing the results to other cities of similar size.”) But the letter of transmittal does note that the current COVID-19 pandemic will likely dramatically compound the issues raised in this report. It reaches a series of conclusions about the fraught condition of Oakland city finances and recommends corrective actions.
2. Oakland Finance Director’s report
The Finance Director’s new report “FY 2019-20 Third Quarter Revenue & Expenditure Report (Preliminary)” concludes with this stark projection:
In sum, we project that, absent rapid adjustments by the City Council, the COVID- 19 pandemic will result in a GPF budget shortfall over the next fourteen months of approximately $80 million ($26.17 million + $53.78 million).
The report contains a list of a number of actions already taken by the administration and recommends a number of policy considerations for the Council. It states: ‘The point is that – absent an unexpected State or Federal bailout – this problem will not be easily resolved, and it will not be fixed by tinkering at the margins. It will require significant action by City leaders.”
So first, let’s take a deeper look at the City Auditor’s report. Here are some notable excerpts:
The report concludes with the following recommendations to City Council to address the City’s unfunded pension and OPEB liabilities:
• State/Federal — what legislative changes, if any, are needed to be proposed so that the municipalities may be in better control of their financial future as it relates to pensions.
• CalPERS — does CalPERS serve the needs of all its member agencies and how can Oakland and other municipalities have a greater impact on CalPERS policies.
• Oakland — what changes may be made now within the restrictions of CalPERS and State Law, and which of these changes can be agreed to by all stakeholders.
This process should be convened publicly and have clearly defined processes for stakeholder input, including citizens, unions and employees. The Advisory Group should be comprised of a broad cross section of stakeholders, for example, the City should strongly consider including:
• Academia and pension/OPEB experts.
• An independent financial consultant with no ties to the City to perform
analysis on potential reforms as they are recommended by the Advisory Group.
• An independent law firm with no ties to the City to evaluate the legality of potential reforms as they are recommended by the Advisory Group.
We welcome your thoughts. What do you think the City should do to respond to the immediate and long-term challenges facing Oakland City finances?
Posted in City Budget, Pensions
Tagged Budget, city auditor, City Budget, city council, Oakland
Many months ago, seeking a ballot measure to amend the Oakland City Charter, Council President Rebecca Kaplan began circulating proposed changes to Oakland’s Measure LL (Charter section 604), the Police Commission Charter Revision. President Pro Tem Kalb began making conflicting proposals. Both agreed that the Commission needed to have an Inspector General and independent legal counsel. The Make Oakland Better Now! board has agreed with that since Measure LL went to the voters.
These issues are on the Council’s Special Meeting Agenda for Tuesday, April 21, 1:30 p.m., to be conducted virtually (details in the agenda). The vote then will not be to place them on the ballot, but to begin the required meet and confer process with the Police Officers’ union and possibly others.
President Kaplan’s proposal also seeks to remove the ability of the mayor to appoint (with Council approval) any of the members of the police Commission. As written and as approved by the voters, four members of the Commission and all but one alternate are appointed by the Selection Panel, while three members and the remaining alternate are appointed by the Mayor, subject to Council approval. President Kaplan seeks to have all the appointments removed from the mayor and transferred to the Selection Panel.
While we support the two changes concerning Inspector General and legal representation, we believe the other primary proposal is unnecessarily politically divisive, and may well make it harder to succeed in November. So today, we have written the following letter to council:
President Rebecca Kaplan and Members of the Oakland City Council. Via E-mail
Re: Proposed Amendments to Charter Section 604 Concerning Police Commission
Dear President Kaplan and City Council Members:
Make Oakland Better Now! urges your consideration of the following issues concerning some of the April 17, 2020 proposed revisions to the section of the City Charter concerning the Police Commission:
Section 604(a) Creation and Role
We strongly support the provision adding the Office of Inspector General. We propose revising the proposed addition of subsection 5 as follows:
Section 604(b) Powers and Duties
We support subsection 12, permitting the Commission to directly retain attorneys to provide the Commission with legal service.
Section 604(c) Appointment, Terms, Vacancy and Removal
We strongly agree with Councilmember Kalb that section (c)(2) should not be eliminated. The question here is whether or not the Mayor retains the authority to appoint two Commission members and one alternate, with approval by the Council. This was strongly debated when the terms of Measure LL were being considered by the Council before the election, and the decision then was the right one. While the majority of Commission members are selected by the Selection Panel, the Mayor and Council should have some authority for a small number of these important appointments. This was agreed to by the voters. Nothing has gone wrong. Suggesting the change for no real reason will simply select a form of political division that should not be involved in this significant matter. Directly related to this, we agree the proposed revisions to what was subsection (c)(3) and is identified as (c)(2) in President Kaplan’s proposed revision, as well as what; was subsection (c)(3)(c) and is identified in the same proposed revision as (c)(2)(c) are not appropriate.
We also agree with President Kaplan’s proposals for subsection (c)(1) concerning the role of alternate commission members as committee members, and Council’s authority to require three commissioners to have certain areas of expertise. And with respect to the role of alternate commissioners, Subsection (g)(3)’s third sentence, partially proposed for amendment by President Kaplan, should provide as follows: “The Chair of the Commission shall appoint a Discipline Committee comprised of three Commissioners, who may be either regular or alternate members.”
We also agree with Council Member Kalb that the proposal to have subsections c(2)(a)(i) prohibit current Department employees from Selection Panel eligibility should not be included.
Sincerely,
The Make Oakland Better Now! Board
Note to Oaklanders: We will probably be attending the Tuesday meeting by Zoom or telephone, both to encourage amendments concerning inspector general and counsel, and to stress the importance of eliminating divisive amendments to ensure the significant ones are passed.
Posted in Uncategorized
Before the outbreak of COVID-19 and the shelter-in-place order last month, Make Oakland Better Now! was preparing for a busy and consequential year. We were fundraising and organizing future events on this year’s top issues like Oakland’s mid-cycle budget and a new ballot measure to strengthen the city’s Police Commission. But like many of you – our neighbors, local activists, advocates, and businesses – our lives and plans were disrupted.
Right now Oakland, as well cities across the country and all over the world, faces a major emergency. The community needs much more help, and our priorities need to change in response.
With this in mind, MOBN! has just donated to the Oakland Fund for Public Innovation, which operates The Oakland COVID-19 Relief Fund. This fund was launched recently by Mayor Schaaf and Councilmembers Kalb, Bas and McElhaney as an emergency fund to serve Oakland’s most vulnerable residents and first responders during the pandemic. Among other outreach efforts, it is partnering with The Alameda County Community Food Bank, SOS Meals on Wheels, Bay Area Community Services, Keep Oakland Housed, La Clinica, Oakland Public Education Fund and Working Solutions.
These are all entities playing a critical role in providing services we need right now. We strongly encourage Oaklanders to consider contributing to the Oakland Fund for Public Innovation as well or making contributions, whether in time or money, to its partnering organizations.
A few other local entities that can use our help: The Boys and Girls Club of Oakland; East Bay Feed ER, which works to feed the emergency department and the ICU of five East Bay hospitals two meals a day; and Steph and Ayeesha Curry’s non-profit Eat.Learn.Play, which focuses on childhood health and hunger and has been serving over 300,000 meals a week during this crisis.
Right now, the community needs us all. So for those of us who can, let’s pitch in!
Many Oaklanders have already heard about this, but to make sure you all know: In this era of the Covid-19 virus pandemic, City Council and Council committee meetings will be rare but not non-existent (there were few in the last days of March, and just one meeting of any kind is presently set in April, a Council meeting on April 7). And for the time being, pursuant to Governor Newsom’s order, meetings will be telephonic. In that regard, Council held an emergency meeting on Friday, March 27, and enacted an emergency measure providing tenant and other protections.
Notice of the meeting to consider the measure was so brief MOBN! had no time to schedule telephonic appearances and express views. But it is certainly critical for Oaklanders to know about it. And among the key elements of the ordinance, passed on one reading as an emergency ordinance, are the following:
Posted in Uncategorized
Join us for an in depth discussion about public safety and strategies for violence prevention in Oakland as they relate to public health, implicit bias and community/police relations.
Doors 6:00pm. Program at 6:30pm. Free & open to public.
Tickets at: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/a-safer-oakland-tickets-94780423799
Posted in Uncategorized
Make Oakland Better Now consulted with Chief Guillermo Cespedes concerning his plans for the Department of Violence Prevention (DVP) and how to stem violent crime in Oakland. Cespedes described a Violence Prevention and Intervention Strategy that combines a public health and community-driven approach. This plan, which we fully support, is an important step towards reducing Oakland’s violent crime. Read our summary below:
Community-Driven Results
If Oakland is going to prevent violent crime, it will need many voices, leaders, and resources. The following elements guide the concept of a community-driven model:
Violence as a Public Health Issue
In general terms, Chief Cespedes describes the the public health approach to violent crime as one that views violence as a contagious disease that can be stopped by providing effective “medicine” (concentrated programming) at individual, family, peer, school and community levels. This approach is most effective when the medicine is applied in specific places, with specific populations, during the times that the disease is most acute.
The public health approach is comprised of the following elements:
Focus Populations
Chief Cespedes described the specific geographic areas that have a documented level of violence. These spots can be as small as four square miles. Populations within these areas will receive four types of services simultaneously:
Changing Community Norms
In addition to the focused interventions directed at different populations, the DVP’s public health and community-driven approach seeks to change community norms through campaigns and macro-level school and community-based interventions.
______
Chief Cespedes has guided successful implementation of this Public Health / Community-Driven Approach in Los Angeles* and has provided consultation on the public health model to cities through Central America, the Caribbean, and in North Africa. Addressing the violence in this targeted way, Cespedes notes, is the most effective way of inoculating the entire city against a city-wide violence epidemic.
Oakland has much to do. We are glad to see that homicide and violent crime have gone down over the past five years. But still, in 2019, homicide was up 12% over the year before, and violent crime was up 5% over the year before. There is much to be done. But Chief Cespedes’ plan is a big part of it, and we support him.
Posted in Public Safety
Tagged Department of Violence Prevention, Guillermo Cespedes, Public Safety
At tonight’s meeting, starting at 5:00 p.m., City Council will be considering the Fair Chance Housing Ordinance, supported last week unanimously at a Special Community and Economic Development Committee meeting, and on the Consent Calendar for tonight’s agenda. Make Oakland Better Now! long ago agreed to support this measure, modeled after the Fair Chance Act, which went into effect on January 1, 2018, a California law that generally prohibits employers with five or more employees from asking about a conviction history before making an offer.
This type of law, also known as a “Ban the Box” law, would be applied to housing, and remove some barriers for formerly incarcerated individuals to access housing.
Here, we share an in-depth interview published on the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative website from May 2019 with one of the leaders, Make Oakland Better Now! Committee of 50 member John Jones III.
Posted in Uncategorized
On March 3, vote YES on Measure Q.
Join the campaign at its kickoff event this Saturday.
Measure Q is a March 3 ballot tax measure, designed to generate revenue to be used for city parks improvement, homelessness services and clean water. The Make Oakland Better Now! board has voted to endorse it, and urges Oaklanders to support it. We join a wide coalition in support of this measure. Among other organizations, it is supported by the Oakland Chamber of Commerce, Sierra Club, SF Bay Chapter, League of Women Voters of Oakland, Outdoor Afro and Oakland Tenants Union. Continue reading
Comments Off on Make Oakland Better Now! Endorses Measure Q
Posted in City Budget, Public Works, Taxes
Tagged homelessness, Measure Q, Oakland, Public Works, tax
(image source: Oakland Homeless Response)
On November 14, Oakland’s City Council passed a resolution to submit a parcel tax to voters on the March 3, 2020 primary ballot. The amount of the tax will vary depending on forms and usage of real property, but residential property would be taxed at rates of $148 per single-family residential parcel and $101.08 per residential unit for multiple residential parcels with a 50% reduction for affordable housing projects, and for non-residential units, a rate based on frontage, square footage and building area. (Read the Chronicle’s recent article on the parcel tax here, and East Bay Express’ coverage here.) Continue reading
Posted in City Budget, City Council, Taxes
Tagged Budget, City Budget, city council, homeless, homelessness, Oakland, tax
