Oakland Public Safety Committee Meeting – July 8, 2025

The Oakland City Council Public Safety Committee convened at 6:02 PM and adjourned at 8:24 PM on Tuesday, July 8, 2025, in City Council Chamber, 3rd Floor. All four committee members (Councilmembers Brown, Fife, Houston, and Chair Wang) were present. The primary agenda item was a report on transferring Oakland Police Department (OPD) Internal Affairs investigations to the civilian-staffed Community Police Review Agency (CPRA). Public comment was heard on multiple items and a spirited discussion took place regarding civilianization, NSA compliance, and police accountability.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of Draft Minutes (June 24, 2025) – Approved 4‑0 (motion by Fife, second by Brown). No public speakers.
• Determination of Schedule of Outstanding Committee Items (Pending List) – Approved 4‑0. Two public speakers spoke on this item.

Public Comments & Testimony

Item 2 – Pending List (2 speakers):

• Rajni Mandal (District 4) urged the committee to schedule a report on the Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA) status, citing a federal hearing on July 10, 2025, regarding OPD’s exit from the NSA. She noted that one late internal affairs case had jeopardized compliance and that the city’s own statement identified CPRA as causing about 15% of late cases.
• Another speaker called for reports on crimes committed by non‑residents, missing persons procedures, police identification in media, backlog in Black police officer grievances, organized crime, OUSD school safety, and the high number of officers on leave.

Item 3 – Report on Transition of OPD Investigations to CPRA (7 speakers):

• Mindy Petchinook (candidate for Mayor 2026) argued that civilian oversight cannot understand police work, called for ending federal oversight, and claimed too many low‑level force reports tie officers’ hands.
• Reef Eloy (Anti‑Police Terror Project) fully supported civilianization, citing 83% voter support for Measure LL and 81% for Measure S1. He stated that moving investigations to CPRA would save $13.2 million and improve accountability. He criticized OPD’s failure to investigate a detective who bribed witnesses, leading to the loss of senior leadership.
• Millie Cleveland (Coalition for Police Accountability) pointed to past internal affairs cover‑ups (a homicide detective bribing witnesses, racist Instagram posts, sex trafficking) and argued that only civilian oversight can enable NSA exit. She also urged full funding for the Inspector General.
• Rajni Mandal questioned the report’s accuracy, noting this was its first public presentation. She warned that the NSA requires IAB to investigate all complaints, that CPRA lacks infrastructure (database, procedures, supervision), and that full takeover would cost millions (e.g., $250,000 per supervisor for 100 cases, over $2 million for 700 division‑level investigations). She proposed petitioning the court to change the investigation process instead.
• Another speaker expressed skepticism about CPRA’s productivity, noting only one sustained finding for racial profiling after years. He said civilians are not inherently better without integrity and training.
• Prescott Chaire (25 years of NSA) urged bold change, emphasizing that no organization should oversee itself and that public confidence requires civilian oversight.

Open Forum (10 speakers):

• K. Abdul (Civic Engagement) supported collaborative efforts, suggesting civilians be deputized for some tasks to free sworn officers.
• Diana (one‑year resident) shared her experience of being raped and described systemic failures in police response and victim support.
• Multiple speakers (Rajni Mandal, Katie Fahy, Tuan No, Edward Escobar, A.D., Jennifer Finley) demanded action on rising crime, declining business safety, and the impact of the no‑chase policy. Katie Fahy (small business owner) reported vandalism and a client’s car break‑in. Tuan No asserted that CPRA costs would exceed $100 million due to duplication. Edward Escobar criticized performative programs and urged focus on crime prevention. Jennifer Finley noted that former Chief Armstrong had said the only hand‑tying was a directive to focus on violent crime.

Discussion Items

Report on Transition of OPD Investigations to CPRA (Item 25‑0760)

Presentation by Tony Lawson (Interim Executive Director, CPRA):

• Reviewed the consultant (Moe, Lau & Fukery) report, commissioned after the 2021 Reimagining Public Safety Task Force recommended transferring most IED (Internal Affairs Division) duties to CPRA.
• Key legislative history: Measure LL (2016, 83% voter approval) and Measure S1 (2020, 81% voter approval) expanded CPRA’s authority.
• Current CPRA staffing: 10 employees; new budget (doubled to $5 million) allows growth to 19 – including hiring a supervisory investigator and 3–5 complaint investigators. OPD IAB budget is ~$10 million with 22 sworn positions.
• Benefits of transfer: Eliminates overlapping investigations; reduces field sergeants’ administrative burden (they spend 80% of time on admin); saves money per position (e.g., captain vs. CPRA attorney saves $102,000/year; sergeant vs. investigator 2 saves $105,000/year).
• Challenges: CPRA lacks organizational stability, staffing, database (currently using an antiquated system damaged by ransomware), and standardized procedures. Legal complexities (impact on MOUs, NSA, labor agreements) remain.
• Three‑phase transition: 1) Fully staff CPRA and eliminate parallel investigations; 2) Expand investigative capacity; 3) Transfer discipline functions and division‑level investigations (DLIs).
• Recommendations: Create a transition working group (OPD, City Attorney’s office, Council, Administration), increase supervisory and admin support, upgrade database, pilot select case types.

Chief Floyd Mitchell (OPD) comments:

• Emphasized that the transition will take significant time and require maintaining dual systems during the process. IAB cannot be eliminated entirely because certain functions (SB2, Brady, peace officer appeals) must remain in OPD.
• Stated that CPRA would need far more staff than currently planned to handle the volume of investigations (e.g., OPD handles over 700 division‑level complaints per year) and still meet NSA 180‑day deadlines.
• Suggested a phased, “stress‑test” approach: move one category of mandated cases (e.g., use of force) to CPRA first, assess outcomes, then proceed further. Noted that labor negotiations with the police union will be necessary.

Councilmember Fife (District 3):

• Clarified her earlier remark: she never called IAB a “waste of money”; rather, using sworn officers for IT, recruitment, and other administrative roles wastes money when civilians could do the work for less. She demanded a list of positions currently filled by sworn officers that could be civilianized, referencing a potential 38 positions (IT, internal affairs, recruitment, training, PIO, OIG). She asked why the council is blamed for “tying police hands” when the no‑chase policy and other restrictions are OPD policy, not council directives.
• Emphasized that small business corridors in her district (Uptown, Downtown, Jack London) want more officers on the street, and civilianization could free up sworn personnel.

Councilmember Houston (District 7):

• Stated that police officers feel their hands are tied by policies such as the no‑chase rule, and that the council needs to hear directly from officers on this. He requested that the Chief address this at a future meeting.

Councilmember Brown (At‑Large):

• Asked about CPRA’s training timeline (Lawson: onboarding program in development for fall/winter hire). Supported a working group and a gradual, phased approach.
• Questioned whether phased transition could begin without fully staffing CPRA first (Lawson agreed it could be gradual).
• Asked Chief Mitchell for a recommended first pilot case category (he suggested use of force cases).

Chair Wang (District 2):

• Raised legal questions about whether the NSA obligates OPD’s IAB specifically to conduct investigations (City Attorney’s office deferred – will provide answer at September meeting).
• Noted the report’s phase‑one requirement to fully staff CPRA seems financially unrealistic and suggested a pilot approach.
• Requested a legal analysis in advance of the September 2025 NSA report.

Deputy City Administrator Joe DeVries:

• Acknowledged that civilianization of non‑IAB positions (e.g., IT, recruitment) is a separate effort and would require a distinct report. The committee agreed to separate that report from the CPRA transition update.

Key Outcomes

• Motion to Receive and File the Report (motion by Fife, second by Brown) passed 4‑0.
• Future reporting schedule:
  • CPRA transition update – every four months, starting with a progress report at the September 2025 Public Safety Committee.
  • Civilianization of OPD sworn positions (IT, recruitment, etc.) – a single report to be prepared before the mid‑cycle budget, to inform potential position changes.
• NSA report scheduled – for September 30, 2025 Public Safety Committee. The City Attorney’s office will provide an opinion on whether the NSA mandates that OPD’s IAB conduct all investigations.
• Chief Mitchell will be asked to bring a briefing on officers’ perceptions of “tied hands” at a future meeting, as requested by Councilmember Houston.
• The committee noted that a working group (OPD, CPRA, City Attorney, Council, Administration) should be formed by end of 2025 to begin detailed transition planning.