OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Alameda County Reparations Commission Meeting - April 8, 2026: Prioritization of Recommendations and Community Feedback Planning

Board of SupervisorsWednesday, April 8, 2026
BodyAlameda County, California
SessionBoard of Supervisors
DateWednesday, April 8, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:49:11
Transcript — Verbatim
0:05

Okay.

0:08

You're a human being.

0:10

Thank you.

0:11

We had a bio break.

0:12

It's okay.

0:12

That way, thank you for recognizing my humane.

0:17

And roll call.

0:20

Commissioner Brazil.

0:23

Commissioner Berry, excuse Commissioner Domes, excuse Commissioner Gardner.

0:28

Here.

0:28

Commissioner Gain, excuse Commissioner Gore.

0:31

Here.

0:31

Commissioner Hursken.

0:33

Excuse Commissioner Johnson.

0:36

Here.

0:36

Commissioner Knowles, excuse Commissioner McClendon.

0:40

Here.

0:42

So small.

0:45

Commissioner Triplett excuse Commissioner Varla here.

0:50

All right.

0:51

So we are here to take an action vote on our recommendations.

1:00

So I tried to summarize uh where we landed based on the many iterations that we were verbalizing.

1:10

So there is the handout that has the large one, two, three down the side.

1:17

And I and this was my best capture.

1:19

So if there are any different recollections or we need to change, uh please let's let's have those comments here.

1:28

Um we were referencing this this thing right here.

1:35

In fact, uh can I be promoted to okay, sure.

1:52

So this is the document um that we that I tried to summarize our first priority through to 11.

2:03

So as you can see here, the priority was one, and we had housing and property.

2:10

So for my note, it was you know 7.1 through 7.4 um as the first priority, and then the second was economic opportunity and wealth that we my notes.

2:23

I showed we combined them.

2:25

That was 2.13.

2:27

And 13.1 and 13.2, then three was the establishment of the office.

2:34

So we pulled from the other and we pulled from the general.

2:38

Um so that created the office and the funding for it.

2:42

Then four was help, and so we put uh 10.1 and 10.2, but I also pulled 9.6, which was in other but had to do with trauma and healing centers.

2:59

So uh added that under health, and five was family and particular black youth.

3:08

Uh six was education, and two recommendations there, and seven is the long legal system, and I also added the word public safety to reminder, uh, because I had so much in my notes that said this is part of the um totally incarcerated and public safety conversation, and then added 9.5 to this one as well because it talked about violence intervention network and collaborations with the office of OVP.

3:44

Then eight is general, which was doing the report um and implementing across working across cities and implementing recommendations across all the 15 cities, generating a harms report and equity report.

4:03

That was eight, which was six the six point two to six point five, and then the ninth category was the creative culture, so that's preserving black history and data arts creative content, then 10.

4:21

I had as the political disenfranchisement, so this you know our civic representation, coding rights, and then also intergovernmental accountability and coordination, and then 11 was data, so that was the remaining nine, so 9.2 and 9.3 went here, whereas the other 9.1 went elsewhere.

4:42

That was data, data transparency, and to help document the harm, and then 12 was the environmental and infrastructure items.

5:00

First I'll ask is there anything out of order for that folks remembered differently?

5:04

Because it's like I said, this is not just uh to keep like organized and not asking.

5:14

I think you captured it pretty well.

5:17

Isn't that your notes?

5:18

Yeah.

5:22

We looked at it, you know, you know, we looked at it earlier, but okay.

5:26

So nothing is missing here.

5:27

Oh well.

5:29

One thing I would say is that um I'm sort of wary of bundling the data stuff with the referendum department.

5:39

I think there should be sort of two separate recommendations.

5:44

Like one for the sort of data and accountability key, and then the second part for sort of the oversight department.

5:55

And then an additional thing, which furniture death is this might be something that belongs to the reparations department if it's created, is like coordinating between different levels of government.

6:16

I mean, there's a lot of overlap, you're right.

6:19

Um, you want to separate them?

6:23

Well, so on let's do the first one first, where you talked about data and the department.

6:29

I guess the question is how much how much do we want to sort of place on having a reparations department or a reparations office?

6:41

Let me let me not only agree in part, but what I was gonna respond to was the um the harm report, and probably wasn't that part of what the reparations uh department would do.

6:56

So then there is a data question.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Racial Equity█████████████████████████████████████████████65%
Community Engagement██████████15%
Data Collection██████8%
Procedural███5%
Public Engagement██3%
Government Representation1%
Library Services1%
Public Health Services1%
Affordable Housing1%
Summary of Proceedings

Alameda County Reparations Commission Meeting - April 8, 2026: Prioritization of Recommendations and Community Feedback Planning

The Alameda County Reparations Commission met on April 8, 2026, to finalize the prioritization of their 12 recommendation categories, assign short-, medium-, and long-term timelines, and plan for a community feedback session. After extensive deliberation, the commission passed a motion to adopt a tiered timeline and a framework for implementation, and also discussed the scheduling of an in-person feedback event on No Kings Day (April 12, 2026).

Discussion Items

Prioritization of Recommendation Categories

Commissioners reviewed a consolidated list of 12 priority areas, initially ranked from housing and property (priority 1) through environmental and infrastructure (priority 12). Commissioner Shed presented a text analysis of the recommendations, suggesting that the categories be reorganized around mechanisms (e.g., direct restitution, data, reallocation, oversight) rather than topic areas. Other commissioners emphasized the need to align with the state report and UN principles, and to avoid losing focus on specific harms (e.g., black youth). The commission ultimately decided to keep the 12 categories but add a framework to each.

Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Timeline

After debate, the commission agreed to the following timeline based on a motion by Commissioner McClendon and seconded by Commissioner Small:

  • Short-term (first year): Priorities 1–5 (housing, economic opportunity, reparations office/administration, health/well-being, family/youth)
  • Medium-term (years 1–3): Priorities 6–9 (education, legal system/public safety, harm/equity reports, creative culture)
  • Long-term (years 3–5): Priorities 10–12 (political disenfranchisement, data transparency, remaining items)
  • Additionally, item 6.5 (requiring equity reports and assessment) was moved to the preamble as an initial step to inform all other actions.

Data and Assessment as a Preamble

Commissioner Chad argued that data collection and assessment should be a prerequisite for all work. After discussion, the commission agreed to include a preamble stating that the county must immediately begin collecting and assessing equity data across departments, and that this effort should be ongoing and inform the implementation of all priorities.

Framework for Implementation (Second Motion)

Commissioner Shed proposed a second motion to establish a consistent framework for each recommendation category, consisting of four elements: direct restitution, data/archives, reallocation of funds, and oversight. This framework would be applied to each of the 12 priority areas in the report. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brandon and passed unanimously (with Commissioner Shed abstaining from the first motion but voting on the second).

Community Feedback Session Planning

Commissioners discussed the upcoming in-person feedback session scheduled for Saturday, April 12, 2026 (No Kings Day) at 2323 Broadway, Oakland. Concern was raised about conflicts with planned No Kings Day protests. Some commissioners felt it was important to participate in the protests, while others argued that the reparations work must continue. The commission decided to proceed with the in-person event and also plan a virtual feedback session to accommodate those unable to attend. Commissioners Bazille, Berry, Gardner, Gore, Johnson, McClendon, and Varla expressed willingness to participate. Commissioner Gardner noted that about 50 RSVPs had been received as of earlier that day.

Key Outcomes

  • Motion 1 (passed): Adopt the timeline: 1–5 short-term, 6–9 medium-term, 10–12 long-term, with 6.5 (equity assessment) as a preamble. (Vote: 8 ayes, 1 abstention)
  • Motion 2 (passed): Adopt the framework of restitution, data, reallocation, and oversight for each recommendation category. (Vote: unanimous with ayes from all present)
  • Decision: Proceed with the in-person community feedback session on April 12, 2026, and schedule a virtual session to supplement feedback.
  • Directive: Staff to finalize the agenda and materials for the feedback session, including voting stickers for priority and timeline.

Meeting Transcript

Okay. You're a human being. Thank you. We had a bio break. It's okay. That way, thank you for recognizing my humane. And roll call. Commissioner Brazil. Commissioner Berry, excuse Commissioner Domes, excuse Commissioner Gardner. Here. Commissioner Gain, excuse Commissioner Gore. Here. Commissioner Hursken. Excuse Commissioner Johnson. Here. Commissioner Knowles, excuse Commissioner McClendon. Here. So small. Commissioner Triplett excuse Commissioner Varla here. All right. So we are here to take an action vote on our recommendations. So I tried to summarize uh where we landed based on the many iterations that we were verbalizing. So there is the handout that has the large one, two, three down the side. And I and this was my best capture. So if there are any different recollections or we need to change, uh please let's let's have those comments here. Um we were referencing this this thing right here. In fact, uh can I be promoted to okay, sure. So this is the document um that we that I tried to summarize our first priority through to 11. So as you can see here, the priority was one, and we had housing and property. So for my note, it was you know 7.1 through 7.4 um as the first priority, and then the second was economic opportunity and wealth that we my notes. I showed we combined them. That was 2.13. And 13.1 and 13.2, then three was the establishment of the office. So we pulled from the other and we pulled from the general. Um so that created the office and the funding for it. Then four was help, and so we put uh 10.1 and 10.2, but I also pulled 9.6, which was in other but had to do with trauma and healing centers. So uh added that under health, and five was family and particular black youth. Uh six was education, and two recommendations there, and seven is the long legal system, and I also added the word public safety to reminder, uh, because I had so much in my notes that said this is part of the um totally incarcerated and public safety conversation, and then added 9.5 to this one as well because it talked about violence intervention network and collaborations with the office of OVP. Then eight is general, which was doing the report um and implementing across working across cities and implementing recommendations across all the 15 cities, generating a harms report and equity report. That was eight, which was six the six point two to six point five, and then the ninth category was the creative culture, so that's preserving black history and data arts creative content, then 10. I had as the political disenfranchisement, so this you know our civic representation, coding rights, and then also intergovernmental accountability and coordination, and then 11 was data, so that was the remaining nine, so 9.2 and 9.3 went here, whereas the other 9.1 went elsewhere. That was data, data transparency, and to help document the harm, and then 12 was the environmental and infrastructure items. First I'll ask is there anything out of order for that folks remembered differently? Because it's like I said, this is not just uh to keep like organized and not asking. I think you captured it pretty well. Isn't that your notes? Yeah. We looked at it, you know, you know, we looked at it earlier, but okay. So nothing is missing here. Oh well.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com