THE OBSERVER CORPS REPORT
April, 2018
Welcome to the second installment of the League of Women Voters of Oakland Observer Corps Report! [Read last month’s installment]
The goal of the League of Women Voters Observer Corps is to monitor local government and report our findings to the Action Committee, which uses the information to develop advocacy positions and plan for direct action. Members of the Observer Corps attend public council, commission, and committee meetings and submit reports.
In each installment of the Corps Report, we’ll summarize the previous months’ reports from Observers to help keep you in the loop about local government activities that may affect and/or interest you. If you’d like to join the Observer Corps, contact us at observers@lwvoakland.org.
Things I’ve learned since last month:
Several of the committees and commissions meet twice a month. I’ll be making sure I catch the reports from both meetings going forward, and will include key highlights I missed in this month’s summaries. Thanks for your patience.
Observer Report Summary, March 2018
The following summaries are my interpretation of reports filed by the cited Observers. Any errors or misrepresentations are my own.
Finance and Management Committee
(This information is from February’s reports.)
The City of Oakland Human Resources department forwarded their annual report on Workers Compensation claims and funding for 2016–2017. Number of claims and spending increased by almost 18%, but the report also establishes that with changes to programming, the future liability costs due to payment of benefits was reduced by nearly 7.5%.
The committee agreed to accept a charitable donation of $225,000 from the Friends of Oakland Animal Services and use it to fund a staff position for two years. According to the memo from the Friends of Oakland Animal Services, “Historically, Oakland Animal Services used methods to evaluate animals’ suitability for placement that evidence based research has shown to be inaccurate and unsubstantiated,” which explains their goal in providing the funding. This staff position would find and train volunteer staff at Oakland Animal Services and improve the performance and safety of the volunteer program there.
The City of Oakland Finance Department forwarded their quarterly report on the performance and activities of the General Purpose Fund (GPS). Revenues in the fund are projected to exceed the FY 2017–18 budget by $13.43 million, of which $6.90 million are considered one-time revenues, and $4.73 million is growth due to the Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax (SSBT). Expenditures however are expected to exceed the budget by $11.13 million. Overtime citywide across all funds is expected to exceed its budget by just under $40 million, most of which can be covered by the GPS.
More discussion of the overtime spending took place next, with a report from the Finance Department on overtime expenditures in the Fire and Police departments. The Finance Department prepared this special report at the request of the City Council due to the increasing costs due to overtime in these departments.
According to the report and a supplemental report from each department (Fire and Police) about the processes and decisionmaking around how overtime is managed, “The key drivers of overtime expenditures for OFD and OPD are service levels, MOU requirements, and legal mandates. Overtime expenditures are largely the result of backfill due to vacancies, training, special assignments, and other negotiated provisions pursuant to Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), such as leave accruals (vacation, sick, personal, etc.). For OFD, a key driver of overtime is MOU-mandated minimum staffing requirements in Fire Suppression. Overtime often results from mandated or high priority service provisions, including compliance with the Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA), Measure Z, and special operations to combat human trafficking.”
The Finance Department then presented a Cannabis Business Tax Policy Analysis as requested by City Council President Larry Reid. The goal of this report is “to give the City Council an in-depth look at the application of the business tax on cannabis businesses, the challenges associated with the tax policy for the administration and for the businesses, and the options in addressing these challenges, with an eye kept on the overall mission of any tax policy,” and explores three distinct options for optimizing the policies around taxing the cannabis industry in Oakland. The report also has a good summary of the history of marijuana legislation and policy in Oakland — recommend if you are interested.
Thanks to D. Shefler for their reports.
Oakland Police Commission
(The Police Commission meets twice a month, which I wasn’t aware of for last month’s installment, so this summary includes information from February’s second meeting as well as both March meetings.)
Commissioner Edwin Prather raised concerns that ICE agents have the word POLICE on their jackets and asked that the commission send a letter to the City Council encouraging them to send a letter to the US Justice Dept. complaining about this practice. The concern is that non-English speaking members of the community won’t report crimes because they’ll think the OPD is the same as ICE. At the following meeting, the majority of the commissioners agreed that members of the community might not feel safe reporting crimes or receiving services from the city. However, the commissioners don’t feel that they should be the ones to air these concerns; they want the Oakland City Council to communicate directly with Dept. of Homeland Security’s San Francisco office. Commissioner Prather drafted sample letters to:
- the City Council, with the Police Commission’s concerns and
- Homeland Security, intended to go out over the City Council’s signature.
Some heated discussion took place, with one of the commissioners strongly disagreeing with the rest of the commission, saying, “We’re overstepping our boundaries to comment about a Federal agency; we should be concerned about the Taser’ing of a (black) young man on a bus the other day, not telling them how to do their business.” Subsequent discussion turned to the issue of race, with a disruption taking place in the gallery taking some time to quiet down.
Links in the Agenda for 2/28 go to some interesting detailed content from the Police Department including a flowchart of how IAD investigations and disciplinary processes take place, a ‘matrix’ of disciplinary issues and their associated codes, and the policies and procedures for police body cameras.
Of particular note was the commission’s response to a letter sent by the League of Women Voters of Oakland (go us! :)) to the City Administrator wherein we expressed concern that the new Police Commissioners lacked training and guidance: A spreadsheet was presented showing which statutory courses have been, or will be, given, and who has attended what. Some of the courses include orientations on various OPD-affecting legislation, community policing, Brown Act/Oakland Sunshine Act, Police Officers Bill of Rights, Laws of Arrest/Search and Seizure, Public Ethics, and others. Sounds like that letter made a difference!
On a related note, the Oakland Coalition for Police Accountability (which was instrumental in getting Measure LL on the ballot and the Police Commission created) sent a letter to the commission expressing concern about the commission’s chair (Thomas Lloyd Smith) having gone personally to a recent scene of an officer-involved shooting, and spoken to the media about the incident. Members of the OCPA spoke in the public comments period at the 3/22 meeting, referencing the letter’s various points — that the commission is not being supported and trained well enough by the City, that as a result the credibility of the commission is in jeopardy — that the commissioners are unclear on their mandate and area of responsibility, and that the commission’s meetings are run too casually and ineffectively, citing the disruptions in the previous meeting and the lack of formal respect the commissioners afford one another. The Coalition’s letter concluded by stating that the behavior of the commissioners has “placed the credibility of the commission in jeopardy…[which can be restored] by deciding how to move forward. … Reconciliation must start internally and that is your challenge now.” Another letter, this one sent by alternate commission member Maureen Benson (the alternate commissioner mentioned in last month’s report, and who was not present due to the scheduling conflicts mentioned in the report), raised and expanded on similar issues, and further recommended the removal of Thomas Lloyd Smith as chairperson.
I’ve not been able to find a copy of either full letter online; if you find them please let me know by commenting here.
Thanks to T.G. for their reports.
Life Enrichment Committee
Human Services Director Sara Bedford presented a report recommending that the City Council waive “competitive solicitation process requirements” for signing a contract with CitySpan Technologies, Inc. to provide licensing and hosting of a web-based, client- level tracking, and contract management database system in an amount not to exceed $223,000 from April 1, 2018 to June 30, 2021. The services are for (1) Oakland Paratransit for the Elderly and Disabled (OPED) in the amount of $37,500 and (2) Oakland Fund for Children and Youth (OFCY) in the amount of $185,500.
- Oakland Municipal Code (“OMC”) section 2.04.042 requires the City Administrator to conduct a competitive multiple-step solicitation process for the acquisition of any computerized or information technology (“IT”) system.
- OMC 2.04.042.D provides that the City Council may waive the competitive solicitation process for IT acquisitions upon a finding and determination by the City Council that it is in the best interests of the City to waive the process.
The report provides background and rationale that meets the committee’s interpretation of the latter, so they granted the waiver for 3 years.
Thanks to K. McLennan for their report.
BART Board Meeting
(This is my first time reading the agenda produced by the BART staff, and I really appreciated the front page explaining how things work — check it out.)
A great deal of detailed information is presented at these meetings, including plans and updates on engineering and operations projects and programs. There were staff presentations on BART’s financial outlook for 2019 and on the timeline for opening the BART extension into Santa Clara county.
Special time was allocated to discuss and recognize the events of 1/2, when a BART Police officer shot and killed a man near West Oakland station. A representative of the family was given time (10 minutes, rather than usual public comments of 3 minutes) to respond and read a letter from the family of the deceased regarding the response of BART police and their discussions with the family. Discussion moved to procedural matters — what’s appropriate and standard procedure and timeline for handling an officer-involved shooting.
Thanks to D. Barki for their report.
Check back next month for summaries of Observer reports from April.
Further Reading: Official agendas and minutes for all city government meetings are available on the relevant committee/commission/council page listed on the left at http://www2.oaklandnet.com/government/o/CityAdministration
The current year’s calendar of meetings is available here: https://oakland.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Some meetings are broadcast via public access cable and the recordings are made available in the same location as the associated meeting documentation.
