No, we'll go to the little bit.

Well, Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Through the chair, if everyone can take a seat, please.

And all council members to the dais, please.

All council members to the dais, please, please take your seats.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Welcome to today's concurrent meeting of the Oakland Reed Development Successor Agency and City Council.

The time is now three thirty-seven p.m.

and this meeting has come to order.

Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit a speaker's card for this meeting.

Two comment in person members of the public must submit a separate speaker card for each item on the agenda before the item is called.

This meeting, this meeting came to order at 3 37 p.m.

Therefore, speaker cards will be accepted up until five.

Again, please submit your speaker cards by five oh seven p.m.

or before the item is read into record.

Ramachandron.

Showing seven members present, one excuse Ramachandron.

No announcements.

Moving to our first item, item number four, modifications to the agenda and procedural items.

I want to remove item 5.21 from the agenda.

It seems like a number of the council members have not had an opportunity to meet with both sides on this issue.

And I want to make a motion.

So move.

With the motion and the second item 521 was a resolution in support of Senate Bill 332.

Has been withdrawn from this agenda.

If there are no further okay.

Moving to our consent calendar.

Oh, okay.

Apologies for item 521 to be withdrawn from the consent calendar.

Moved by council member Jenkins.

Seconded by Councilmember Guile.

On roll, council members.

Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Absolutely not.

Guile.

Houston.

Ramachandran.

Excused.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Nay.

And Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with five ayes, two no, and one excuse.

Ramachandran.

The public can still have an opportunity to comment on item five point two one in the consent calendar in the consent item.

Through the chair, you do have a council member's hand up.

Wong council member.

Uh can we move the uh s5 point forty-one to the non-consent calendar, please?

Motion to move.

Absent of a second.

Motion fails.

I need to say something.

Um, President.

You can speak on the consent calendar.

Yeah, but I had asked that to you can speak on the consent calendar.

Okay.

Okay.

So absent a second.

There's no second.

All right.

Moving to our next item, item number five, the consent calendar, reading in short titles.

Item 5.1, approval of the draft minutes from the meeting of July 1st, 2025.

5.2, a resolution regarding the declaration of local emergency due to AIDS epidemic.

Item 5.3, a resolution regarding the declaration of medical cannabis health emergency.

Item 5.4, a resolution regarding the declaration of a local emergency on homelessness.

Item 5.5, an ordinance amendment to the salary ordinance for various classifications and minimum wage increase.

Action on this on this item will result in final passage.

An ordinance of with amendments to the citywide impact fee regulations.

Action on this item will result in final passage.

Item 5.7 parking fines ordinance.

Action on this item will result in final passage.

5.8 ordinance for the omnibus planning code amendments with focus on streamlining design review.

Action on this item will result in final passage.9, an ordinance regarding the 2025 code amendments, accessory dwelling units, fire zone.

Action on this item will result in final passage.

Item 510, an ordinance regarding the license of 615 High Street to Tribe Inc.

This ordinance action on this item will result in final passage.

Item 511, a resolution regarding Dwayne Wigginsway.

A resolution regarding the professional services contract amendment with Biggs Cordosa Associates Inc.

for Limart Bridge Systemic Retrofit Project.

Item 513, a resolution regarding the MLU with Alameda County for HHAP6 funds.

Item 514, a resolution regarding the Caltrans funding for trash capture projects.

Item 515, a resolution regarding public works equipment services division, cooperative purchase agreements.

Item 516, two pieces of legislation regarding allocation requests for regional measure three goods movement and mitigation funds.

Item 517, a resolution to accept limited exemption to integrated pest management policy to reduce harmful algae in Lake Merit.

Item 518, a resolution regarding the authorization to examine sales and use tax and transactions and use tax records.

Item 519, a resolution regarding the tree maintenance contract award.

Item 520, a resolution as needed emergency tree services contract.

Item 521 regarding the resolution in support of Senate Bill 332 was withdrawn from this agenda.

Item 522, a resolution regarding the UPRR crossing agreements for Fruitville Alive, the Gap Closure Project.

Item 523, a resolution regarding Michael Coolram, Nicole Brown Booker et al.

versus the City of Oakland.

Item 524 regarding and recognizing Black August has been withdrawn from this agenda pursuant to Rule 28A.

525, a resolution regarding support of California Senate Bill 63, Winer and Arguin.

Item 526, a resolution regarding the contract authorization for veteran veterinarian supplies with MWI.

Item 527, a resolution regarding the appointments to the wildfire prevention commission commission.

A resolution regarding employee benefits broker consultant contract.

Item S529, an informational report regarding the fiscal year 2026 through 2030, Oakland Roadmap to Fiscal Health.

Item S530, a resolution regarding Nixon Eagle Eye Equipment Company contract for paving equipment parts and repair services.

Item S531, a resolution regarding Project 100 7572, Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation.

Item S532, a resolution regarding Project 1007573, citywide pavement rehabilitation.

Item S533, a resolution regarding the contract authorization for pedestrian right-of-way construction projects.

Item S534, a resolution ensuring a competitive market for prowl construction.

Item S535, a resolution to eliminate annual cap on sidewalk assistance program.

Item S536, a resolution regarding the memorandum of agreement for 571 Crofton Avenue.

Item S537, a resolution regarding the annexation of city-owned property at Joaquin Miller Park.

Item S538, multiple pieces of legislation regarding the property bid annual reports and assessment pavement approval.

An informational report regarding the OAB air quality.

A resolution regarding the 2025 professional services, city span technology, item S41, a resolution regarding the revisions to the animal control ordinance.

A resolution regarding the mayor's designation to the police and fire retirement board.

This item requires an urgency finding if the mayor's office is available through the chair.

Okay.

We'll continue.

Item S543, a resolution regarding the support of AB 1242 new one.

This item also requires an urgency finding from our council members or their staff.

Item S544, a resolution regarding Oakland Head Start Children's Initiative Fiscal Year 24 through 27 funding application.

This item requires an urgency finding as well from staff and item S545, a resolution regarding the early childhood apprenticeship program.

Also requires an urgency finding in votes through the chair.

From City of Oakland Head Start, I'm the education manager.

So the urgency finding for um the first resolution is to ensure that we continue with our Oakland Children's Initiative grant to pay that those that contract from last program year, which is fiscal year 24-25.

The second urgency is to partner with a pay agent so that we can pay those funds quicker to continue the implementation of the apprentice program.

Um there's two years of funding that we have yet to receive.

So for uh Councilmember Bryan, go ahead.

Okay, so for um S5.43, which is AB 1242, the urgency finding is that the state legislature and Governor Newsom will be considering legislation during the council summer recess, and so in order to um show our support, um we have placed this item on our agenda.

Is there someone here from the mayor's office to give an urgency finding?

If not, I'll give the reading.

For item S542 regarding the mayor's designation to the police and fire retirement board.

For this item, the urgency is that there is a need to take immediate action, which came to the attention of the local body after the agenda was posted, and that the need to take immediate action is required to avoid a substantial adverse impact that would occur if the action was deferred to a subsequent subsequent special or regular meeting, and this concludes the urgencies for these items.

Thank you.

Councilmember Houston.

Yeah, I had a question about 5.3.

And my only issue was um we're voted in to speak for the public, and it says I wanted to return to council.

So when I have voted no, that automatically moved it to the um non consent um calendar.

So, but now it's on consent.

So can you uh explain to me?

Councilmember Houston, I moved I moved that item on rules from non-consent to consent.

There are other ways to get reports back from the administration and if public works is a public works or DLT issue.

It's um DOT.

That's public works.

Josh, can you come up here?

For the public, can you read the title of the number?

Is S point I mean S.5.

What is the title?

This contract uh authoration for public um right-aways construction projects from Department of Transportation S D O T.

Gotcha.

Josh, can you commit to on this item coming back to public works and transportation from time to time to give updates to the committee?

Yes, certainly.

Thank you.

That's fine.

What like was it every three months?

You can work with them in the committee chair on the cadence.

Okay.

Councilmember Brown.

Um, I wanted to briefly comment.

I know that there are a few folks here in support of AB 1242, um, and so I was really delighted to sponsor this resolution along with Councilmember Wong, and this is a language access um piece of legislation from assembly member in UN.

Um, and so language access is a fundamental equity issue in a city as diverse as Oakland, where nearly 40% of residents speak a language other than English at home, and over a third of our public school students are English language learners.

And so this bill is really coming at the perfect time.

A B 1242 takes two significant steps forward.

First, it would establish a language access director within the California Health and Human Services Agency and provide real um accountability for language access efforts.

And so um also want to invite Councilmember Wong if you wanted to uh share a few words as well.

Yeah, thank you so much, Councilmember Brown, for co-sponsoring this item.

Um I've spent my career really fighting for language equity for uh immigrant communities and um you know, even seen our services.

Um my constituent services director has been calling around some of our uh various phone lines to test out how our language access and our interpretation services are, and I will say uh we have some work to do here in our own very own city, so proud to sponsor this bill and uh we have more to to progress when it comes to language equity.

Thank you thank you council member guy yes thank you um members of the council members of the public uh we have a a good number of press presentations uh today regarding the revisions to the animal control ordinance uh and I wanted to make sure that then the people understand they'll have the opportunity to speak on this item and um and staff will be present to also respond uh to the council to the public thank you thank you any more council members council member five if I could have clarity um around I I think council member heuston has sent out um in information about the amount of time that council members are allowed to speak if I could get clarity from our parliamentarian on what that time is on the record so we're all clear I think at seven we're looking up the rules of procedure yeah rule I believe it's rule 11 if we could get clarity on what rule 11 means and how it's um how we utilize it I'm asking because it's something that's consistently come up over the last um several meetings and committees and I just want it to be clear for the council and the public through the chair I'd be happy to um cite the rule and read it into the record.

So Rule 11 provides that no member of the council shall speak for more than eight minutes on any on any non-consent item without the consent of the presiding officer or majority of the members of the council which consent may be granted for complex matters such as adoption of the biennial mid cycle budget just for example.

No member of the council shall speak for more than two minutes on the consent calendar without the consent of the presiding officer or majority of the council for ceremonial items the presiding officer may determine the allotted speaking time for the council members.

I would like to ask for two minutes on the clock for the consent calendar because I think it's important for the individuals who came out to support SB 332 um the Wahhab Senate bill to understand what has happened over the course of the last week I sponsored legislation in support of what is happening in Sacramento not because I'm trying to eliminate Pacific gas and electric from the city of Oakland but rather because I believe that there should be opportunities for competition in the city of Oakland to ensure that ratepayers are getting the best possible service that their dollars pay for and right now in the state of California the Pacific gas and electric company is it owns 60% of the infrastructure for the entire city the CEO made 17 million dollars last year in pay for two years in a row they've had record profits that have been on the backs of the ratepayers and the the majority of the funds that they earn come from the city of Oakland so I'm not this is not a demonization of an organization it is a request for a feasibility study to find out if that is the best model for California because record profits being distributed to our community organizations while important it is not the only factor that we need to uh investigate in the city of Oakland I appreciate and I'm so grateful for everyone that's called me over the last week to uh share their opinions and to share uh how PGE has benefited them with individual grants and my concern is for every single resident in the city of Oakland that has to decide between are they going to pay for groceries or are they going to pay for power?

The majority of individuals who have had their power disconnected disconnected because they cannot afford it because the rent in Oakland is still too damn high.

The people who cannot afford to pay for these utilities are in my district and in East Oakland, where it is unbearable the cost of living in California right now.

So this is not about who I like, who I don't like.

This is about what is best for Californians, what is best for West Oakland, and what is best for East Oakland.

So I do not appreciate the fact that my name is being drug, and then the the nonprofits who offer life affirming services in this city are being threatened with their charitable contributions being withheld because of legislation that I'm bringing.

I respect every single person on this council for their opinions and their votes.

And at the same time, we have to be the stewards of this city and what is best for our constituents.

And sometimes that means challenging the people who are nice to us.

So being nice also means being able to be held accountable for when you might need to make some changes.

I expect the same level of accountability for me as an elected official as I do for the private investor owned utilities in this country and in this state who are making it difficult for people to make choices.

So I just want to be clear this is not an attack on an organization.

It is about accountability and it is about affordability.

And I care about my most vulnerable residents who may need uh who may need access to the the the things that keep them connected for disabled residents who can't afford to have power when there's rolling blackouts, but they may lose access to whatever connections they need to have electronically to stay alive.

There are several individuals, several disabled individuals, several seniors, several people living on the edge.

And once again, I appreciate everyone who came out on every side.

And I know this is difficult.

All we were saying was we need a feasibility study to find out if they could be there should be competition because competition brings prices down, and I wanted to clarify that for all the misinformation that's been going around.

Thank you for the time.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Anyone else?

Councilmember Houston.

I want to thank Councilmember Five for bringing up that Rule 11, because that's very important on the non-consent that we all have eight minutes on any item and on a consent two minutes because I've been cut off and I'm not happy with that.

So I'm just saying, we got so thank you for that, Councilmember Five for bringing that up.

Thank you.

Seeing no more comments from the council members.

Let's go to public comment.

And through the chair, to the chair, if we can get the motion for the urgencies before we go to the speakers as advised by the parliamentarian, we have a we do have the mayor's office, I believe, here.

Uh President Jenkins and members of the city council, we're requesting an urgency finding on S5.42 is due to timing of the loss of our previous uh finance director and the appointment of the new uh finance director a week ago.

So we need this urgency because the uh PIFERS board needs to keep a quorum and there will be meetings while you're on recess.

Thank you.

Did the chair just need a motion and a second for the urgencies for these items that were added at a three day?

Sir move.

Second.

Thank you.

There is a motion made by Councilmember Guyos, seconded by Councilmember Unger to approve the urgencies for items as 542, 4543, 44, and 45 on roll.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five.

Aye.

Guile.

Houston.

Aye.

Rama Chanjan is excused.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with seven ayes.

One excuse Ramachanjan on the urgencies.

Moving to public speakers, Chair.

Calling the names for those who signed up for the consent calendar.

Once you hear your name, please approach the podium.

If you are in Zoom, please raise your hand before your comments.

Please state your name for the record.

Okay.

We have a Stephanie Tran, Gene Hazard, Kevin Choice for multiple items.

Chanelie Harris, Asada Olabala, Ariana Casanora, Robert Raborn, Rayborn, Victor Flores, Jeff Levin, George Spies, Derek Barnes, Prescott Chair, Maria Henderson, Ryan Hebert, Julia Lau, Candace Foo, Janice Park, NM Scott Smith, Frenna or Swens Francois Rensted.

Sorry for mispronounce your name.

In addition to Richard Tobin, Shiroski, Cindy Cooper, Willow Liroff, Mary Bates, Leah Hinnan, Alexandra Camille, Diane Cooper, Matthew Labar, Ralph Cannes, Joanna Widger, Hallie Day Ginova, Genova, Josh, Beth, Rachel Padasfinski, Kimberly Millington, Nara Dalbaca, Joanne, believe I've said Joanne Widger, Valerie Green, Don Piper or Peeper, and Ellen Lynch in no particular order.

Please state your name for the record so I can adjust your time appropriately.

I'm here to speak on SB 63.

Public transit plays a key role in supporting the needs and livelihoods of Oaklanders.

In a 2018 survey, 25% of Oaklanders said that public transit is their primary way to get around.

People who are workers, students, seniors, people of color, and people with disabilities are more likely to use public transit.

Oakland is home to nine BART stations and over 1,750 bus stops that are supported by AC Transit, which together form a broad network that connects our communities.

However, post-pandemic, our transit agencies are in fiscal jeopardy.

The failure to address this will result in significant cuts that harm our residents' abilities to meet basic transportation needs.

SB 63 is the solution to this problem, which will raise revenues to support the Bay Area transit agencies and keep them operating at a time when people are returning to work.

Thank you for your support on this important bill.

Good afternoon, Council President Jenkin, Council members of the Oakland City Council.

My name is Victor Flores.

I'm the BART District 7 Director.

BART and Oakland are symbiotic.

We cannot thrive without each other.

Oakland has more bar stations than any other city in the Bay Area, more than San Francisco.

Every weekday, 15,000 workers enter Oakland off of BART.

More than 700,000 people get off in Oakland.

Oakland's plans for housing and jobs and growth are focused around BART.

BART is investing in Oakland with a new police headquarters coming to Uptown.

97 units of affordable housing for seniors are under construction at the Lake Merritt future Chinatown station as we speak.

And there are plans for hundreds more apartments and office space to build there and at West Oakland Station.

We're doing so much to improve our service.

And at this critical time, we need your support to make sure that we can survive and move forward into the future.

Thank you for your support.

Good afternoon, Council President Jenkins and Council members.

I'm Robert Rayburn.

I represent East Oakland on the BARC board of directors.

I want to thank Councilmember Unger for introducing this resolution.

Before the pandemic, BART was a model for self-sufficiency.

Passenger revenue covered about two-thirds of our operating expenses.

But the pandemic and the lowest return to office rates in the nation mean that this model no longer works.

About 75% of our riders are back, but they're taking fewer trips per week.

All of these lost trips and fares collectively add up to an average deficit of three hundred and seventy-five million dollars starting in fiscal year twenty-seven.

Thankfully, this year's state budget preserves transit funding and provides a 750 million dollar loan for BART, SF Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit.

This will allow us to get through to when regional major funds would start flowing in calendar year 2027.

We urge your support.

Good afternoon.

My name is Kevin Choice, and I just have comment on a couple of uh items on the consent agenda.

Uh, first, my name is Kev Choice, artist, educator, former cultural strategist, and member of Oakland's Cultural Affairs Commission, uh resident of D2.

Uh, I wanted to start just by uh grounding us in reminding us of the city's official motto, love life, which I established the love life acknowledgement that we used to read as city council meetings and also inaugurations, and just want to remind y'all to bring that energy back into the space.

We need love into the space.

That is our official motto.

There was investment into the love life acknowledgement, and I want to see y'all have that.

I want to see smiles on your face when y'all walk in.

Y'all, my people, and I support y'all.

Um, also just want to comment on a couple of things.

Um, item 5.4 of the unhoused situation.

Um, that crisis is deep.

Um, it's cultural as well.

Uh, many artists are part of our unhoused community who once contributed to Oakland's vibrant cultural and also must be a part of that solution.

I've done work down at Wood Street.

I've supported them uh when they were getting rated.

Uh, my studio was right down near East 12th.

I've seen how that has evolved and adapted, and I hope that those people are still getting resources and support that they need, wherever they may be in this current moment.

Um, also want to support uh 510 tribe of Oakland.

Uh when I was cultural strategist, uh Love Life Week, we went out into the community and fed the unhoused.

Uh, we gave them meals, we gave them uh toothbrushes, toothpaste.

Uh, Tribe is a very deeply rooted in Oakland program.

I love what they do across the whole city and uh appreciate anything that can be done to support them.

Uh speaking on 511, Dwayne Wiggins Way.

Dwayne Wiggins, an Oakland legend and icon and mentor to so many, including myself, who got my start at his club on Lakeshore Avenue Java House.

I don't know if y'all remember that.

I fresh out of college.

I used to just be playing behind the poets, a very important cultural uh institution in Oakland, just like the House of Soul, where I sat in on sessions with Keisha Cole and Kaylani and all of the musicians in the community.

Uh the way also wanted to do a lot of stuff with the city.

He couldn't get a lot of support that he really wanted, but we want to make sure that we uplift him in his passing and uh rest in peace and power to his amazing contribution to Oakland community, the power of our artists.

Y'all see I got a thread here.

I know 524 was uh taken off, but I want to also support Black August.

A lot of us in community practice Black August.

We fast, we do discipline, we do a revolutionary study.

Uh shout out East Side Arts Alliance, Malcolm X grassroots organization that actually helps start and implement a lot of the Black August practices.

I know that that was taken off the agenda, but I just wanted the community to know the importance of that and let's practice that together.

It is very important, especially now in a time when our political prisoners are must-need, and also there's a new political prisoners being made every day as ICE continues to snatch up people, even here in our communities and make sure let's make sure we support them.

Uh, culture is a core service, and it's a part of every single issue and value of Oakland.

I appreciate y'all time today.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council President Jenkins and Council members.

My name is Maria Henderson, legislative affairs and community relations for AC Transit.

It's Alameda Contra Costa Transit District.

I am respectfully urging the council to vote in support of item 5.25, the SB 63 resolution.

I want to thank Councilmember Unger and his staff for bringing this resolution forward.

I also want to acknowledge the Rockridge Community Planning Council as well for their advocacy and support of public transit.

As you know, public transit is a lifeline for Oaklanders, especially our students, working families, seniors, low-income communities, and transit dependent individuals.

AC Transit alone provides 30,000 student rides each weekday and supports 135,000 daily riders, with over 45% of our trips made to and from Oakland.

AC Transit faces a 60 million average annual shortfall for the next four fiscal years that threatens to force significant service cuts starting in 2027.

Good afternoon, uh President Jenkins and City Council members.

I'm Julia Liao and I'm the CEO at Asian Health Services.

I wanted to acknowledge the leadership of Councilmember Brown and Councilmember Wayne for their support for your support of AB 1242.

That will provide critical infrastructure at the California Health and Human Services Department at the state level for language access.

At our clinic, we provide 50,000 patients with language accessible services in 14 languages.

And at a time when there's Medicaid cuts and so much more in terms of language access because of the executive order that states that English is going to be the nation's language, primary language.

This is a critical time for this bill, so I really want to thank again the leadership of Councilmember Brown and Councilmore Wang.

Thank you.

Hello, good afternoon.

My name is Janice Park, and I'm a policy intern on behalf of Asian Health Services.

And at a time when federal policy is designating English as the national language and prioritizing assimilation over access, I believe it's more crucial than ever that California should step up in order to protect its diverse communities.

More than ever before, it's crucial that we're strengthening and modernizing our state's language access infrastructure.

And AP 1242 is helping us do just that by closing dangerous equity gaps and ensuring that individuals with limited English proficiency can still fully participate in public health and social services.

Thank you so much for your support.

Hi, I'm Candice Phu on behalf of AA and HPI Health Equity Coalition as an intern.

I'm here in support of the city writing this letter because AB 1242 is critical for advancing language access and health equity for our minority communities.

Nearly 44% of Californians speak a language other than English at home, and 17.1% speak English less than very well and are considered limited English proficient.

This bill would help bridge critical gaps by establishing stronger language access standards and providing essential health care resources to Asian Latinx and other ethnic communities.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Francis Ranstead.

I'm the landback coordinator for Segorate Land Trust.

I'm here to speak on the agenda item S537, the annexation of Joaquin Miller.

We wanted to extend our deep gratitude to the City of Oakland for their partnership and collaboration on this annexation project.

Your support and commitment have been instrumental in moving our work forward.

We're honored to be working alongside with you and look forward to continuing our relationship as we create more opportunities for community and our connection in the future.

Thank you for your support.

Hello, Council members.

I'm Cindy Cooper.

I'm a resident of Oakland and District 4, the Laurel area, and I'm going to speak about S5.41, the Animal Control Ordinance.

As a resident of Oakland and supporter of the Oakland Animal Shelter, I'm very discouraged to hear about the regressive changes taking place within the OAS facility in recent years.

As recently as 2023, I successfully brought a feral mother cat with her five newborn kittens to OAS.

Intake for all of them was smooth and organized.

The kittens were taken in with arrangements to be placed in foster homes, and the mother cat was spayed and vaccinated.

In the days thereafter, she remained unsocialized, so OAS asked that I take her back to be released where she was found with the caveat that I provide a food source for her, which I did.

And I do recognition.

All right, good afternoon.

My name is Stephanie Trant.

I'm the president of the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce.

Housing is a human right and we urge the city to continue responding with compassion and urgency to support our unhoused community we support the city council's decoration of a local emergency homelessness and the need to renew and continue this resolution.

This is the right step in the right step to acknowledge the scale of the crisis and to mobilize resources at the same time we must emphasize that solutions must be transparent and community driven.

The now withdrawn interim project at 988 Broadway was done behind closed doors without community engagement and one of the in the area that is most directly impacted.

This is unacceptable and not having any recommendation for measure W on the agenda today is concerning in just a few days we've collect thousands of signatures from resident merchants and small businesses.

The city staff cannot claim that there isn't time to engage when the public and community is ready and willing to participate so please collect funding from Measure W.

Hi I'm Johanna Widger I'm actually here to speak to everybody.

I hope you can hear me I am a volunteer and a mentor thank you for the Oakland Animal Services the only reason this ordinance is even being considered is because of extreme budget cuts.

The last budget has officially made the shelter's mission untenable.

I oppose the idea of this ordinance but I totally understand why the shelter feels it has no other options.

We are the lowest funded shelter in ratio to our city's budget in Northern California since 2020 OAS has lost 30% of its staff and 40% of its budget for food and other basic supplies while animal intake has gone up by over 40% in January due to mid-fiscal year budget cuts we are first to close to the public on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even after voters chose to increase their taxes to support essential services the budget recently adopted by the Oakland City Council makes permanent the loss of eight key staff positions at AOS this was the final wound in a death of a thousand cuts crippling the ability of OAS to take in and care for animals as they have in the recent past will result in the death of animals.

My name is Valerie Green and I live in the Laurel district I volunteered at Oakland Animal Services since 2019.

I'm here to strongly oppose point two of the proposed S5.41 ordinance which would allow the shelter to reject owner surrendered animals.

People bring in pets to OAS as a last resort last resort during eviction illness or financial crisis turning them away will lead to more animals being abandoned in parks and on streets unable to survive our city shelter must stay open admission and accessible to those in need the lowest in our community who need that help um the proposed ordinance change has actually already been implemented for cats and the results are clear more strays and more people are being turned away you can look on next door and see it all over and recanted to members of the community OAS is facing real budget and staffing issues.

We aren't saying take in all the animals but cutting off access is not the solution we're saying that this is an opportunity to analyze the system and create an effective data informed policy.

Please reject this harmful proposal hello my name is Don Pieper I've been fortunate enough to be a homeowner for over 30 years in District 1 and I've spent the last 14 years as a dedicated OAS volunteer.

I'm also a pet guardian a taxpayer and I strongly oppose item number two on ordinance S541 that would remove the requirement for OAS to accept owner guardian surrendered animals.

I understand the budget challenges in Oakland and I completely empathize with shelter staff struggling with the number of animals needing service.

It pains me to see how overwhelmed they are and the absolute struggle they are facing to care for all of the animals at OAS.

But there are over 200 volunteers who really want to help.

Still, item number two will have devastating irreversible effects on Oakland's animals and their guardians.

An impact I've already seen firsthand.

I volunteer with OAS over 30 hours a month, including the community outreach clinics.

I help vaccinate microchip cats as well as supporting residents who cannot afford to keep their animals without cis assistance.

Please don't.

Hi, my name is Alexandra Camill.

I am a resident of District One, and I'm speaking on S541.

I urge the city council to reject the proposed change from Shell to May in Section 6.04.110.

This gives OAS unilateral unchecked discretion to do whatever it wants, essentially, with regard to animals in this community.

It needs a public process to respond to the public to comments from the public that it serves, and also to consult outside experts in animal welfare organizations, and please require that the policy be circulated in writing and to be updated annually.

Discretion sounds good, but you can't have unfettered discretion like President Trump gave to Elon Musk at Doge.

Promulgating this approach will subject Oakland to needless and costly litigation.

There's already a trial court that has said that what OES plans to do under this policy is illegal and a violation of state law, and individuals working for OES may be subject to potential individual criminal law enforcement.

This may also violate the UNRWA Civil Rights Act by harming poor.

Hi, I'm Willow Leeroff, and I have been a volunteering at Oakland Animal Services for 25 years.

I started the volunteer program there.

And over the years, residents have demanded a compassionate progressive animal shelter, and we achieved that.

But now after the city's recent budget cuts, the Oakland Animal Shelter is in crisis, and the latest elimination of shelter staff is the biggest reduction we've ever seen.

And without having a full-time executive director to help us navigate it.

While the rest of the proposed ordinance changes are very positive, I urge you to remove point two of 541 for the allowance of turning away owner-surrendered pets.

We need an urgent uh coordinated strategic response to address the shelter staffer staffing crisis utilizing animal welfare experts who can help develop this sustainable response.

So we need to mandate data collection for all the members of the public and residents turned away and to find out what is happening with animal-related field service calls and outcomes.

The city needs to see how much the public is dependent on OAS and plan appropriately.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Richard Saroski.

I have worked in animal rescue for Oakland's animals for over 30 years, including time at Oakland Animal Services.

I'm here asking you not to support ordinance 5.41, specifically point number two.

This item would be bad for Oakland and specifically bad for Oaklands animals.

I asked you to keep the uh shelter and open uh shelter for all Oakland residents.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Leah Hennan.

I'm a longtime volunteer at OAS.

I respectfully ask the council to reject section two of S541.

I cede the rest of my time to Joshua Ralph.

There's no seating time on the consent calendar.

Do you have a card?

Yeah, I had a card.

No, so you are welcome to speak, but there's no conceding time on the consent calendar.

Joshua Beth, I've lived in Deep East Oakland over 20 years.

Cats being turned away by OAS are not thriving on our streets, and the vast majority do not have owners.

They are frequently hit by cars like this one who bled out in my driveway on Thanksgiving.

Sick, injured, malnourished, and mauled like this one.

This is the reality, okay?

Uh or poison like these two.

This was just the I'm sorry.

Shit.

This is just the other day, okay, in my neighborhood.

This is what I see on a regular basis.

They tell us these cats are doing well.

They are not, okay?

All white cats that are left outside get skin cancer.

Their ears rot, their noses rot, eventually their whole faces and heads rot off.

And we are the ones who have to find them.

OAS is basically telling the lowest income members of our community that we have to now care for these animals ourselves, that we have to shelter, feed, spay neuter, find homes, pay for their medical care to act as unfunded mini shelters.

This is good afternoon, Ralph Camps.

I want to talk about a corrupt process.

The corrupt process is what's in front of you today.

There was no public input on this.

The public was not given a chance before it was brought to council.

Then it gets to council, and one week ago in this room, it was decided it would go on non-consent today.

And then at rules on Thursday, all of a sudden it goes back to consent.

That's sleazy.

It is sleazy as all get up.

It is not how you should be running the city council.

And it's not fair to the animals, it's not fair to the people who came out to speak about this because they don't get a fair hearing on this.

This should go back to the committee and get reviewed again.

That's the right thing.

On top of that, you've got a gold-plated zoo on top of that hill that you keep pouring money into, and you won't take care of your animal shelter.

They get two and a half million dollars of government money every year.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ryan Hebert.

I'm here to offer comment on agenda item 5.6 on impact fees.

Um I am a resident of uh district two and of the area of East Lake that's being considered for reclassification to zone three.

I'm here to offer my strong support of that reclassification.

I think this is one small way that we can help to uh address, start to address the housing crisis, as well as a way that we can uh promote and and uh and build on the economic diversity of that community um as well as promote density, which uh leads to more walkability in the city uh and better public safety through more eyes on the street.

So uh I am in strong support of this measure.

I uh urge all of you to support it as well.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Kimberly Millington.

I'm a 33rd year litigator.

I'm not here on behalf of my employer.

Um I've been a cat volunteer at Oakland Animal Services for 10 years.

I am the former co-president of Friends of Oakland Animal Services.

I'm a former feeder of feral cats in two, thank you, Oakland communities.

Uh please do not adopt the proposed change to section 6.04.110.

It should be very clear that everyone here is in opposition of that one part of the ordinance.

We are all fine with the rest of it.

Oakland Animal Services is the only open admission shelter in Oakland.

I sat here last week and heard someone tell you that it's the only one in the Bay Area that is literally not true, but there's literally nowhere else for animals to go.

And if you think this is going to impact all the white people in this room, and people like me who live in District 4 and people who live in district one, that's not who it's going to impact.

The vast majority of the cats on the street live in all everyone else's districts, and there's no money for them.

They're going to they're already there, okay.

So let me just back up.

This policy has already been implemented by OAS in violation of the current ordinance.

I've told three directors that they don't care.

Um, cats and kittens have not been allowed into the shelter.

The people are being told put them back out on the street.

The shelter vet says, oh, they're fine out there, people are taking care of them.

That is literally not true.

Cats have, I don't know what the number is, but they have multiple litters per season, and they're just out there having cats.

We have panelukopenia breakouts every year at the shelter, and they're not being vaccinated, they're not being spayed and neutered.

Lost cats are not being returned to their owners, which is part of the legislative history and purpose of the Hayden Act of state law.

This violates a recent San Diego, it's a it's a you know a state court case, but when it goes on appeal, this is going to violate that.

Oakland's going to be sued.

I mean, I'm a litigator.

I don't want to see Oakland sued.

I believe this is an unconstitutional ordinance.

It's unconstitutionally vague.

Who's enforcing it?

Who's going to decide what animals and whose animals do not come into the shelter?

There's other alternatives.

Please do not pass that.

Hi, my name is Diane Cooper.

I live in the fourth district, and I'm here today in opposition of item number two and would like to share one experience as to why.

A little earlier this year, Fort Ferrell kittens showed up in my backyard.

I noticed they had weepy eyes that turned into cut um crusty pussy eyes that were often so crusty that they were shut and they couldn't be opened.

Um I took one of them into OAC where I was told, Oh, we're not taking kittens or cats unless they're sick.

And then they directed me to a free clinic where I received some antibiotics and some instructions on how to care for them.

Two days after that free clinic, I walked outside to check on the kittens.

One of them had a bulging bleeding eye, and two others had their eyes totally shut, and the fourth one had pussy crusty weeping eyes, but they were still open.

I grabbed them, put them into a carrier, took them to OAC, and they said, Oh, we'll take these because they're sick.

Diagnosis.

Three of those cats lost one eye.

The fourth cat might be able to keep all of both eyes.

Um, uh good evening.

Uh my name is Mary Bates, District 4 resident of Oakland, and also president of Island Cat Resources and Adoption.

Um I oppose revisions to the amendment to the animal control ordinance as proposed by the city administrator.

My key issues are that the proposed amendment must be revised to ensure that no cat is ever turned away from OAS without first being spayed and neutered.

The outdoor cat spay neuter regulations that are being proposed should be paired with resources for low-income residents.

It's unreasonable to penalize without affordable spay neuter services being offered.

Residents struggle to find accessible and affordable spay neuter for cats.

Clinics are expensive and booked, and nonprofits cannot meet the demand, forcing residents to travel far.

The proposed ordinance lets OAS refuse unfixed cats, even pregnant, contradicting efforts to manage overpopulation and burdening vulnerable residents.

In conclusion, this ordinance risks unfairly burdening residents and contradicts overpopulation control efforts.

The city must provide accessible spay neuter resources for a humane solution.

Oh hi.

Good evening.

I'm Ellen Lynch.

And I don't know if you can see this photo.

This is along with Josh, there's um I have a million photos like this because I do community cat work and have for 35 years in Oakland.

I'm a 50-year resident.

I was in district two most of the time.

Now I'm in um Mr.

Guyo's district here, and um I love our shelter.

It's not properly funded.

We are turning cats away.

I don't work at the shelter, but people are not getting help at the shelter, they're not getting the resources or not even being given advice to what to do.

Um, and we're we're struggling.

People are in the stakeholders have not been given an opportunity to speak to you.

I think if you would please put out a call to your stakeholders to your residents to your um constituents, I think you would hear a lot about what is happening in their neighborhoods with cats and dogs, and especially the I mean thousands of cats out there who are not thriving.

The veterinarian says they're thriving, they're not thriving.

We are encountering cats like this all the time.

We want to help.

Good afternoon.

My name's Marie Carney, and I am a district one resident and homeowner for 14 years.

Um I'm here to oppose S541 section two, like everyone else, and I don't have a lot to add that everyone else hasn't already said, but just want to reiterate that it is the low-income, the people without resources that aren't here today that this is really gonna affect, and the people who are doing this work on the streets of trying to help the low-income residents with their animals and have them have somewhere to go and help these animals.

So what we're really asking for is everyone here, I think is for the shelter and wants them to succeed.

And what we want is more time to go over this.

This was done without consulting other organizations, without consulting the public, without consulting the people who help these animals.

So we propose having more time to work out a better solution.

Thanks.

Hi, my name is Rachel Potosfinski, and I'm a district two resident.

I am also here to ask that you not pass um section two without amendments.

I'm more importantly asking that we support the rest of the legislation, and we also really do support Oakland Animal Services.

We are asking for a little bit more time, frankly, even if you could give us two more weeks to put that on the non-consent calendar to be able to talk about any misunderstandings.

This could get hashed out pretty quickly, because honestly, we all are on the same page.

We need to make sure that the legislation reflects that.

Um I just want to say OAS and Voas do an amazing job with the minimal resources that they have.

And one of the things I want to make sure why this legislation is so important is because Brendan Burke is someone that tried to surrender his out of control dogs to OAS and was rejected because he could not pay the owner's surrender fee, and his dogs ended up murdering somebody.

And that's why there's so many things that we could talk about more with this.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Brian Pompa, and I'm also here to speak against uh item S41.

So, as you've already heard multiple times before, our only objection is with section two, which is an adjustment to the intake policy where OAS will be allowed to reject and turn people away when they attempt to surrender their dog to us.

But obviously, that's going to be a burden on the lowest of income people.

OAS is the only open admission center in the city, which means that if we are unable to take in an animal, the people who have come to surrender them, whether it's theirs, whether it's an animal that was found on the street, they'll have nowhere else to go.

That burden is placed on them.

And I understand that this is an adjustment that's made due to budget cuts, which multiple services throughout the city have been experiencing this, where ultimately this is something that we will get through, where we've managed through these budget cuts, whether it be through volunteers, whether it be through other services, outside services, whether it's adjustments to sending people to private shelters as well.

We will find a way to work through this.

And I'm a bond measure contributor, a homeowner, and a taxpayer that lives in one of the lowest income neighborhoods, which is district seven.

So I'm going to address my comments to Ken Houston, our district council person.

For a long time, we have been dealing with issues like trees overgrown for years, uh dead animals burned on the sidewalk, mentally ill people being allowed to take over our neighborhoods by hoarding dangerous and safe, unsafe items, safety concern, feces, filled refrigerators, abandoned vehicles when my car will get a ticket, but they'll go around the banding car and give me a ticket, but don't give them a ticket.

Folks are allowed to hoard in residential areas, not allowing children to play on their own street.

They can't go to the parks already, but now they can't do it on the streets.

Yes.

So homelessness, mental illness, and drug addiction are three different things.

Homelessness does not, we don't have a whole bunch of homelessness going on in Oakland only.

We got mental illness and drug addiction.

A lot of the people that I have encountered want to be in the street.

But you can't live on my street now with tires and gas cans and feces, and for months I've been trying to get somebody to come out and look.

I've asked you, council member, to come and look, and you haven't come and look.

I need you to come and look.

Mr.

Jenkins, I want to vote no on measure A.

Again, I'm a bond measure, taxpayer, homeowner, and I cannot afford one more tax.

I cannot afford, I'll be paying more taxes than I will my mortgage.

And the Oakland zoo that I pay bond measure taxes for, I cannot afford to take my own grandchildren to that zoo.

I don't want to pay these taxes.

Everybody needs to contribute.

Not only homeowners, homeless people.

Everybody that's getting a check needs to contribute to whatever it is you think you're gonna make safe.

Because it ain't safe where I live.

So come check it out.

I'm gonna talk about Janelle Harris at Open Forum.

She's another Latanya Simmons, Mr.

Johnson that you fired.

3.4.

I'm sorry, 5.4 local emergency.

Wang, you ought to be shaming yourself.

Saying that those people who would get medical care, 150 beds, would be available at that Marriott for free.

You wouldn't have to pay anything for critically ill homeless people.

They she said it would be a danger to their community.

When we had the uh Lake Merritt Tiny Homes, the the uh apartments across the street, were all seniors, Asian seniors, and nothing never happened to them.

That's a false lie.

5.7 uh parking fines.

Oakland has been issuing parking fines to stolen vehicles.

5.9.

Address the very high uh fire hazard situation at Skyline High School.

I continue to say that.

You can't fix it.

You can't fix it.

5.10.

There's a statement that uh it is in the in that item.

You have a statement that is in the it's in the best interest of the city not to charge zero licensing fee.

You're in no position to say it's in the best interest not to charge anything.

With the deficit you're dealing with.

You're doing favoritism with 5.10, 5.11, renaming the intersection.

I'm gonna say it again.

The art shanks junior renaming on Mandela that you approved last June.

Nothing has happened for Mr.

Shanks to get the plaque and the signs, do something.

5.13, homeless housing assistance.

You have over 5,000 homeless people in this city, and you got this Chinatown situation going on, and you're gonna move them over to Hagenburger.

You're not gonna get away with that.

I'm gonna bring it up every time.

Try to lie on the homeless people that they're a danger to your community.

5.17.

Look at all the money that you have been spending at these parks, and they're being neglected.

All these parks are being neglected except for Lake Merritt and some of the other ones.

5.18.

You have a statement that the voters adopted a local transaction and use tax.

You said on the ballot it was a sales tax.

You got you confused the voters.

You're lying on that one.

5.23, City of Oakland using, oh, are you're getting you getting sued.

You suing Trump for Sanctuary City, you're suing the Homeland Security, but you will not have one discussion on your sanctuary city status.

But you're participating in a lawsuit to protect your sanctuary city status.

5.24.

Why has to be frank?

This is a perfect example of institutional racism.

Wait, how could you say that?

Because there would have been black folks moving in that hotel out of the Maria.

And you're gonna call it institutional racism.

It's institutional racism against black folks in this town.

We can't get nothing.

But you can make a word institutional racism.

70% of the unshelters are black folks.

That's institutional racism.

Where's the shelter?

With respect to urgency findings.

Public finding, the legislative body must publicly determine there's a need for immediate action.

And yet I I gave all this to you, and I highlighted it.

Y'all follow your own rules.

The need arose after the agenda was passed, posted.

So when it comes to uh rules, you have to state what the nature of the urgency is.

You don't pass this on to the council meeting.

That's not what the rules say, and the parliamentarian and Ryan Richardson, who should know who's the city attorney, should bring it to your attention.

Why does the public have to bring you what the rules say?

With regards to the security contract.

That was a debacle.

Although you were right, Mr.

Houston, when you told uh staff, y'all are this uh the final determinant of what happens on a recommendation for staff, but you don't know the rules, because the rules said and had the city attorney did his job, he further confused everything.

Because Rule 5, action by subject matter committee.

Or look at the back of that, you could have done C or D.

Propose a majority vote whose uh presence are more alternate.

You could have eliminated ally, but now everything's kicked to December.

Y'all gotta pay.

ABC.

You canceled the committee meeting that you couldn't resolve this matter Tuesday.

Thank you for your comments and through the chair.

I will move to our Zoom users, noting that I will still call the name for those who signed up for item 521, item that was withdrawn from this agenda.

Moving to our Zoom speakers, starting with George Spies, signed up for multiple items, three minutes on the clock.

George, you may unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Hello, council members.

My name is George Spees, and I'm an organizer with traffic violence rapid response for a pedestrian safety organization here in Oakland.

And we speak up today in support of items 5.33, 3.4, and 3.5.

Together, these three resolutions would provide the Department of Transportation the flexibility to address the terrible backlog of ADA compliance work in our pedestrian right-of-ways throughout Oakland, specifically sidewalks and curb cuts for people with mobility assistive devices such as walkers, wheelchairs, and the like.

This is a case of balancing two important interests and finding a way to make sure that our most vulnerable citizens can be kept safe on our streets.

Just in the past week, Oakland has seen two fatalities.

Both people being struck and killed while trying to cross the street.

The situation is heightened for those with mobility challenges who need access to usable accessible sidewalks to stay safe as they make their way through their day.

With the settlement of current with the of the current v Oakland suit, we as a city are now compelled to address this situation, and the modest requests here will save significantly in both time and money and give Oakland a fighting chance to meet our obligations to our disability community and to all people who walk and roll in Oakland.

Thank you.

Thank you, George.

Moving to our next Zoom user.

Nara.

You may unmute and begin your one-minute comment, Nara.

Hi there, yes.

Uh good afternoon.

Um, Council President, Jenkins, and rest of the city council.

I'm here to speak uh on behalf of the East Bay Animal Pack tonight uh regarding S5.45.

Through the chair to Nara, if you don't mind, we could put the virtual clock back on the Zoom so that you can see your time through the chair.

One moment.

Oh, okay.

Thank you for your patience.

Oh, no, it was almost there.

Alright, good.

Uh good afternoon again.

Um, I'm here to speak on S 5.41.

I echo the concerns that have been raised by uh other folks in the room here today.

Um I would like to ask for um at least amendments on this, uh, on recommendation number two, which is to take data on any animal that's turned away, including their health condition, their age, the address of where the animal lived or was found.

Uh, number two, checking the span neuter status of any rejected animal that may go back onto the street, um, and uh getting getting span neuter resources to them if they are not fixed.

Three, continuing to take the owner surrendered animals that are verifiably from Oakland because no other shelter will take them, and Oakland is required by state law to have an open intake shelter.

And number four, to work with the major transfer partners to develop a safety net for animals that are turned away.

Um this is incredibly important.

I think this has been rushed.

Thank you, Nara, for your comments.

Moving to our next Zoom user, Prescott Chair, signed up for two items.

You have two minutes.

Thank you.

My name is Marcus Johnson.

Speaking on items 513, Oakland has already received funding from half rounds one through five, yet unsheltered homelessness still rose nine percent last year.

Before approving another round, I urge you to strengthen the MOU by requiring a public dashboard that showed by provider and program dollars spent, people serve, and permanent housing exits.

Today, neither the community nor the council can see which contracts are delivering results, enforced performance benchmarks, titles, future allocation all future allocations to clear outcomes and phase out contracts that miss the target for at least two consecutive reporting periods.

These additions won't delay the August 29th deadline.

So I urge you to move forward with those.

Item 529, the report outlines important long-term steps, but some key issues, need more urgency and more transparency.

Relying on a 40 million dollar parcel tax in 2026 is a risky strategy without a backup plan.

And while the roadmap acknowledges voter mandated service levels, it still suspends funding for basic services like library parks and fire.

Economic development reforms are delayed until 2026.

We need business growing now.

Not two years from now.

We need faster action, real metrics, and transparent engagement with labor and the public.

This roadmap is going to work.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Jack Levin, you sign up for one item on the consent calendar.

You may unmute and begin your comments, Jeff.

Thank you, Jeff Levin.

Speaking on behalf of East Bay Housing Organizations on item 5.6.

As leaders of the original campaign to establish the impact fee program 10 years ago, we are deeply disappointed that you're approving these changes today.

This action reduces future revenue by exempting all of East Oakland for three years and permanently exempting small properties and the first four units of all multifamily projects.

Delays the remaining revenue by deferring all payments until the certificate of occupancy and fails to deal with the long-standing issue of finding a way to forward commit fees assessed but not yet received for projects that have received building permits and are under construction.

This is particularly distressing since you've already diverted to the general purpose fund, 50% of the affordable housing boomerang funds.

We urge you to direct staff to include in the annual impact fee reports a determination whether these exemptions have resulted in increasing housing production and at what affordability level, and to identify how much revenue has been deferred and how much would have been generated.

Thank you, Jeff, for your comments.

Moving to our next user, EBRH, I believe it is Derek Barnes.

Please state your name for the record.

EBRHA.

Hi, Madam Clerk, it's Derek Barnes.

I should have several items.

Yes, we have your three minutes.

Please continue.

Great.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, council members and uh city staff.

Derek Barnes with the State Rental Housing Association, representing about 1,500 housing providers who own and operate about 60,000 rentals and provide homes to about 140,000 East Bay residents.

And for the record, um, with about 105,000 rental units in the city, uh, this injects almost three billion dollars to Oakland's business economy.

First, I want to express a serious concern that only one council member has followed up with questions regarding my June 30th email sharing some preliminary and urgent findings from our 2025 mid-year housing survey.

Findings that show the city on the verge of intractable housing uh destabilization.

As my report stated, nearly one in two small housing providers in Oakland now say that they plan to exit the market within 24 months.

This isn't abstract, it's happening right now.

About 26% have already removed rental units.

Some of them in some of them are your constituents providing deeply affordable homes.

Over 40 percent have to defer repairs, unable to keep up with rising taxes, RAP fee increases, operating costs, and inconsistent communication and notification from the city.

Let's be honest, you can't address homelessness while ignoring the attrition of those who house people.

There's a direct through line between housing policy decisions made in this chamber and people who end up unhoused on our streets.

You're ready to revise impact fee rules that will again affect small owners, yet there's been zero outreach or engagement with rental housing with the rental housing community on how these fees hit different ownership classes.

Many of operators are the last stewards of deeply affordable and unsubsidized homes in black neighborhoods.

You're also aligning with the Alameda County to um manage HATH Funds.

Yeah, now not most of the money that is currently uh being supported in the program don't do anything to keep people housed.

Where it's aligned item I item two to stabilizing long-term owner operators maintaining uh their older properties, many of whom are women, black and Asian elders uh who are faced with being forced out of the uh the housing uh business?

We need balance, we need engagement, we need ethical policy shifts that sees housing providers as partners, not problems, uh for vacant from vacancy reduction incentives to legacy owner preservation programs.

There's a huge opportunity to turn these disturbing trends around.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you for your comments.

Noting that I called the following speakers, Haley Deja Genova, NM Scott Smith, Matthew Labar, and Josh Beth.

If you still wish to speak, please approach the podium or please raise your hand in the Zoom app.

The following signed up for item 521, which was withdrawn from this agenda.

I will call those names before we go to our next speaker.

If you still wish to speak regarding this item that was withdrawn, please approach the podium, or please raise your hand in the Zoom app.

Myra Alvarado, Luz Hernandez, D.

Johnson, Mike Patterson, Jessica, Tavar, Julian Lake, Jake Fleck, Jewel Sanchez, Claire Green, Karina Lopez, Dave Shukla, Les Moranos, Moronis, sorry, Colin Cook Miller, Samantha Wise, Joanna Cruz, Janai Stark, Scott Brown, Jay, Salazar, Salazar, sorry, Amani William, Carrie Sims, Sarah Yoel, Marcelina, Gia Shing O Young, Michael Patterson, Priya Amin, Celine Jones, Mayra Alvarado, Nate Adams, Sean Greenfield, Alexander, Batsalingo, Lena, sorry if I mispronounce your name, Megan Phillips, Brett, Bad Bad Cell or Ballas, Marie Carnes, Oscar Lopez, Naya Tiz Tisdell, Daniel Robello, Emily Ross, Emmy Yoko Young, Zoe Jonik, Igor, Egar, Trey Tragub, sorry for pronounce your name, and Jason Zoo.

Thank you.

And please state your name for the record.

A very pleasant good evening.

My name is Reverend Tania Scott Smith.

I am the chair of the CEO of Oakland Headstar Parent Policy Council, and I am as always in support of anything that funds and supports Head Start.

And um, but I also want to caution because of our partnership.

What it was should be a partnership with First Five, but is not, and not because of our staff.

If we have an accountability officer, that person should be held accountable, and also for an organization that says it promotes equity and is committed to being an equity-centered anti-racist and anti-class organization, intentionally prioritizing investments in communities impacted by systemic racism and disinvestment.

I would like to see that exhibited in its leadership.

I would like to see that in our community being respected by the leadership of that organization.

And I'm just sick and tired of people who don't look like us trying to tell us what to do.

Please approach the podium.

Order in the chamber, order in the chamber.

Good afternoon, Council members.

Should I score ahead and start?

Okay, thank you.

Um, I'm I'm a leader.

My name is Les Morones.

I'm a leader with Communities for a Better Environment.

I'm very proud to be here to represent our East Oakland families.

We really want this for you to please say yes and pass.

I know that 5.21 has been moved, um, moved out, but I'm still allowed to make the comment, right?

Please um please pass it, support it, support Senate Bill 332 because we really really need a break with from PGE.

We need to be able to have a choice to have a nonprofit um utility um choice for clean and affordable energy, especially after we've seen that PGE has done within the within 2021.

The rates have gone up of 54 percent, only in 2024, it's 13% and six times our our electrical and gas rates were raised um up.

So we have that increase, and that's a huge thinking about us.

We're still not back, you know, uh surviving, we're surviving after COVID, and truly to our inner to our community members having this.

Good evening, my name is Myra Alvarado.

I am a second grade teacher in District 2, a district 7 East Oakland resident, an elected member of the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee speaking today on behalf of Alemania County Democratic Party in strong support of SB 332.

Thank you, Councilmember Fife, for bringing this resolution forward.

This fight is personal.

As a daughter of working class immigrants, I remember how hard it was to pay utility bills under PGE.

Decades later, it's only gotten worse.

PGE continues to raise right raise rates and pass wildfire costs onto customers.

And in my classroom, I see the impact.

Families stress about bills, kids distracted about what's going on at home with their bills.

Disconnection rates are the highest in Black Latina and disabled communities.

Our communities deserve research into something that's different, and that's what the Senate bill calls for.

We need a utility system rooted in justice, not profit.

Support SB 332 and put people over profits.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, council members.

Um, I'm speaking in support of item 5.21.

Uh, Council Member Jenkins, you wanted some more information about this item.

So I'm here to give it to you.

Uh, I'm an electrical engineer, licensed engineer working in the state of California.

If you can state your name, sorry.

Scott Brown, yes.

And I want to speak as an engineer about PGE's record on safety starting in 2010 when PGE blew up a neighborhood in San Bruno, they leveled 38 homes, killed eight people because they spent 42 years defying the 1968 Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act.

As a result, they entered a five-year criminal probation while on that probation.

They started 2,000 fires.

We all remember the 2017 fires, they killed 44 people.

Oakland was covered in smoke for a month.

The next year they killed 84.

They pled guilty to 84 counts of manslaughter.

And this was all while on probation in 2022, probation expired.

The judge said we've tried to rehabilitate them as the judge over overseeing probation.

I must acknowledge failure.

PGE will emerge from probation as a continuing menace to California.

We need a solution.

City Council.

Good evening, City Council members.

My name is Zoe Johnnik.

I'm a lifelong Oaklander, a third generation Oaklander, and I'm also an organizer with the 50 Bay Area Climate Justice Group that has uh represents hundreds of volunteers across the Bay Area.

Um, I'm here in support of what was previously 5.21.

Um, because we believe that we need a change, and I'm honestly a little bit shocked at the amount of political pressure that we are seeing PGE put on the city council members here.

Um, and I think that it is disgusting that they could be using our money, our ratepayer money to politically pressure our local governments that want to support the residents who are drowning under the highest rates in the nation.

There must be a better way, and we must be able to democratically push for another way, and that is all this is doing is saying that we need a feasibility study to see what is the best way that serves ratepayers and serves our safety and affordability, and that is not what is currently happening.

Thank you.

Hello, council members.

My name is Jessica Guadalupe Tovar.

I'm the executive director of the local clean energy alliance, and my organization focuses on advancing uh democracy in clean energy.

And we do a lot of work to create alternatives to PGE and the corporate model that we know is actually hurting our communities, literally leaving them in the dark and burning up communities of elders.

Um and they have a wrap sheet, and I always refer to them as a serial killer in California because if you look at it, that wrap sheet also includes a long legacy of environmental injustice.

We're tired of this model.

We need something that works for our communities.

We're here today to say that we need your support in advancing uh SB 332, Aisha Wahab's bill, because we do need an alternative, and Golden State Energy is a step in the right direction that would represent the people of California.

Thank you very much.

Clean power to the people.

Good evening, City Council.

My name is Salim Jones.

I'm here with Youth Versus Apocalypse.

I'm here in support of bill number five two one.

You are about to hear a long list of people say the issues that PGE has caused them.

And I would like to reiterate what Councilmember Fife said.

This bill only creates a feasibility study.

After hearing what everything that these people have been through, you should a hundred percent want to give them at the very least a chance.

Thank you.

That's all this is a chance.

Hello, my name is Claire Green.

I'm an educator in OUSD, a resident of District 7.

Having grown up in Hayward and Oakland, I've watched my friends, family, and now students be increasingly priced out of their neighborhoods we grew up in.

PGE and their price gouging practices are a huge factor in this process.

My students' families regularly have to choose between keeping the lights on and paying for groceries.

In fact, one in five households served by the state's largest investor-owned utilities are now in debt.

A study by the UCLA Leskin Center for Innovation analyzed PGE data from the second quarter of 2020 and found that certain zip codes in Oakland with the highest percentages of black and Latino residents have some of the highest percentages of household utility debt.

Since 2020, that study was conducted.

The total utility debt for PGE customers has nearly tripled from 284 million in 2020 to 675 million today.

My 15-year-old students are desperate to find jobs not to save for college but to help their families from being evicted.

All while PGE shareholders are raking in record profits.

Please put your constituents above corporations and support the resolution that would provide.

I'm from District 2.

I'm a rising junior and a youth leader with frontline catalysts.

My experience with PGE hasn't been great at all, as they have created a problem for my family and I.

My family cannot afford to keep up with the bills as they have only kept rising.

This isn't just happening with my family, as many others are experiencing similar things throughout my community.

A solution that could help solve this problem would be SB 332.

This bill will look into solutions, not for profit utility companies.

Thank you.

Hello, good afternoon.

My name is Karina Lopez.

I'm a community organizer with frontline catalysts where I have the honor of working alongside young people throughout Oakland fighting for climate justice.

Today I'm here to urge you to support SB332.

Or communities are hurting.

PGE continues to put profit over people.

They've shown time and time again that they're willing to gamble with their lives or homes and our future to protect profit, their profit of their shareholders.

I want to remind you, it's not their responsibility to look out for us, it's yours.

And today we're urging you to support a feasibility study.

We're not trying to get rid of, we're not trying to, you know, push PGE out of our community.

We're trying to look into solutions.

Alright, because we know this system's broken, a system that is fueled by PGE, that is run by PGE, and so far, they have not done justice to our communities.

We know that that systems is broken, our energy systems are broken.

We are paying too much, and we need a solution.

And that's all we're asking of you today is to help us look into solutions.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Naya.

I'm an organizer in East Oakland with Communities for a Better Environment.

And I'm a PGE ratepayer.

When I was in college in 2018, the campfire destroyed our communities.

I remember the sky was orange, and so many of us got sick.

Many folks with no protective masks, no resources, no shelter.

PGE whose neglected transmission lines caused the deadliest wildfire in California's history.

85 people were killed, mothers, fathers, siblings, beloved friends gone because of a catastrophe that could have been prevented.

PGE made 2.5 billion dollars in 2024, increasing rates six times, and attempting to raise it again this year.

All this money for shareholders and CEOs, but our communities are still suffering.

And this is unacceptable.

We are asking for something different to hold PGE accountable to reimagine what our utility system could look like.

Support Senate Bill 332 so we can begin a feasibility study to work towards building.

Hello.

I would just want to talk more about my experience with PGE.

So my background is that I recently graduated, UC Davis in 2023, and I took political science.

However, throughout my one year and a half, I haven't been employed, and I'm happy that I have a family that was able to take with me to be in their home without being paid.

However, during college, especially as I'm starting to work during that time, I have struggled with PG, P G and E bills, and with lack of support in the university.

I struggled, and especially throughout my years, seeing my mom and my father's struggling to pay the bills as every year it increases around 40 or 45 dollars.

As me unemployed and my father have passed away during COVID.

I'm sorry, I'm gonna cry.

I see in my family's struggle, and I really wish that we could my name is Jules Sanchez, and I live in Oakland District 2, and I'm in support of 521.

Oakland has a history of standing up for its people when corporations put profit before public good.

And we've seen this in the past from passing wildfire mitigation measures and investing in community-driven energy projects.

But these instances are just few examples of Oakland has um showed up to lead, but these are band-aid solutions when PGE continues to fail us.

And the danger goes beyond just paying bills.

PGE equipment has caused over 1,500 fires, including the campfire.

Um, and during that time, I was a student at Chico State.

Um I remember everything from black skies falling ash to students calling out how many seats they had in order for us to evacuate.

Professors and my friends had lost their homes, and I helped organize food and shelter in crowded churches for displaced families.

And now in Oakland, it's facing its own wildfire risk, rolling blackouts, and growing energy insecurity, and we deserve better.

We need a not-for-profit utility, and I urge you to pass item 521 and support Senate Bill 332 to study what could what a public utility for Oakland.

Hello, my name is Priya Amin.

I'm a I'm an Oakland resident and a member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

I'm very disappointed to see that measure that item 5.21 was removed from the agenda today.

Oakland City Council should not answer to the billionaire shareholders of PGE.

It should answer to the residents of Oakland.

And what the residents of Oakland need is this visibility, this feasibility study.

We're really not asking for much, and the dozens of people here to give comment are testament to that.

This feasibility study will prove once and for all what everyone here already knows, it's that PGE is not the best option for us.

It is time for us to transition to a publicly owned utility model, just like the people of Alameda and Sacramento have who pay about half what we do in electricity.

I work as a process engineer, and after layoffs in the climate technology, despite the fact that I have a master's in chemical engineering for a year and a half I've been living off of unemployment, SNAP, Medicaid, and savings.

I shouldn't have to worry about my PGE bill tripling in that time.

It is never less than $50, despite the fact that I live in a studio apartment downtown and sometimes can be as much as $100.

Please reconsider.

Hello, my name is Megan Phillips.

I'm a resident of District One.

And I would like to thank first Councilmember Fife for bringing forward this resolution and standing up for the people today.

As a ratepayer, I have seen six rate hikes in the last year alone, as has everyone else in this room who is under PGE.

And I see this money going to PGE shareholders, not to improving our lives or improving our service.

Explore what this new reality could look like and how it would improve all of our lives.

We need to put people and the planet above profit.

Please support the resolution, support item 521 and support SB 332.

Good evening.

My name is Alex Batolino, and I'm an Oakland resident from District 1.

I'm speaking in support of item 521, and I'd like to thank Council Member Fife for bringing this resolution forward.

In 2019, the state passed assembly bill 1054, which allowed PGE to place wildfire mitigation costs onto ratepayers.

Since that time, energy rates have increased by over 50%.

Personally, I received an outrageous $431 energy bill for a single month for a small household of two.

At the same time, that costs for basic services is squeezing Oaklanders, PGE is generating record profits.

This grave injustice is hurting our city, and it must be corrected.

If we had a not for profit utility, the money that would otherwise go to a tiny group of wealthy shareholders would be used to provide safe and reliable infrastructure and deliver energy at an affordable rate.

We urge you to make known your support for SB 332 and studying the feasibility of a not-for-profit energy utility to make clean affordable energy available to all city and state residents.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Daniel Robello.

I'm a resident of District 3, and I'm speaking in favor of uh item 5.21.

Thank you to my councilmember Carol Fife for bringing this resolution forward.

Councilmember Fife understands the outrageous harms of PGE's greed and criminal negligence.

She understands the devastating impacts of PGE caused wildfires, utility shutoffs, skyrocketing electricity rates on low-income people of color.

She understands that no one should have to choose between paying their utility bills or putting food on the table.

She understands that housing is a human right, and that that right includes being able to turn on the lights.

She understands the heavy burden on PH uh of PGE's exorbitant rates on cash-drapped households in our district, like mine and my neighbors.

In the last two years, my rates from July 23 to July 2025 have gone up by 50%.

How many communities must PG and E burn to the ground before we are allowed to even study alternatives?

We are just one wrong wind away from being smoked out again and again.

And as always, disabled and unhoused people are affected most.

I urge you to support the.

Hi, my name is Jay.

Um I'm here to support Is V five three three two.

Sorry.

Uh I'm here with Disability Justice Culture Club.

Uh, here to to say that we shouldn't.

The community should not be choosing whether to have energy or to it.

I never do this.

Um, whether to whether they can live after a shutoff because they're it is not available to them.

PG and E should not be able to kill so many folks in our community.

Me, myself, I have been without electricity for four years now, and have and I am lucky enough that I live next to my mother, that in that my brother is a contractor, and that he has uh put my house into my mom's electricity, but that means that she is paying over a thousand dollars a month in and now we have to pay for my name is Amiyoko Young.

I'm with Reclaim Our Power and a resident of District Six.

I'm here in support of item 521, and just really want to thank Councilmember Fife for hearing Oaklanders' cries for a new utility.

East Bay Community Energy, formerly, or now Ava Energy data from 2012 to 2019 indicated that my zip code 94605 experienced disconnection rates at 14%.

Councilmember Jenkins, 14%.

This was just one of 11 zip codes in Oakland that experienced disconnections at over a 10% rate.

This was also before the endless rate hikes that we've experienced.

We experienced six just last year, and so many have talked about the harms.

California has the highest utility rates in the continental United States.

That and we know that public utilities are half that rate in California.

We don't need to accept this future, and we call on the city of Oakland to support SB 332 and join other jurisdictions.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council President Jenkins, Council members.

My name is Colin Cookmiller.

I live in District 1, and I'm here representing Reclaim Our Power in support of agenda item 521.

We are a grassroots Oakland-based coalition with members here in Oakland and statewide.

We're building the movement for a just transition from for-profit investor-owned utilities to a not-for-profit people's utility for local, clean, affordable, sustainable, reliable energy for all.

We believe no one should have to pay a choose between paying their utility bills and paying for groceries or rent.

We believe that clean affordable energy should be a human right.

For authoring this resolution, recognizing the urgent need to reimagine California's energy system, one that has repeatedly failed its residents.

Thank you also, Councilmember Wong for voting to keep the resolution on the consent calendar.

From catastrophic wildfires to unaffordable bills and widespread shutoffs, while PG and E shareholders rake in ref record profits, 2.5 billion dollars alone.

Good afternoon, current administrators of the occupying forces of unceded Ohlone Lijan territory.

We all know that politics is rigged if we look at our world, if we look at what has happened in our city traditionally since at least the 42 years that I've been here.

Do they chair your name, please?

My name is Amani.

This isn't just about PGE, as I listen to all these other things.

Who owns PGE?

Who owns the zoo?

Who benefits from custom public housing, public transport, animal support services, and all public services while increasing the entire cost of living?

Who has billions of dollars, 47 billionaires in a 20-mile radius from here.

The same dudes on behalf that y'all defend potentially by running this council.

This shit is rigged.

So we need unprecedented action towards what we've known we've needed the whole time.

Your people's many of your ancestors were stolen and brought here.

You're gonna defend the same cats who did that?

That's where we stand.

Show us something, y'all.

Good afternoon.

President of the Council Jenkins and uh council members.

My name is Dave Shukla.

I was a climate fellow for this city last year, and I still reside in Carroll Pipes district.

I'd like to thank the councilwoman for uh a pretty courageous stand, um, to understand and to study and identify uh what the options for this city and for the state are.

And I'd just like to close by saying on the record that the idea, the idea that PGE would move its headquarters after spending a billion dollars to centralize operations where they have the ability to create the most profit, it's laughable.

And it's something you should extract something politically for.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Marcina.

I'm in front of Calice leader.

I am here to ask you to vote for the resolution in support of SB32.

I am from District 5.

PGE has harmed my community with their high price.

Please choose the people make it easier for families like mine.

Vote for SB32.

My name is Sean Greenfield.

Um, if you don't want to support a feasibility study, it should be embarrassing.

Because let's think about this.

PGE is a murderer.

They are murderers, okay.

If you don't want to potentially get rid of PGE, or think of ways that could get rid of them, you are enabling crime.

You are aiding and abetting criminals who not only kill people but people put people away in like to homelessness, straight up.

They make them starve, they make them die from the fact that they can't even get their medical supplies.

That the disabled people literally don't have a choice in these matters.

And you would sit here and say, that's okay.

We shouldn't even think about a feasibility study, not to mention the fact that the money that these nonprofits that you're so afraid of not getting money for, that's our money.

PG and E gets it from us.

What's the point of that?

Thank you for your comments.

Good evening, Council President Jenkins, Council members.

My name is Michael Patterson.

Um, first of all, I'd like to say I agree with a lot of what you said, Councilmember Fife.

But after hearing everybody, I know this is not going to be popular, and I'm not here to support PGE.

I'm here to support the workers that could be impacted if you remove PGE with an IOU and Fester Home Utility.

Those people have families too that they need to take care of, also.

You should I suggest that you look at what happened in Long Island, New York, where they had an IOU take over the uh the utility, they had to be bailed out twice by the state of New York because of high debt and mismanagement.

I know there can be alternative solutions, and I suggest that you look at all of those before making any decision.

I understand that a feasibility study is just that, a study.

I understand that, and nobody's talking about taking over or anything like that.

I do get that, but there are consequences, and I suggest that we look at my bill is high too.

Thank you.

Moving to Zoom users, echo Cartagena.

You may unmute yourself and begin your one-minute comments.

Echo Cartagena, I'm a veterinarian of 15 years experience.

Um, in support of item S 5.41.

Um, I appreciate that the community members are voicing their concerns.

What is striking to me is that the goals of these members and the goals of OAS are aligned.

Common mission here is to improve positive outcomes for the animals.

Community comments in particular about the owner surrendered cats, um, have focused on the concern that managed intake leads to animal abandonment.

I'm not surprised at all at this initial uh concern.

It's a very, very common misconception, which has thankfully been demonstrated to not be the case.

Um Oakland would not be a test pilot for these types of policies.

They will be following a well-established research policies, imperative for implementing best practices.

These policies are already adopted by neighboring shelters as well as successful shelters across the country, and supported by the ASBCA, UC Davis Shelter Vet program, National Animal Care and Control Association and Best Friends Animal Society.

Uh, the wording of the municipal code does not convey what OS OES is trying to do.

Thank you.

Moving to Matthew Labar.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Matthew.

My name is Matthew LeBar.

I'm an Oakland resident.

I first adopted from OAS in 2001 and most recently in 2023.

Number two of S5.41 will increase the number of animals being born every single day, the number of potentially dangerous dogs and cats up the street.

Most of the burden will fall on the poor communities of Oakland, which tend to be communities of color, thereby creating a disparate impact in violation of California under a Civil Rights Act.

We already have a housing crisis which is leading to the surrendered animals.

These people have nowhere to turn but OAS.

Now you are taking that away from them.

As it says in the report, OAS's mission is to be the safety net for the neediest animals.

This proposal is not consistent with OAS's mission.

There's zero evidence in the record that this proposed change will save OAS money or make OAS better able to function, which means this council does not have the evidence to make the substantial finding it needs to approve this.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Noting there were no more hands raised and only people approaching the podium.

I've called on names, chair.

That was our last speaker.

So thank you so much for everybody that's coming.

You may unmute yourself and begin your one-minute comment through the chair.

Hello?

We can hear you.

Sorry about that.

Yes, hi.

Uh my name's Jason Zoe and uh I'm resident of District One.

Uh I wanted to comment on item 5.21 and echo um all that others have already said in support of passing this item.

And I also wanted to just share a quick antidote from a particular community member who I was talking to recently while helping to organize support for this in the community.

Uh he told me that he's been seeing these issues with PGE coming for years, which is why he's been building an off-grid setup and telling everyone else he knows to do so.

And I just wanted to think about what he's saying.

He's seen this coming for years, and he decided it was more worthwhile to invest his money in his own panels and everything.

Rather than to keep paying PGE.

And I just wanted, you know, note that because I feel like even when the people who can afford the current rates don't want to deal with PGE, something's very wrong.

And as many people have mentioned.

Thank you, Chair.

That was our last speaker.

Thank you so much, everybody who's come to publicly comment on a wealth of items on the consent calendar.

It's good to see people coming out and voicing their opinion in the public square.

Um I want to take chair privilege to address a few things.

Um consent calendar versus non-consent.

I understand that Council Member Houston has been voting no purposely on the items and sending items to non-consent so that he could have more time to speak on items he's being rushed in committee.

And so with that, he's voting no purposely just so that he will have more time in the full council, and it's important that we let our council members speak in committees.

That is where the work gets done.

So I just want to encourage all council members to let people speak in committee.

Um to Mr.

Hazard, he is completely right about government code section five four nine five four point two, but he is wrong of the application of the law, the application of the law, it's not the brown act, it's the Sun Check Act that we are following.

Um staff, have some questions about the animal shelter.

Is Joe Debris here?

Okay.

Hi, Mr.

DeBries.

Um, there's been a number of public comments surrounding an item on your item specifically around the May versus Shao when it comes to cats.

Have you had an opportunity to meet with this relevant stakeholders?

We thank you, Chair.

We did uh meet, we we put out the the draft ordinance, we met with our volunteers, we met with staff, we we put it out to stakeholders multiple times, and we'll continue to meet with them as we develop the administrative guidelines to actually implement this successfully.

Order in the chambers, please.

Is there an urgency to this item being passed?

There is.

Right now, much of what the public speaker said is true.

We we do lack the staff we need to meet our state and our local mandates.

We do work hard.

We're seeing uh approximately 200 hours of overtime clocked every month by our animal care attendants.

Uh we have an animal control officer that hasn't had a day off in two and a half weeks because they're working overtime to come in and clean cages.

Um it's it's really dire.

And frankly, we're the only shelter in the Bay Area that doesn't have a managed intake policy that that allows people to just show up from anywhere with any animal at any time by by implementing some reasonable guidelines that meet the best practices that Contra Costa, Hayward, San Francisco, San Jose, Berkeley, every other uh shelter, by waiting, we're simply making it harder for us to adjust.

Um, we need this ordinance uh to to meet best practices and to come up with a better way to manage this this process.

So is it my understanding this is best practices for the larger surrounding cities in the area?

It's actually best practices map.

Order in the chambers, please.

So I'm looking at uh a document from the National Animal Care and Control Association, and basically um it is best practices nationally to create uh guidelines for appointment-based pet intake into shelters, and they're I'll I'll read right from it the numerous harms and risks associated with unscheduled intake.

We recommend all animal shelters replace this practice with an appointment-based system that includes individual assessment and a case management approach for all non-emergency requests, and that includes owner surrender.

We want to provide the care to the animals that are in our shelter, and we want to try to avoid owners having to surrender their animal.

And we do that through case management.

We do that through providing them services like spay neuter or vaccination.

We don't do that by just accepting an animal in the shelter and watch it deteriorate while we try to find it a new home.

We also would like to implement a home to home uh um uh adoption system uh that used to exist that we'd like to bring back so that if you have an animal and you can't um you can't care for it after we've done some case management, we can find it a home without it coming to the shelter.

We can't do that with the current ordinance.

Thank you.

Um I'm gonna go council member Ramadan Chandran, Council Member Brown, Councilmember Wong, Councilmember Fife, then Council Member Houston, then Council Member Gaio.

I'll remind you of the order.

Thank you so much.

Um, I want to register my opposition to 5.41.

Thank you.

And just thank you.

One of the biggest, we're obviously in a budget crisis, and one of the biggest reasons why we're able to provide some services when it comes to animals is because of the power of volunteers.

So I'm so grateful for every single person that puts in their personal time to try to take care of Oakland animals, and I appreciate everyone that's here today or is called or emailed about this issue.

And I I think this is something that should wait a little longer.

I missed the window today on.

Thank you.

I missed the window today where it was a possibility to discuss, um, pulling this off today, but I really urge us to consider waiting for a little more time.

And then there's a second reading, so I know there's opportunities still to amend this, but let's unpack one of the big reasons why owners surrender animals.

Housing.

When it's a major barrier having pets to being able to access shelter, it's a major barrier to access many kinds of tenant properties.

I've lived in buildings that don't accept pets and animals and have been in situations where people have to make really difficult choices, and it's something that Oakland deserves to provide our residents this service.

I know that the shell, our Oakland Animal Services is strapped for our budget and strapped for a lot of things, and I know that volunteers are also ready to step up and support for where we have these major gaps.

We're not the only city with the budget crisis, and but we cannot be a city that rejects animals because owners may not have a choice but to surrender them.

So I really hope, Deputy Administrator DeVries, that you would be willing to meet with these groups here to figure out a solution.

I'm registering a no vote today, not on the whole ordinance, but just on the basis of this.

And I wish that there was not, I hope there's an opportunity for further amendments when this is brought back to committee and council.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Council Member.

Councilmember Brown.

Excellent.

Um, well, you know, thank you so much to everyone who showed up to speak on on this item.

Um, I I don't serve on the life enrichment committee, but I um was listening during that meeting and um heard all of the feedbacks, feedback, um, and I just wanted to ask a few clarifying questions.

Um, I think I heard a public comment or mention about the policy actually needing to be updated in writing, and that there is a little bit more, it's it's a little bit more fluid around like um, you know, what the volunteers or those who work there at the shelters will do as it relates to this, you know, potential policy change.

Um, and then um I believe um during that meeting, I also heard um the statement being made that um changes to this ordinance is actually putting us in line with other local jurisdictions, and I guess I was curious um who the who you know which jurisdictions those are.

Everyone, I'm so sorry.

Everyone, so Berkeley, I mean I heard it said that Hayward and San Francisco don't have this problem.

I read their ordinance yesterday, it's silent on this.

I've read the San Jose ordinance, San Jose, San Francisco Hayward, you're required to make an appointment, and they they have the discretion to decide whether or not they're gonna take the animal because they want to try to see if they can keep the animal with the home.

Um I talked to the Contra Costa County director who's our former assistant or former assistant director, and he said, please do this.

He had hoped that we could have gotten it done while he was here.

Uh we're the only jurisdiction that does this.

And frankly, our ordinance says we have to take any animal from anywhere, and it's and it's overwhelmingly the cat situation that's the problem is not about dogs.

Um, it really is just not.

Um, and when you look at our data for how many cats we spayed and neutered last year, um, and and when you look at the the data for how many owners surrender cats are brought in by trappers.

I mean, I'll just be honest.

We've had people that have spoken against this ordinance that brought last year 47 cats into the shelter as owner as owner surrender.

Excuse me.

Order in the chamber, please.

So I just I just want to make it clear that a lot of what everyone has said who's speaking, who's concerned about this is true.

We don't have enough resources.

We have seen our intake go up.

But what we're doing to manage that is is our CAN.

And what we're doing today is modernizing it.

That's why I'm the third or fourth director to work on this ordinance.

I'm just the one who's bringing it across the finish line.

Thank you, Councilmember Wong.

Then Councilmember Fife.

Thanks, Councilmember Jenkins, or Council President.

So first of all, I just want to know.

So I'd like to thank first of all the volunteers who commit so many of their tireless hours to the shelter, as well as our shelter staff that are doing a lot with limited resources.

One of the things that I just uh wanted to discuss with you, we've had some conversations, uh Joe, and uh just if you're willing to make some commitments first, meeting with stakeholders uh before our the final adoption of this ordinance.

Um I do think that we need to have more transparency around um these administrative guidelines for what type of animal uh the shelter will or will not accept.

Um I think there's actually not that much of a gap between what we're hearing from the uh from the public as well as uh some of what you told me, but I do think that we need some guardrails just to ensure that um some of the situations that have been discussed with me from the animal advocacy community will not happen.

And then finally, um, if you can commit to reporting back on data on owner surrenders, especially um after the ordinance is adopted at the three months and six months period.

Yeah, so through the chair, that that's exactly what I'm I'm committed to do.

Um, with your approval tonight, we know and we're signaled that we can begin to develop the administrative guidelines so that when you when you vote on this in September, we can immediately implement them.

I'll be happy to share those guidelines in that packet and so that you all have them, and I will meet with those stakeholders between now and then so that they have input to those guidelines.

We may not completely agree, and they may be people still upset.

Um, but um I have an open-door policy, I'm more than happy to do that.

And I do think it's prudent to do a three-month and a six-month report back on how it's on how it's happening.

One of the things I'm learning is you know, when it comes to data, if you show up and you and we don't take your animal, it doesn't go into pet point, which is like the management system.

So we're gonna have to create a separate tracking system, and I've already talked to the staff about that.

Great.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fife and Council Member Houston and Council Member Guy.

Yes, uh, thank you, Chair Jenkins.

I I want to be clear that the some of the things that were just articulated, I apologize through the chair to Councilmember Wong.

I didn't hear everything that you said, but it sounded like part of it was a reiteration of what you asked for in the life enrichment committee, and I committed to uh the the public speakers at that time to be in dialogue with you all to make sure that your voices are heard with the city administrator's office.

We have a deputy city administrator that's taken on a lot of the work at OAS because our staff are literally burning out, literally burning out, and so we are and in animal services.

We are at risk of not having a department at all because people are leaving, leaving the department.

So what I just talked to Nara Delbaca about was um working with our our labor unions, working with the city administration to figure out how volunteers can be more of an asset to support in this particular time.

And I I again am committing my services and my office to work with you, Deputy City Administrator DeVries, and the community to figure out how we can make sure that everyone is heard on this topic because there's a lot of energy around this, but also that we're doing what's in the best interest of the city of Oakland uh when it comes to ensuring that our staff stay on board, don't leave the work, and can continue to do the jobs that they're doing because it's a lot, it's a lot for them right now.

Um we heard and I said that 2025 is gonna be the year of just being really transparent and direct, and I take issue with the fact that we just passed a budget and we just heard that this is death by a thousand cuts when you freeze these positions and understand we we have to do things, but to then turn back around and say that this is like not the best thing to do when we cut the budget for the people doing this work is hypocritical, period.

So let's be honest about what we're doing and stand on business in the votes that we take so that we can be honest with the public.

That's what I'm saying.

Thank you, council member.

Council member Guyle, then Councilmember Houston.

Not all at once.

You don't want to, you're you're next.

Okay.

You're upset.

Okay.

Um I just look first for the members of the public.

Uh certainly, you know, that uh the animal shelters in my district have known it for many many years.

And I want to recognize the people that are here that are volunteering.

We've been understaffed.

Directors leave every so many years, and we are looking for a director again to facilitate to run the to operate uh the animal shelter.

Not only the director, but the facility, I still I don't think it's adequate enough to be able to accommodate the demand and the need that the community comes up, you know, making a daily request.

But I do, Joe, I do want to say that I really want to recognize the people that are here because they're the ones that are making the animal shelter deliver the service because we don't have the paid employee and the staff to do that.

There, I see them, you know, Sundays and Mondays and volunteering and uh working with the animals on the playground areas on the outside on the inside, and so my recommendation to the council let's try to work together to make sure that the needs that are there in Oakland are being met, and so what I would recommend to the council, one is to let let us work it out with our volunteers and our staff and an administration uh to find the best solution to be able to meet the need that we currently have.

I mean, developing an ordinance and creating an ordinance is not gonna solve the solution.

Because we need people on the street, it's like having a clean city.

I need the whole community to help me clean it and don't just rely on the staffer to do it.

Or a law that we sit around here passing many laws, but I don't have the personnel in the neighborhood or on the staffing level to help us.

So I would advise that before we adopt this that we have an opportunity to work together to come up with a recommendation uh that can move us forward to make sure that not only at the staffing level but on the facility level, we're able to meet the need of the citizens of Oakland.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember, Councilmember Houston.

Yes.

Um Janelle Harris had mentioned something that district seven is has the most impact, and it's true, and I'm talking to my colleagues here.

Um I've been in office 190 days, right?

And the reason why I ran for this office is to make change for my district that's been underserved for years.

I'm talking about years, 11, 15 years, and it saddens me.

And when I speak, I always speak from experience.

Uh, if I if it's not experienced, I won't say anything, right?

And in my district, I took care of uh 600, I mean uh 62 cats.

It was 62, and it was this lady, she was coming to where uh where my office is and she was taking them and she was getting them neutered and she was dropping them back off, and we were fighting.

I didn't understand.

Like, if you're gonna take them, why are you bringing them back?

But then, you know, it was like I was feeding them 62 cats, but then and I took pictures of her, she took pictures of me because I just could not understand what she was doing, then it made sense, right?

She was dropping them back off, and they fought they didn't get hit by cars and things like that, but they finally diminished after a certain amount of years, and this was years ago.

Um and I'd like to thank the president for giving me this time to speak, and that is why I did say no, because I wanted to um share my voice, and that's what I'm elected for is for the people, my constituents that expect me to stand up for them, right?

So thank you for that, President.

So my thing is is Joe, Mr.

DeVries, in the other cities.

Are we in line with them?

Uh, you might have answered that question already, but are we in line?

Are we doing something different than the other cities?

Passing this ordinance tonight aligns us with the other cities in the Bay Area.

If you don't pass it, we will be in a system where we have longer holding periods.

Uh uh a mandatory um uh owner surrender rule as opposed to a managed intake system, and that's why we're doing this, among other things.

I mean, there's a lot of other things in the ordinance we haven't talked about, but they all align with modern practices.

Uh we we rely on our our staff, our our veterinary staff, our care attendance, meetings with volunteers.

There were things I wanted to put in this ordinance that that I was convinced to take out because it didn't be, and I you know I looked at national standards.

We looked at uh at what what UC Davis has to say, and this is fact-based.

That's why we're doing this.

And I do want to take a moment to say, yes, uh, did at the committee absolutely thank the volunteers, those that are here that agree with what we're doing, and those who disagree with what we're doing, we couldn't do this without them and without FOS Friends of Oakland Animal Services, and we'll continue to partner with them.

Uh, and we're in a tough moment.

So, do the chair apologize.

Um, so we're planning to meet with them about the surrendering of the animals.

Uh, the cats basically.

I'm committed to develop the administrative guidelines to implement what you're going to adopt tonight before it gets adopted in September and to meet with those stakeholders in the interim, yes.

How many more times do you think we can meet with them?

I'm not put trying to put you on the spot, Mr.

DeVries.

I'm just saying because this is important to the community, and this is important because we want to be in line, and then we still it's important.

So how many times?

I mean, I'm at the shelter over half of my week.

I'm there.

Um we we've met, I met with all the volunteers, you know, early on when I came in.

I I bought pizza.

Yeah, we had a second meeting, we had a third meeting.

Again, I'm I'm I'm all about meetings.

Okay.

All right, that's all I like to say.

I'm good.

Just one, just one question.

Mr.

De Brees, there is also an in East Oakland, an animal shelter.

Is that I mean, we're still in cooperation working together because they have a Yes.

Uh East Bay SBCA, and I spoke with the director and actually she provided input on this ordinance and gave me the thumbs up.

So they're definitely a trusted important partner.

They do accept strays there as well.

Uh you know, they have limitations too.

Uh, but they're absolutely an important partner.

Uh, along with all of our rescue organizations, and frankly, we really only are relying on one rescue organization to handle cats, and we need to expand that portfolio.

Part of the reason other rescue organizations have pulled back is they can't afford the veterinary care.

So they only want cats from us that have already been fixed, spayed neutered, microchipped, etc.

That's a problem in the entire industry, is access to affordable veterinary care.

And that's why some of the rescue organizations have pulled back.

Um, we need to continue to work on that both through our public financing and through private financing.

Yeah, and that animal shelters supported by what agency or foundations is private, it's the East Bay SPCA, yeah.

Right.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Wong, and I'll entertain a motion.

Um, this is a separate topic, yeah.

I have a comment on a separate topic just around the measure w funding.

We are on the consent calendar, and measure W is not on the agenda, and so that it cannot be discussed.

Okay.

If you relay it back to maybe the state of emergency on homelessness, maybe you have some leeway there.

Okay, thank you for that guidance.

Um, so we are certainly in a state of emergency around uh homelessness.

This is true.

There were comments that were made uh by two members of the public that I did feel absolutely thank you, Mrs.

That I wanted to clarify my position.

Uh yes, I had been moving against a homeless shelter that a nonprofit provider had sought to put into uh Chinatown uh at the cart at the Marriott courtyard.

Now, I want to be very clear.

I am not against putting in homeless shelter in the district.

In fact, I've already identified four alternative sites in my district in which it would make more sense to erect homeless shelter.

But across the street is a in Chinatown is unique, it is a high rise, and unlike a high rises in most part of the cities, this is an extremely low income community.

You look up Oakland's equity toolbox, this is the community of the highest need, mostly Medical Medicaid eligible seniors that are are in poor health themselves.

This was a poor population mix, and so I want to address that.

I am moving to the to identify other sites and work with nonprofit providers to erect shelters in my district.

And I think it's also important when we do move to use that Measure W funding that we have a equity framework.

I actually do support Council Member Houston's push that says we cannot put shelters all in East Oakland.

That's not fair.

It is well documented that homeless shelters are disproportionately put in the lowest income communities, and that is not fair.

And so we have to, as a council, when we think about Measure W funding, where to place these shelter sites, that we have an equity framework.

Anyways, that's all that I wanted to address.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

And is that a motion?

I'm not sure.

It's a statement.

So I got a motion from Houston, a second from Gaio with a no on five point.

Which one?

4141 from Ramanchandra.

On the consent calendar move by Councilmember Houston, seconded by Councilmember Gaio to approve the consent calendar, noting that item 521 was withdrawn from this agenda.

On roll for the consent calendar, council members.

Brown, aye.

Five, Guyo.

Aye.

Houston.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye, but no one five point four one.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins?

Aye.

Thank you.

Noting the no vote for Ramachandran for item S541.

But the consent calendar is approved with a vote of eight ayes.

And Madam Chair, we'll take item 10 and then items 11 and 12 together.

And then item nine.

You said reading in item number 10.

We'll be followed by item 11 and 12, and then item nine.

Reading in item number 10.

Adopted resolution making certain findings, approving a preliminary and final official statement related to the city of Oakland, Community Facilities District number 20 2023-1, Brooklyn Basin Facilities and Services, Special Tax Bonds, Series 2025 and adopting appropriate findings under the California Environmental Quality Act.

And we have one speaker on item number 10.

Uh good afternoon, David Jones.

Before you today is a resolution approving a preliminary and final official statement related to the City of Oakland Brooklyn Basin Facilities and Services Project, Special Tax Bonds 2025.

Known as Brooklyn Basin.

It's a mixed use project right off the estuary of about 64 acres of land along the Oakland estuary, as I mentioned.

Just for a little bit of clarity, back on July 16th of 2024, the City of Council adopted ordinance 13809 authorizing the issuance and sale of the bonds.

So right now we're just coming back with a revised preliminary official statement.

We have intend to um price these bonds next month and potentially close at the beginning of September.

So this item has already really been approved and last summer, and we're just reapproving the preliminary official statement or the offering document as we did make some uh some modifications and um available for any questions that you may have.

Thank you.

We'll go to the public speaker.

Ms.

Asada Olabala for item number 10.

So uh what's confusing about what's going on related to the park and public space that'll be involved with the 32 acres at Brooklyn Basin and the uh the boat slip and the wet land restoration area.

You have the the people who live in ABC and F parcels gonna have to pay for a special tax to get things done, but this is also a public facility where you have the residents paying a partial tax to accommodate whatever needs to happen to get it in place, but it's going to be available to the public as well.

Then you have something about uh partials G and J have requested the county of Alamedi to reduce the assessment on their parcels, so they're gonna be paying something less.

Then you had the parks and recreation uh uh advisory committee meeting on July the 6th to discuss partial in and the meeting reviewed uh feedback on excluding the partial in uh from the uh park partial tax.

I don't know what's going on, but you got some people paying, this is layman terms.

You got some people paying who live in Brooklyn Basin, then you're giving some people an opportunity not to pay, as well as you having people pay from the Brooklyn Basin for uh access to everybody in Oakland and anybody in the city, anybody in the county can use that access.

Then you haven't completed the arrangement for the park where part of it is on commercial property.

You have not gotten permission for that commercial property to be used for any uh access to the public.

Thank you.

Councilmember, entertain a motion that's in your district.

I'll make a motion to approve staff's recommendation.

I got Wong and then Noel, I mean Councilmember Guile for a second.

Oh council member.

Um I have a question.

Um, so thank you through the chair to um the presenter um on page five of the report.

Um so my question is based on page five of the report.

Um, curious if there's any will be any impact on the it um on issuing the bonds if the owners of parcel G and J are granted the reductions in the excess value.

I have the uh consultant uh here with us today.

I'd like for them to to address that question.

I have Mr.

Dan Cox of Canon.

They're serving as a municipal advisor, and he can address that question on parcels G and J for you.

Good evening, uh, members of the council.

I'm Dan Cox with Canon Public Finance.

We're the city's municipal advisor on this transaction.

Uh the bonds to be issued are secured by a fixed special tax, they're not paid by the advalorm tax.

Uh, the reference to the assessed value that's under appeal is part of the discussion of the value of the property, so a reduction in the assessed value would not would impact these bonds uh in any way in terms of the ability to pay them back.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

There's a motion the second, Madam Clerk.

On item 10 moved by council member Wong, seconded by council member Guile to adopt the resolution on roll council members Brown.

Aye, five.

You said what I have a question before we I did not make a motion.

I would like to ask a question first, just to clarify my actions.

Okay.

Uh just one question on uh Brooklyn Basin.

There was a recent presentation to the uh the uh park advisory and recreation commission um by the developer.

I just want to make sure since there is quite a bit of controversy around uh the possibility um of basically the developer essentially wants to have uh that estuary park land uh you know uh is this part parcel in?

Yeah, I just want to make sure that parceling in is not in this.

Okay, so by supporting this, it will not at all.

It's not important to sale of no great, thank you.

Okay, motion to adopt staff resolution.

So motion by uh Councilmember Wong, second by President Pro Tem Gu.

Adam Claire.

On the motion, made by Councilmember Wong, seconded by Council Member Guyo to adopt the resolution for item 10 on roll council members Brown.

Hi five, Guyo.

Houston, Ramachandran.

Aye, Unger, aye, wong, aye, Jenkins, aye.

The motion passes seven ayes, one excuse five reading in eleven and twelve.

Adopt an ordinance providing for the borrowing of funds and the issuance and sale of general obligation bonds and an amount not to exceed three three hundred million dollars authorizing the issuance and sale of a not to exceed fifty-five million dollars aggregate principal amount of city of Oakland General Obligation Refunding Bonds and approving certain related matters.

Action on this item will result in introduction, reading in item number twelve, receive a written informational report from the city of Oakland's city administrator or their designee on the status, current process, immediate next steps, and plan for the city council of Oakland's 2025 bond issuance.

Good afternoon, David Jones.

I'll take item number 11 uh because there's going to be action that's needed on that.

And then for 12, I will defer to the to the city administrators' office on on how they would like to fold that in.

But on item 11, um, before you today is an ordinance that staff recommends that city of council adopt for the borrowing of funds and issuance of general obligation bonds in a an amount not to exceed 300 million and the issuance and sale of refunding bonds not to exceed $55 million.

Uh, the principal amounts will be issued under measure D D and Measure U.

The proposed financing will advance the city priorities such as housing and violent infrastructure with the improvement and rehabilitation of city streets and sidewalks.

Um we're anticipating approximately 78 million for streets and sidewalks, uh roughly 30 million for city facility improvements, and 180 million dollars for affordable housing.

Uh this is the first reading of this ordinance.

We'll be coming back on September 16th for the second reading of this ordinance, as well as a resolution that will be um um approving the documents if you will.

So this is really just authorizing the issuance and borrowing of funds.

Um we're anticipate pricing around October 24th and closing the transaction around the 4th of November, and I'm available for any questions that you may have.

But as I mentioned before, this is just the first reading of the ordinance, and then we'll be back September 16th, Mr.

City Administrator for item number 12.

You have a brief update, too.

Nothing uh significant, I think everything that we that has been presented today really covers it.

So thank you so much.

Uh Councilmember Guile, then Council Member Ramachandra.

I'll make a motion to approve staff's recommendations.

Thank you for the update.

I'm very glad that this is coming before us.

I wanted to understand a little bit about the timeline.

So this is coming to us from the first reading now, and then we'll approve the second reading hopefully by September.

When does the sale actually happen?

We're anticipating, because after the the second reading, there's a 30-day referendum period where you know individuals that, you know, it's like a validation period essentially.

So we typically do not price during that 30-day referendum period.

So right now, based upon our schedule, and if anything changes, I'll let you know when I come back in September, but we're anticipating pricing around the 24th of October, and then closing, which would mean we would receive the funds around November 4th.

But if there's any change to anything like that, I'll definitely let you know in uh September 16th, but everything's looking good right now.

Thank you so much.

And just in the interest of this is obviously an issue, and an issue of public interest, given that the funds that will be issued fund basic city services, public infrastructure, affordable housing.

Can you explain, you know, what steps the city is taking to make sure that we get um as good of a deal as possible for the city?

Yes, we've put together the financing team.

Um we have appointed Siebert Brantford as our um senior underwriter.

We have two other co-managers, loop capital as well as Bank of America.

So in the documents that I'll be bringing to you in September, it will outline all of that.

We are in weekly meetings every Wednesday morning talking about you know how we're gonna market this transaction.

We'll be going to the rating agencies at the end of August.

So I'm very confident, confident that you know we've got a very, very uh solid team in place to get the deal done at the most reasonable cost of funding for the city.

Thank you.

Let's go to the public speakers.

Calling the public speakers who signed up for items 11 and 12, noting that we have one speaker that signed up for item 11, Nicole Guzman, and Mr.

Gene Hazard signed up for both items, Ms.

Asada Olabala for both items, Tanno, I'm sorry, Trent Trend.

Trend Timberg.

I'm sorry if I mispronounce your name, Tano.

Sign up for both items, Samuel Ramy, both items, Angelina Cornejo for both items, Marion Lim for both items, and Jeff Levin.

Please approach the podium or please raise your hand in the Zoom app.

Please state your name for the record.

All right, so uh you have been cited for having a negative bond rating, but the city of Oakland can still sell bonds even with a negative credit rating.

But the outlook is that you're putting yourselves at risk financially, you're going to be challenged with the possibility of having having this negative rating, a high perceived risk of default, you have a high risk of interest rate that you're gonna have to uh incur.

You're gonna also have reduce the the investor pool will be reduced.

Some institutions will not invest with you because of the situation you're in with the negative rating, but you're willing to take the risk, even when you've been advised by the finance department.

The recommendation was to wait and delay any sales of bonds until December of 2025, ensuring that the city's disclosure of its financial conditions meets the standards of federal securities law.

So you're ignoring what you should be doing, and you are saying you're going to make an investment that will put you at risk, an investment for which you're gonna pay higher interest ratings potentially, an investment for which you're gonna have very small window of institutions who will want to deal with you, but you want to do it anyway, and that's what the grand jury said about you, that you were not following the recommendations of staff.

Now, I don't know why they up here not saying anything, but that originally you were told to wait until December, taking risks.

So while I got some time on the clock, I want to tell you this.

The unemployment rate for African Americans has gone up to 8.9.

Nationally, it's 6.7 for African Americans.

You have a department of Economic and Workforce development that is doing nothing to help us with employment.

You're talking about translation and spending money on it.

I had a brother from Miami, Florida call me and tell me he just got a jail.

He can't get a job because he can't speak Spanish.

In order to get a job in Miami, you have to be able to speak Spanish.

Okay?

You will not talk about gentrification.

You will not talk about Sanctuary City.

I told you what happened in Mexico, where they had an uprising because the Mexican people are saying U.S.

gentrifiers are pushing up the economy and pushing them out of their homes.

I told you about the use of the term black in African.

Look what happened at the Essence Festival, the big conversation of how African Americans are not respecting that Africans are coming into their things and re uh uh redesigning African American culture so it fits an African context.

If you look out here in your uh security ABC, you have non-African Americans.

You got black people, but you don't have African Americans.

So let's get that straight.

Let's also deal with the fact that you are not talking about being a sanctuary city.

You're not talking about how we've been pushed out.

Gentrification.

You're not talking about it.

And going back to this woman about homelessness in Chinatown, you will not disrespect the homeless community by insinuating that if they're coming to your community.

Uh Angelina Cornejo from East Bay Housing Organizations.

I'm here to voice my support, uh, our support for advancing the measure U bond issuance.

Uh, measure you passed by 75%, because Oaklanders understand the need for more affordable housing and safer streets.

Now delivering on these priorities quickly would go against the will of the voters.

The city has seen affordable housing development accelerate, but it's only because of those pipeline projects that we're allowed to go forward with the first tranche of measure you money.

Delaying the measure you issuance could result in severe tax penalties to affordable housing developers.

Um it could lead to project delays, significant cost increases, and permanently reducing the number of affordable housing projects in the city of Oakland.

Uh, we cannot delay the housing uh that is in the pipeline right now because we are nowhere near the state obligation to build deeply affordable housing in the city of Oakland.

We urge council to make sure staff does everything possible to issue bonds this year and not stop the pipeline of uh the deeply affordable housing that we really need in the city of Oakland.

Thank you.

Hi, good evening, President Jenkins, members of the council.

My name is Tono Trachtenberg.

I'm with the nonprofit housing association of Northern California or MPH.

We are the voice of Affordable Housing for the Bay Area.

I want to echo what Angelina just said and reiterate what I said last time that Oakland is at a relative competitive advantage right now having these local funds.

So it is really valuable and important that you continue to move forward in issuing these bonds.

It sounds like that is likely gonna happen at the end of the by the end of the year, and that's great to hear.

So thank you to staff and to the council members that have been working on this.

We'll continue to pay attention and just want to emphasize that this is critical, particularly these projects that have already been issued these dollars.

They need them to move these projects forward.

So thank you so much.com because what I'm about ready to say is post it there.

I gave each of you this document.

Measured you the November 8, 2022 850 million dollar journal obligation bond does not include a provision for refunding or restructuring existing debt.

It authorized the issuance of a new general obligation bonds to fund affordable housing, street repairs, and facility improvements with repayment via dedicated property tax levy.

Not a refinancing plan for the outstanding bonds.

I read the agenda report.

And also going to what Mrs.

said the negative bond rating.

You have that on this document.

Moody's 12th, 5th 24, negative.

SP Global Ratings.

February 2nd, 2025, negative.

Fitch ratings, 1127, 24, negative.

Okay.

On the back of the first sheet I gave you.

Ballot language.

Did the original measure D D allow for refunding or restructuring?

Were limitations placed on the maturities use of maximum debt service?

Two years in, you're looking at basically refinancing.

You can't do that.

Now, I looked at took me a long time to try to find where in the charter can we find the restructuring.

Section 17, 717.

The city shall have the power to issue bonds for any municipal purpose in accordance with state law.

The issuance of bonds payable from adverbal taxes shall require the approval of two-thirds of the voters voting in the proposition at an election.

Key points.

Must be approved by two-thirds of the voters voting on the bond.

City council may place a measure on the ballot, but voters are mandatory to approve it.

Now, in reading your agenda report of July 1, 2025, the city anticipates refunding all or part of the outstanding general obligation bonds.

What do you mean all apart?

That's double talking.

The prior bonds are currently outstanding and a principal amount of $54 million as of June 30th, 2025.

Show me, Mr.

President, where in the original document, it allows for a restructuring or refunding the two minutes.

Thank you.

So the statute requires that any refunding or restructuring has to be included in the original document.

DD was in 2002.

Measure U was two thousand and twenty-two.

So you're two years into refinance it because that's what we're talking about.

You can't do it under the statute.

So why are you looking at doing that?

You're in a crisis.

And we'll be you're trying to restructure the transaction and use tax.

That's what this is.

We'll be in court on September 2nd on the writ, because Ryan Richardson, the city attorney, altered the text of the ballot measure.

There are two cases I've already found that requires only information report, not advocacy.

And so what Ryan Richardson did, the city attorney was put you in a bind.

Cause they intentionally misled the voters by altering the transaction use tax.

And you know it was a transaction use tax, it was not a sales tax.

That's what you did on June 3rd.

With authorizing the city administrator to enter into an agreement with the California Tax and Fee Administration.

That right there told you it was not a sales tax.

So Ryan Richardson lied and misled the public and what you're doing.

You can't do this.

Moving to our Zoom users, noting I've read in the names for Nicole Guzman, Marian Lim, and Jeff Levin, calling on Nicole Guzman.

You signed up for item 11.

You'll have two minutes.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments, Nicole.

Good evening, City Council members.

My name is Nicole Guzman.

I'm a senior project manager working at Satellite Affordable Housing Associates, a nonprofit affordable housing developer based in Berkeley.

I currently live in District 2 and managing two affordable housing projects funded by Measure U Bonds.

I urge City Council to adopt this ordinance to benefit and further support the development of affordable housing, such as the 3135 San Pablo project that will be developed in partnership with St.

Mary's Center, who will provide resident services and case management services.

3135 San Pablo will be a new construction six-story building providing 73 units for seniors and formally unhoused seniors.

Please move forward with this ordinance to grant the housing and community development team the ability to fund the new construction pipeline that are counting on these funding commitments and address the critical need for more affordable housing.

Thank you to staff and council members for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Maryam Lynn, you sign up for both items.

You'll have four minutes.

You may unmute and begin your comments.

Thank you.

Good evening, Council President and Council members.

My name is Mary Ann Lim, and I'm speaking on behalf of EAH Housing, the nonprofit affordable housing developers serving the communities of Cathedral Gardens, Australia Vista, and dozens more across the Bay Area.

While we are saddened by the decisions made last week regarding Oakland's impact fee ordinance, we are nevertheless committed to working with a city that values the important conversations around affordable housing.

That is why we are back once again to urge you to continue moving forward with proper bond issuance for upcoming projects that we and other affordable housing developers need.

On behalf of our communities, unhoused and low-income neighbors.

We encourage this body to continue underscoring this robust and reliable funding source.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And calling on our last and final Zoom speaker, Jeff Levin.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments, Jeff.

Thank you.

Good evening, Jeff Levin, speaking, uh, for East Bay Housing Organizations uh in support of these items and just want to um reiterate what other speakers have said about the importance of moving forward with this.

The city has a substantial pipeline of projects uh ready to move forward, but they need this funding.

Uh we want to make sure that they can move forward and be as competitive as possible.

I will note that the new state budget has authorized new state funding for affordable housing.

So having uh these projects positioned to apply for that funding would uh be really advantageous, and we also don't want to risk uh any of these projects actually falling through and not being able to move.

So I strongly encourage you to um adopt this legislation uh and allow the city to move forward to issue the bonds by the end of this year and keep uh our affordable housing program moving.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jeff.

Chair Jenkins, that was our last speaker.

Okay, so there's a motion from Gaio, is there a second?

Madam Clark, call the roll, please.

Noting I will call the vote on item 12 after this for item 11, moved by councilmember Gaio, seconded by council member Fife to approve the ordinance on introduction and schedule for final passage on September 16th on roll.

Council members Brown, aye five, Guile, Houston, excused Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger?

Aye, Wong?

Aye.

Jenkins?

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with seven ayes, one excused Houston to approve the ordinance on introduction and schedule for final passage on September 16th for item 12.

Same motion, approved.

Okay.

Moved by Councilmember Gaio.

Seconded by Council Council Member Fife to receive the informational report on item number 12 on roll.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guyo?

Aye.

Houston is excused.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Thank you.

The motion passes with seven ayes.

One excuse Houston to receive the informational report for item 12.

Moving to our final action item, item number nine.

Adopt a resolution.

One authorizing the city administrator to amend the agreement with Madoxo Traffic Management Inc.

for parking citation system software, hardware related services and pass-through collection fees for an additional one-year term in an amount not to exceed $2,260,300 and authorizing the payment of us outstanding invoices in the amount of 249,397 for a total contract amount over the one-year term of 2,509,697.

And two, waiving the competit competitive multi-step solicitation process.

And three, appropriating $68,274 to the general purpose fund, and four adopting appropriate California Environmental Quality Act findings.

And we do have two speakers on item number nine.

I'll need 30 seconds.

Oftentimes things take longer than we anticipate.

So this is simply a contract extension to allow us time to finalize the procurement for citation management, which will again go with Medaxo.

Thank you so much for that brief presentation.

Can we go to the public speakers?

Jean Hazard and Asala Olabala for item number nine.

It seems to be a potential practice that should need not be in the new process.

So what you keep doing is extending the contract.

So this contract, you say you might have to extend it up to from six to twelve months to complete the uh competitive process.

Uh you have the same thing going on with AB security.

Uh, with that, you haven't come to a conclusion about your security contract, so you're going to extend, and I don't know how you're gonna do this, uh extend the contract because you have not approved anything related to ABC security being able to continue on a month-to-month basis because the contract expired June 30th of this year, and and you have not, it was originally on the agenda along with a uh approving allied, was also extending paying uh ABC back payment of over $300,000.

You haven't approved that either.

So we got to stop this process of staff coming to you saying, oh, we haven't been able to, and because of that, we have to extend the contract, timely performance of putting contracts in place so we don't have to continue this process, is what I recommend.

Now the grand jury said that the Oakland Transportation Department does not have a system in place that allows parking citation technicians to identify stolen vehicles that are parked illegally.

So we have we don't have anything that can make this happen, and that's why you're being cited by the grand jury because you've been giving parking citations to stolen vehicles, so let's fix that as well as it relates to parking citations.

Here's a grand jury report to which Ms.

Olabala is speaking to.

Get it.

Get it, and I like to associate myself with her comments, but I also like to because you already voted, but I want to put it on a record so you understand what you did, which is in violation of the government code 5-3508.3, no bond shall be subject to mandatory tender for purchase or redemption prior to its fixed maturity date, unless it contains a recital to that effect.

You understand what this says?

If you don't ask the city attorney, no, don't ask the city attorney because he may mess it up.

Ask the parliamentarian, and I'll read it again.

5.3508.3.

A, no bond shall be subject to mandatory tender for purchase or redemption prior to its fixed maturity date.

I think that would also uh go to a refund or restructuring the debt.

You only had this for two years, it's a 20-year maturity.

So what are you doing?

Rama Chandra, you should know better.

You're an attorney.

This is illegal what you're doing.

You should know, Miss Brown.

You went to law school.

This is illegal.

You are on notice.

Oh, understand a motion.

Second.

On item nine moved by Councilmember Guyle, seconded by councilmember Houston to approve the resolution on roll.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five.

Aye.

Guyo.

Aye.

Houston.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight ayes to approve the resolution for item number nine.

So announcements.

And then chairman's.

Councilmember Fife.

Yes, I would like to adjourn this final city council meeting uh in the memory of civil rights attorney Dan Siegel.

Not only was he a champion for many issues throughout the city, uh he challenged the city uh in a lot of ways, but also supported many of us, and um he was a very very dear friend of of mine and my family's, and it is a major loss that um that we have with with the loss of Dan Siegel, and so I wanted to just honor him today.

I will be bringing forward legislation um when we come back to council, but I wanted to acknowledge him today.

Absolutely, and Councilman McGuire will do adjournments after open forum.

Well, after open forum, we still have a yeah, so the next uh city council member, right?

The next city council meeting will be September 16th.

September 16th.

All right, open forum, yes.

Calling the names who signed up for our open forum, Mr.

Sada Olabala, umali Harris.

Sorry for mispronounce your first name, Carl Chan, Stephanie Tran, Jean Hazard, Josh Beth, Maria Henderson, Finn Making, Curtis Johnson, Jane Kramer.

Thank you.

So my name is Janelle Harris, and I want to talk about the bonds and the taxes that we keep inheriting, and again, you are creating a hardship for the people who can't afford to live.

We are barely staying afloat.

I know I am.

I want to talk about a bond measure that was allotted to McClyman's High School years ago.

It was allotted three times, and they never saw a dime of that money.

And currently we were allotted ninety-two million dollars to rebuild McClyman's, which is 87% African American.

It is a historical black high school, and it is falling to the ground, and we were allotted 92 million dollars, and we cannot get one dollar.

I go by there every day, and they have not started the work that's supposed to be completed in 2026.

So it saddens me.

So I just want to let you know about your spending with the bond.

This is the reason why I'm at McClyman's, Janelle Harris.

Janelle Harris is a parent at McClyman's, and she works diligently.

She started the parent resource center.

She's advocating for a sports academy.

She advocates every day.

She was on the police commission.

She was treated wrongly.

She helped to develop the um missing persons policy.

She helped to develop the stop parole uh persecution policy.

She wrote the chief's job description.

She she wrote the hiring of the chief uh uh description process.

She has been involved with the Bay case, which nobody wants to deal with.

She kept bringing it up.

Whenever they had the issue of the black black police officers' grievance, she was always on top of it.

She has she has been wrongly treated and she has been disrespected.

But and that's another like this man here, the city administrator did to Latanya Simmons.

Janelle was also a victim of misuse and abuse while she was on that commission.

But I stay with her at McLean's because she is a sincere, dedicated parent that works every day to try to get what's best for those students, and she gets no respect.

So Janelle, I just want to give it to you today.

You deserve it.

And when when you didn't pay attention to Jonathan Bambalike, she did.

She did.

And she took care of it along with what's the other lady's name, Michelle.

I want to recognize her too.

Thank you, Janelle, for all your hard work.

What the city did to the time to Tonda Simmons is going to come in back and bikes you.

They've changed the culture in them.

Even the food.

Go look at J.L.

Richard.

Don't look at market.

Don't look at uh St.

Mary's.

Go look at 21st Street.

Black folks are becoming a dangerous species.

So talk about institutional racism.

Not when it comes to black folks.

Jane Kramer, I want to go back to item 5.25.

Please actively support and broadcast this bill.

Its intent is to facilitate user ability to quickly move from point A to point B without blockages in time or excess throughout the region as people go about their daily business.

Its implementation depends upon sufficient funding.

To get that funding, you will have to have a transparent conversation between yourself and your constituents.

If you want a workable transportation system within the region, thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Kramer.

Moving to our Zoom speakers, Maria Henderson.

Out of all the names I called, you're the only one that raised your hand.

Maria, you may unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Maria.

Thank you so much.

Good after good evening, Councilmembers Maria Henderson, Legislative Affairs and Committee Relations with AC Transit.

I just wanted to provide an update on our realign project after nearly two years of reviewing and updating our bus service network plan that included a robust public participation process.

We are pleased to announce that the new AC Transit Realign Bus Network will go into effect on August 10th, 2025.

This plan is in response to changes in how people travel since the pandemic, and while working within a con within a constrained budget.

Each decision point was weighted against a set of guiding principles focused on reliability, equity, and frequency, and the requirement that we have enough workforce to operate bus service while not jeopardizing the reliability of service to low-income individuals and transit dependent communities.

We now have information for our writers in the community on our website, on our buses, social media, and at bus stops.

Thank you for your comments, Chair.

That was our last speaker for open forum and zoom.

Council Member Wall.

I'm good.

It was an announcement about what Maria Henderson just brought up about the new bus line changes.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Through the chair tonight, we adjourn this meeting in the memory of Dan Siegel.

Thank you.

This meeting's adjournal.

Um so thank you for being here.

Um really wanna welcome Tim from it's working with advisors give back, who'll be speaking with us today about making the most of what you've got, how to um use the money you have in the best way possible.

And Tim is a certified financial planner originally from Bend, Oregon, who has resided in the Bay Area for nearly two decades.

As a modern Renaissance man, Tim brings a refreshing blend of analytical rigor and heartfelt humanity to his role as a financial advisor.

His overarching goal to leave every person he works with feeling empowered, uplifted, inspired, joyful, and at ease.

With a master's degree in World Religions and over two decades of experience as a mindful meditation instructor, Tim weaves mindfulness and intention into his advisory work.

He's a returned Peace Corps volunteer and is fulfilled by being of service and helping others to achieve their goals.

And we're having him here today as part of our launching uh working with advisors give back and providing uh one-on-one expert guidance to anybody who would like it to achieve their financial goals.

So why don't you take it away, Tim?

Great.

Thanks so much, yeah.

Okay, so um I'll just uh ask for forgiveness at the beginning.

I got a little bit of a cold, so uh if my voice cracks a little bit, that's uh that's what's going on there.

But I think I think it's not so bad that I'm losing it.

So um I'm gonna go ahead and uh share my screen here.

I've got a little PowerPoint that we can go from.

Uh as you said, the the topic tonight, making the most of what you've got, um practical steps to strengthen your financial life.

Um and uh as you said, I'm uh CFP.

Um and for those who don't know, uh you can think of a uh financial advisor, certified financial planner, um, as somebody who's who's uh kind of the quarterback of of somebody's financial life, um of working with them.

Um we hold all the different pieces of somebody's financial life with them.

Um we we we have a level of expertise in each one of the areas, um, which includes retirement planning, investing, um, insurance planning, tax planning, estate planning, and we have you know rigorous education and and board exam that that we um sat through and uh conquered to earn that designation.

But um when we're holding all those pieces, we we will work with uh experts in in those areas as well.

So we partner with saying a state attorney when we have a depth of knowledge that goes beyond um what we know, then we'll partner somebody with somebody in that field or CPAs or whatnot.

So we're we're the the quarterback.

Um and what's great about when you find um working with CFPs, you know that they're held to a standard um that's that's very rigorous and uh being a fiduciary, probably for that term, but uh that we're we're we have to put a client's um needs first above our own.

So seems like it should be the standard for everybody, but but sadly it's not.

So when you see that CFP designation, you you know that um your needs are gonna be uh put first.

So um what I'd like to say just kind of quickly about my background is I have a background um of working uh for a number of years on uh the debt side uh with individuals, so people who owe you know quite a lot of money to uh uh tax debt to the IRS or state tax um authorities or credit card debt as well.

And then um, you know, the second half of my career, I transitioned into uh working more with people with uh higher um financial net worth.

Um, and really what I can say for my experience is we're working with the same principles.

Um, I kind of see it as a spectrum of somebody who's you know way in debt on one side and somebody who's got a lot of financial net worth on the other side.

Um the the principles that we're working with are the same, and you know, it's somewhere along that spectrum where we all lie that we might be somewhere either neutral, like we don't have any debt, but we haven't really built up any you know money to save or invest, and then everybody some somewhere on that spectrum.

So sometimes people can get the idea that financial planning's not for them because they don't have money to invest, or um, you know, they might be dealing with debt or something else.

And I would say that that financial planning, um, and when I introduce advisors give back and what uh we do there, it's I think it's perfect for everyone.

So I think everybody can can benefit from working with with somebody.

Um, see, I'll go forward here.

Here's just an overview of the agenda, what we'll go over uh introduction, already started that.

We'll go through the um kind of key uh tenets um to kind of to look at with financial planning, and then the second half, uh introduce advisors give back and see how they can help, and we can help put those into uh action.

So really what you're gonna get hear me uh really uh you know, banging the drum is the small changes makes big impact.

So um wherever we're at on that spectrum, um, to realize that every dollar that we have has power, our choices and what we do, and coming to financial planning and actually prioritizing it is putting a focus um and and building an intention and saying, hey, I want I want to pay attention to this, I want to uh prioritize my finances, I've got some goals, and just by doing that, um you're you're already uh on the track of moving forward.

So um it doesn't have to be some revolutionary change that you make overnight to like, oh, I want to get from A to Z.

It's actually recognizing like, okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna take a like a uh reality check of where I'm at and where I want to go, and like uh the the uh meme says here, like it's a journey, not a destination, it never ends.

Like people can build up great wealth, and then they're still concerned about you know, some people with great wealth maybe overspending, so they might be on a trajectory where they could be running out of money in a short period of time, even though to other people it looks like they're set and their money set, or there might be issues with if they don't have enough insurance, they can lose money, or you know, all these different things.

So it's really just to see, and like the title of the um talk is where are we at?

And we're not gonna be the same place as anybody else, it's unique to each individual, and uh I think that can be an empowering um insight.

Um, when we're looking at financial planning, we we basically see it as there's four main pillars.

Um we're gonna take a look at our income, we're gonna take a look at our expenses, we're gonna look at our assets, what we own, and then we're gonna look at our debts.

And moving forward here, it's really important as we prioritize this to know like where's our money coming from and where's it going, like um so I know some people are really adverse to to tracking or keeping budgets, and I get that, and some people are they're just not gonna do it, and that's okay.

There's there's ways to do that.

But if if somebody's willing to, it can be really insightful to take a period of time, say I sit here, say 30 days to just track everything and to start without judgment.

And and it's it's always pretty amazing because we will oftentimes see our habits changing just by putting a light on what that is.

I know I've done that before with with diet or the gym or whatever, just by tracking something.

I'm like, oh, wait a minute, I'm buying quite a few uh mochas and Starbucks or something.

And so the next time I'm going to go there, I might be like, you know, maybe I'll get something else, or maybe I'll you know, find an alternative, which we'll talk about later.

So but to start with, not trying to make any changes.

Just trying to look and analyze at what the situation is.

Um and there's, you know, there once you once you do that, you can, you know, for 30 days.

I personally still just either use a spreadsheet, you know, it doesn't cost any money to open up a, you know, Google spreadsheets or or um or uh just uh spreadsheet, but I think some there's a lot of apps out there too that are reasonably priced, like monarch money is one, or you need a budget, or you can, you know, there's you can get as kind of complex and detailed with it as you want, but I think at the end of the day, we really just want to be able to look at that.

Like, what am I spending my money on?

And then as we get into actually tracking that and looking at, okay, here's my income, here's my expenses.

We can start to categorize like which of these things are like I definitely need these things, like I gotta pay my rent, I gotta pay for health insurance, these different things.

And then there's a lot that start to get bucketed into just wants or um things that we could do without.

So once we can start to get that information together, then we can start to analyze it.

We start to look for patterns of our spending, you know, and and like I said, everybody's unique, but I think everybody has a similar kind of experience of being like, you know, sometimes it's like, oh, like it's a little bit of uh um a reality check.

But I I I think if approached with the right attitude, and you know, just like okay, this is what it is, it can be you know kind of fun, you know, to take a look at it at what's the reality.

So um, then when we get into that, we can start thinking about you know, budgets and can we do we want to make some changes to try to try to prioritize, you know, what's essential, what's not.

Um I wrote a note here, you know, thinking of the library of maybe I'm spending a lot of money on, you know, Amazon books or something, or or or someplace else, and that's a place I want to, you know, cut back.

I'm like, oh, I could, you know, go to the library, find find the books I want to read, or you know, there's so many different um options like that.

So when we're going to to look at reducing expenses, we don't necessarily have to completely rob ourselves of the joy or the experience that we're having.

There's oftentimes some opportunities out there to to do something similar um at a lower cost.

So and I wrote down planning for fun too, because all this can just feel kind of daunting and heavy if we're not actually like enjoying our life.

So it's it's you know, making sure we can put money away to keep doing the things we enjoy.

Um, which then brings me into the next uh topic, which is you know, taking that, you know, painful look at at debt, you know, what what kind of debt are we carrying?

And um, I know for a lot of people, you know, there's it it can be such a heavy weight.

Um, and a lot of people don't want to look at it or just it just keeps building and um and I've found that working with clients, uh particularly an advisors get back when they start talking about it, um, it's like starts to feel more manageable for them because there's there are options.

There's there's options with debt that if if we're just head in the sand and we don't actually want to look at what's going on, it's it's just gonna keep doing what it's uh done in the past, and that weights there, whether we realize it or not.

There can be a lot of kind of shame that people feel or just vulnerability of talking about it.

But once, you know, that it's great to use the advisor to actually talk about that because then they can help, you know, bring you resources that can help with that.

So really what you want to take a look at is uh what are the debts that you have, what are the interest rates, what are the payments that you're making, and then when you when you get that data, you can really ask yourself like is there a feasible way that I'm gonna be able to pay off these debts?

Um is like looking at my income, looking at my life, looking at maybe other sources of money, looking at my expenses.

Is there a plan that I could in the some foreseeable future pay this off?

And if the answer is no, you know, then depending on how much debt you have and if it's credit card debt and what the you know interest rates are and everything else, eventually, that's gonna come to a point where you're gonna need to deal with it.

And there are there are different options.

Um, there's credit counseling options that advisor get back and help with to put you in touch with people that's uh that specialize in that.

And they're, you know, you might be able to settle if you're in a situation and your your credit card debt for less than what you owe, or bankruptcy might be your best option, or you know, it's it's it's just all on the table what the what the best advice is, depending on your circumstance.

Then when you can some way, shape, or form get that weight off of you, you can start thinking more like forward with your money with okay, um, now can I build a buffer up so then maybe in the future I can avoid having to go into debt.

Sometimes, you know, a lot of times debt is an investment in yourself.

You might have you have student loans, or you might have maybe not worked for a while and built up some credit debt so you could go to school or do something, and then later you can make money and pay that off.

And, you know, if it's if it's invested in just that you spent money carelessly or whatnot, it's okay, like no judgment, like it's just like okay, what do you want to do going forward?

If people are in that space, they obviously want to want to do something differently.

So then we can start to look at at growing your savings.

Um it doesn't make a lot of sense if you have crippling, you know, debt that's all at high interest rates and everything, and then also over here, you're thinking about putting some money away and maybe getting four percent interest or something, and maybe the credit card debt is 20 some percent interest, like you're kind of in two different places with that.

So, so it makes sense to try to um optimize your whole plan together.

So the key thing, uh, which you know you can think about is yeah, if you're if you're paying more than what you're saving, then you probably should use your excess money to to try to pay down or off your debts first.

Um, and then for settlement, you know, uh situations, maybe you're settling your debt on less than you owe, you have to look at like, am I making more money than my expenses are?

Because if not, you're gonna be right back in the same place and you're you're spending more than you have, so it's gotta come from somewhere.

So um, but once you do get to that place and you've got some money, then you can start thinking about okay, I want to put money away for you know, emergency fund, and it's typically recommended maybe three to six months of your uh your um expenses that you know, not your like your essential expenses that you've got enough money set aside for your rents, your you know, different things, and you just have that sitting in a savings account or maybe a CD or something where it's liquid, and if if you need to draw from that at a certain point of time, you know, in between jobs or different things, you'd have that available for yourself.

Um and then you you look for opportunities to set yourself up to save consistently, even if it's a little bit of money at a time that you're taking out, you know, from your checking and putting into a savings, or if there's 401k contributions that you can be making, they just automated happen, you know, builds up your 401k um just consistently, like I said at the beginning, small consistent steps add up over time.

And then when you when you're got okay, we've got your emergency fund, we're our debts are managed, we know our income and expenses, um, we've we're we're aware of our spending, we've kind of got a budget either very detailed or loose, you know, but we know in the ballpark of what we're doing each month, each period of time.

Then you can start thinking about what to do with the money that you're starting to build up.

So you can think of savings accounts, uh investing now, CDs are paying, you know, have been the last couple of years, like a pretty good amount, money market funds, different things, low risk.

And then if you want to, you know, think longer term and you're thinking about uh, you know, riskier, but depending on your risk level and your investment horizon, you can start thinking about um brokerage accounts or individual retirement accounts, or you know, you're putting money away for 10 20 30 years from now that you're uh, you know, investing soundly, like said the diversification is the only free lunch where you, you know, don't have all your eggs in one basket.

We have seen that where everybody you've got got their money in a particular crypto or they've got it in one stock of company that they so believe in or work for, and and that's, you know, not not advisable.

I mean, some people hit a home run with that, and that's great, but most people, um, you you wanna our our firm's philosophy is be invested in the market, like is far and wide and as you can in mutual funds and stocks and bonds and um uh and then real estate is another place that some people you know have a strong conviction of that they they invest in, and um, so you can see the steps of the ladder here of you you're tracking things, you're you know, you're you're looking at your debt situation, you're starting to grow your savings, and now you're investing, you know, for the future.

Again, you know, the future is not guaranteed and we don't know, like we we all have an idea what it's gonna look like, but there's no end.

There's no end to it.

Nobody like arrives and then it's it's over.

But we also wanna be, you know, if we can thinking forward, you know, by our actions now, so setting ourselves up for success.

So um some of the other topics, financial planning, I'll just kind of gloss over for the purpose of this uh conversation.

But we will look at tax planning, you know, you work with CPAs, um, uh you know, optimize whether you're gonna invest in a Roth IRA or are there charitable, you know, activity that you can do that that gives you some tax um deductions or you know, different things.

So uh again, this is kind of like the next step in in things that people are thinking about.

Um insurance, you know, that's a big one.

When you start to build something up, are you protecting it?

You know, is it could something go wrong that you know you didn't have an appropriate amount of coverage for the house that you invested in, or you know, God forbid some auto uh accident happens and you weren't cut, you know, all those different things where you start thinking about like okay, how can we mitigate the risk out there?

Nobody likes to pay for insurance and you don't want to overpay for insurance that you don't need, but you know, if you're thinking about if you have a child and you're thinking longer term, like what if you know one of the parents is not able to continue with the income, you're thinking about life insurance or um disability insurance or uh these different things.

So and then estate planning comes into play too.

If you have something that you're leaving to next generation or to charities or whoever it is that you wanna um pass along, whatever it is that you have, then there's okay, looking at the beneficiaries on your retirement accounts, um, you know, looking at uh how you're setting things up, maybe you want to uh develop a trust, or you know, you have your will, or a big one is um, uh thinking about healthcare issues with having an advanced everybody should have an advanced health care directive, it's called you can get download it for free and you know, fill it out, uh, have it notarized.

And those are the cases that if you know you were to become incapacitator, something were to happen, you have somebody who's making those decisions um for you that align with your wishes and um that you've set.

So um, yeah, again, each one of those things, um, and we're we'll approaching the place where I'll introduce advisors get back.

The advisor that you're working with um has some pretty good level and depth of knowledge of each one of those areas.

So each person that comes might be like, hey, I've got a lot of debt, and somebody else might be like, I want to buy a house, and somebody else might be like, Oh, I'm I'm thinking of my estate or what I should I do, you know.

It's like they can they can be specific to to your needs.

Um so finally before that, you know, they the advice is yeah, use what's available out there.

Use um, if you're if you're working for an employer uh who's offering like um retirement plans, 401k 403B, HSA, you know, use your HR to see like, you know, are there employer matching amounts, and can I uh um it's essentially kind of seen as free money, like they'll match whatever up to a certain percentage that you're able to put in there.

So um, and then community resources, like I said before for credit counseling, if you got any tax help, and then um advisors give back.

So um all these different things that I've spoken to.

Um I'll now introduce uh this great program that I I became aware of uh um about a year ago, and it was something that just like completely aligned with with my desire to, you know, to be of service and to help people where they're at, uh and the system and the every everything that they've got set up is like super user-friendly.

Um it's confidential coaching, it's free.

The we're not gonna the advisors aren't gonna try to sell anything or get you invested in anything, it's all just pro bono work that we're doing, and um it's it's kind of maybe a little bit sometimes like speed dating, like you got 30 minutes that first uh first conversation, and people come in and and they've they're they're pretty clear on these are what I want to do, or this is what I'm thinking.

And if they're not clear, then that conversation can help clarify like what are the things that are most important to them.

There's the website right there, which we'll put um later to.

So there are a few qualification requirements, um, total savings that uh client has, it's gotta be under 250,000.

Uh single individuals um need to earn less than a hundred thousand dollars, a married couples earn less than 150,000.

Um they've they've set the minimums, you know, or maximums there just to serve the the targeted population where people beyond that kind of see that could hire uh financial advisor or CFP.

Um, but uh I think that's a good good amount there.

And then the different things that, you know, tying in, and lo and behold, it's most of the things that I just introduced that advisors get back and help with, like creating a plan uh to pay off debt, building savings, sort of emergency fund, budgeting, then make the most out of your money, understanding investing basics.

Um maybe you're at a big financial decision point.

Like, am I gonna buy a home?

Do I want to keep renting?

What's that look like?

Saving for retirement.

And then again, like I said before, like whatever topics are specific to your need.

Um there's there's uh yeah, there's again the wealth of knowledge that is uh the advisor has is they can probably either you know give you good advice, whatever it is you need, or they've got they've got their own connections that they can find somebody who can.

So what you can expect is they're one-on-one sessions, um, again, completely confidential, completely private.

So it's kind of breaking that seal, the first point of like, okay, like uh what I've experienced is what people once people start telling you about their money.

You know, that's one of the things in our cultures, people seem to hold the kind of most close to the chest or most dear, and they can trust somebody to start to talk about that stuff and get some good advice, and then start to put that advice into some very you know uh approachable um user-friendly actions, um, and then put that into action and feel that progress, feel that sense of like, oh, that you know, if that feels less of a weight on me, or I feel like I've moved forward in that particular area, it becomes something that you want to keep coming back to.

It's like going to the gym or working a muscle or doing something.

So um what I've what I found and the feedback back that we've gotten is their platform is is really um helpful and user-friendly and right to the point, and we'll do that call, identify what the goals are, be able to put in, you know, maybe one to three to five uh very clear action items that get sent back to the to the uh client, and then they can go back and and work on that.

And in between, if things come up, they can be in touch and message um the coach or the support system and get the help they need.

And then there's you know, follow-up calls.

You can follow up, 20 minute call, see how things are going, kind of like with the good uh encouraging coach, or you know, it'd be like, okay, good job.

You know, you're on that, or okay, what happened?

Like what what blockade got in your way or whatnot, and and really really is a non-judgmental, you know, thing.

Like everybody wants to succeed, and everybody wants to help everybody else to succeed, and there's no there's nothing other invested in it by the advisors than that.

So it's not it's not like um it's got to be some heavy, heavy-handed thing.

So um the dashboard, um you can track your tasks and goals, stay on top of your plan, and then like I was saying, like the momentum that you build and each of those small steps uh really can uh feel fun.

Feel like you're you're uh you're winning the game, I guess.

That that never ends so um and then lastly like how to sign up, um quick easy sign up, just go to the website and then you can schedule your first session and then go from there.

So I love this, you know, to end with this quote from Mr.

Rogers, uh, that we come back to every once in a while.

Anything that's mentionable is manageable.

So again, wherever somebody's out on that spectrum, same principles, if you start talking about it and just like be uh transparent, you're gonna get help that actually um will help you and you get to be the one that puts that action uh puts that item into action and it gets to feel all those great feelings of moving forward.

So um, yeah, I think that's that's basically what I have for now, and I just you know I'd like to open it up if there's any any questions from what I'd shared or um yeah, anything.

Safe passages is a multi-service organization serving Oakland, other high need areas of California.

We are focused on implementing um and driving a continuum of services and supports for children, youth and family across the entire age continuum birth all the way up through college and career.

The Papas in Action is a program, a strategy that for us fit perfectly into our continuum and into our philosophy.

They came to us one day and said, you know, we have a lot of fathers who are really struggling uh with mental health issues, uh with depression, um, trying to find jobs, they have little kids, um, they don't know how to be better fathers, they're feeling very guilty.

So we asked well what would be the best way, you know, to support them and Tulio, who is the director of uh Central American Refugee Committee, crece, said, Well, you know, I have this um soccer group, and I noticed that the dads drop off the children to the soccer group, and they're here for two hours.

So can we have somebody come and just meet with them?

And so we began to create this program that really came from from them from the community.

We work specifically in an area that is mainly uh immigrants from Latin America.

So there's a lot of Spanish speaking on it.

And they need those services, and there's a lot of fathers that their own history has been that of not interacting in a caring way with their fathers.

So how to facilitate for those fathers the ability to see themselves as somebody who's bigger, wiser, stronger and kind.

What we want to really stress is that everybody has the potential to be a great dad, are a great father or a great papa.

And that's a big part of the papas in action program is where reinforcing that everyone has the potential to be a great parent.

You don't have to fit into the mold to do that.

You can create your own mold.

It's a misento que los padres como se habla sobre experiencia, verdad?

It's been bonus to you, the experience is the meet but the de ellos.

It's incredible what the most fanatic of the final.

I have been able to bring the circle of security international curriculum to the work that I do specifically with these groups and fathers, developing greater reflection, reflection about their parenting, their own history and how that is impacting their kids.

The research has been showing how the father has a great impact on the early development of kids.

It's a place, it's a location, a group of people where you feel comfortable sharing what's bothering you, feeling supported and feeling supported in ways that you understand.

Everything they have built with very little resources, and you just have to imagine if we provide a little bit of resource, how much more we can do.

This is a program that is culturally responsive, culturally appropriate, and very effective.

Other communities can replicate.

And we can ensure that after participating in this programming that families will be stronger, that dads will be more confident, and that children will have just a better opportunity to engage with their parents.

I'm Howard and I ride from Howell Street Station to the Berkeley station.

Voters are going to the polls in record numbers today to decide on the proposed Bay Area Rapid Transit System.

It was the biggest project in our region.

So not only was I observing the construction in San Francisco on Marcus Street when I was in high school and college at San Francisco State, you could see the entire project unfolding.

It was always in the news.

And when it's completed, you and the Bay Area will not only feel better, you both look better.

It's kind of a lifeblood of the region.

A year and a half ago, I met my boyfriend and I found out he lived in Walnut Creek.

So to kind of venture out that way in the East Bay was really big for me, and it was kind of a moment for me to realize I'm more independent now as an adult.

I'm from DP Soakland.

I don't think I would be where I am today if it wasn't for Bart.

My early summary on Bart is going on Bart with my mom, my brother, my dad from Coliseum to 16th Street Mission.

We went and got like these amazing burritos for the first time, and I just remember thinking it was such a short trip and being uh very inspired by the city, and it made me want to live in San Francisco.

And then when I transferred to go to school in Fruitvale, I used to take uh the Bart from Coliseum to Fruit Vale every single morning.

I just felt so adult going to the station in the morning with all the other commuters with my little backpack, and I got to listen to music and daydream and think about the life that I want to have.

I currently go to SF State.

I went in for business administration with a minor in Japanese.

Um, but ever since I started taking BART, I kind of got more into transportation and just everything that goes into it.

I definitely want to see BART go to more places in the peninsula and just the Bay Area in general.

People always forget that BART is a very, very young system.

It's only like 50 years old.

So the system is going to be constantly evolving just like it has in London and Paris.

If I didn't have Bart, I would be at home.

Like I would be sitting at home.

I would be very confined to a smaller area because there's so many places where I wouldn't maybe necessarily go if there wasn't a Bart station there.

As a student and someone coming from an immigrant family, there was this sense of democracy, of a democratic benefits of a public transit where all people had access to a system which was fairly affordable.

If Bart wasn't around, I don't think this relationship would be where it is now.

I don't even think I would be where I am right now if it wasn't for Bart.

Dinner was good, babe.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Dishes are yours.

Those don't go in there, babe.

They go in that green compost bin I just got.

That's what that is.

So all the food scripts go in there?

Even the bones?

Yep.

Even if we didn't have that green pail, we can use a paper bag as composting, and we can throw the whole thing out in the green composting bin outside.

What else can go in there, Mom?

Most of these things over here, like coffee grounds and filters, tea bags, soiled paper, like this pizza box, even our shredded paper can go in there.

Oh, really?

I thought the green bin outside was just for your trimmings.

Learn something new every day.

Wow.

That's pretty cool.

Hey, we can compost just apple.

That's right.

Composting is like nature's way of recycling.

All food is rich in nutrients.

The stuff that makes life grow.

Unfortunately, a lot of it ends up in the landfill.

But if we compost that food instead of throwing it away, we get to reuse all those nutrients.

The compost is used as fertilizer in gardens and farms and helps grow more food.

The entire process creates a closed food cycle.

Well, that's pretty cool.

And not only is it good for the planet, it's the law.

If we don't compost right, we can get a contamination surcharge.

Well, aren't you the expert?

Gotta keep up with the times.

And we just dump our compost in the green bin outside, right?

That's right.

Composting.

I got this.

To learn more about composting and Oakland's commitment to zero waste, go to Oaklandrecycles.com.

From New York, this is Democracy Now.

President Trump has been focused ever since he's been in office on making America safe again.

And that is what my job is as a secretary is to make sure that we're following through on exactly what he promised the American people to make sure that we're going after the worst of the worst every single day, get the murderers, the rapists, the child pedophiles and pornographers off of our streets and out of this country.

As the Trump administration vows to arrest up to now 7,000 immigrants a day, we'll speak with an attorney who represents a six-year-old boy from Honduras with leukemia.

Together with his nine-year-old sister and mother, were detained for two months, taken after an immigration hearing.

As ICE moves to deny Bond to those jails and nearly double its capacity to detain 100,000 people, we'll look at a new report.

You feel like your life is over.

Abusive practices at three Florida immigration detention centers since January 2025.

Looking at three of these detention facilities in Florida where people are surviving mass overcrowding, lack of access to basic hygiene, and uh complete in some cases is lack of access to appropriate medical care, which in at least two cases might have actually led to the deaths of detainees.

And finally, as the federal government begins to implement some one trillion dollars in Medicaid cuts, a new documentary examines the moral dilemmas and profit motives surrounding assisted dying that members of the disabled community could face.

It's called Life After.

Welcome to Democracy Now.

Democracy Now.org, the war in Peace Report.

I'm Amy Goodman.

The world health organizations accused Israeli forces of attacking its staff residents and main warehouse in the city of Derabalah in Gaza.

On Monday, Israeli forces entered the WHO premises and handcuffed, stripped, interrogated male staffers and family members.

One WHO staff member remains in detention.

So far today, Israeli forces have killed at least 43 Palestinians, including 10 aid seekers.

Israel killed another 60 Palestinians on Monday.

This comes as the health ministry in Gaza says at least 15 more people, including four children, have died due to famine and malnutrition over the past 24 hours.

Michael Fakri, the UN special rapporteur on the right to food, told Al Jazeera, quote, what we're seeing now in Gaza is the most horrific stage of Israel's starvation campaign.

This is Maltaz Harar, the head of the emergency department at Al Shifa Hospital.

Most patients admitted to the hospital recently are not suffering from war injuries, but from severe malnutrition.

Twenty-eight countries, including Canada and Britain have issued a call for an immediate end to Israel's war on Gaza.

During a speech to Parliament on Monday, British Foreign Secretary David Lamy condemned Israel's militarized aid system in Gaza, noting almost a thousand civilians have been killed while seeking food since May.

The new Israeli aid system is inhumane, it's dangerous, and it deprives Gazans of human dignity.

It contradicts long-established humanitarian principles.

It creates disorder.

Hamas is now exploiting, with distribution points reduced from 400 to just four.

It forces desperate civilians, children among them, to scramble unsafely for the essentials of life.

It's a grotesque spectacle, wrecking a terrible human cost.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump spoke after Monday's sentencing.

Brianna Taylor Killing.

Five years later, is telling us a lot at which direction we're gonna go.

Are we gonna continue to be a democracy?

That upholds the objective of liberty and justice for all, or are we gonna dissent into being a police state where the police can do anything?

Louisville Metro Police arrested four protesters who blocked traffic outside the federal court where Hankison was sentenced on Monday.

Among those arrested was Bianca Austin, Brianna Taylor's aunt.

A warning to our audience: the following story contains graphic footage of police violence.

In Florida, Jacksonville Sheriff TK Waters said Monday, none of the officers involved in the violent arrest and beating of 22-year-old black motorist William Anthony McNeil Jr.

will face criminal charges.

The beating occurred February 19th after Jacksonville sheriffs office deputies pulled McNeil over for driving without his headlights on, even though it was daytime and not even raining.

Now viral cell phone video shows McNeil posing no threat to officers as he questioned why they'd pulled him over.

An officer then breaks McNeil's window and punches him in the face before officers drag him from the car, throw him to the ground and begin pummeling him.

Exit the vehicle now.

Exit the vehicle.

Show me your hands here.

Come here.

What is your reason, sir?

What is your reason?

No, no, no, no, no, no.

McNeil says he suffered a chip tooth that pierced his cheek, requiring stitches, a concussion and short-term memory loss.

Jacksonsville's branch of the NAACP called the video disturbing, adding, this troubling behavior from law enforcement highlights the very reasons why many African Americans, especially African American men feel fear during traffic stops.

The Pentagon says it's withdrawing 700 U.S.

Marines from Los Angeles after their unprecedented deployment in June, as the Trump administration sought to crack down on protests that erupted after a wave of ice raids in Southern California.

Nearly 2,000 National Guard troops remain in Los Angeles.

Mayor Karen Bass has accused the Trump administration of fomenting chaos and making LA a test case for authoritarian rule in U.S.

cities.

ICE agents in South Florida have detained the prominent Haitian entrepreneur, Dr.

Pierre Reginald Bulos.

He was born in the United States, but renounced his U.S.

citizenship to run for president of Haiti.

ICE accused him of being, quote, engaged in a campaign of violence and gang support that contributed to Haiti's destabilization, unquote.

Bullets is being held at the Crome Detention Center.

On Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the Trump administration will begin deporting U.S.

lawful permanent residents who have ties to Vivense Haitian armed group that was recently labeled a terrorist organization by the Trump administration.

Democratic Attorneys General from 20 states in Washington, D.C.

sued the Trump administration Monday, seeking to restore undocumented immigrants' access to federal health and safety net programs.

Their complaint filed in U.S.

District Court in Rhode Island alleges that Trump administration violated administrative law when it cut off immigrants' access to programs including Head Start, mental health services in schools, 24-7 crisis hotlines, and shelters for people lacking housing.

Crew, that's citizens' responsibility and ethics, which sued the OMB and its director Russell Vote for taking down the website.

Celebrated the ruling, writing, quote, contrary to the Trump administration's absurd arguments, it's not unconstitutional for Congress to require the executive branch to be transparent, unquote.

House Speaker Mike Johnson's reversed his call for the Justice Department to release information about the dead serial sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who was a longtime friend of Donald Trump's.

On Monday, Johnson ruled out any votes on measures related to the Justice Department's trove of files on Epstein before the House leaves Washington at the end of the week for its planned August recess.

Johnson said President Trump and his administration needs space.

If further congressional action is necessary or appropriate, then we'll look at that.

That's a reversal from the House Speaker's statement just days earlier when he joined calls from Trump's MAGA base and House Democrats for the Justice Department to release everything it has on Epstein.

It's a very delicate subject, but we should put everything out there and let the people decide it.

On Monday, the White House said it's removing the Wall Street Journal from press seats on President Trump's upcoming trip to Scotland.

The move comes after Trump filed a 10 billion dollar lawsuit against the journal, its parent company, and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, and the two reporters who broke the story that Trump wrote a body birthday card, including a sketch of a naked woman to an album for Epstein's 50th birthday.

Accompanying the sketch was Trump's note to Epstein, quote, happy birthday and many every day be another wonderful secret.

Unquote.

The Trump administration's released over 240,000 pages of FBI records on Martin Luther King Jr.

and his assassination despite opposition from King's children.

In a statement, the King family said, quote, the release of these files must be viewed within their full historical context.

During our father's lifetime, he was relentlessly targeted by an invasive predatory and deeply disturbing disinformation and surveillance campaign.

They talked about the campaign against King by the longtime FBI director, J.

Edgar Hoover.

And a federal judge appears likely to side with Harvard and its lawsuit against the Trump administration for stripping $2.6 billion in research funding to the university.

During a pivotal hearing on Monday, Judge Alison Burroughs said the constitutional consequences of the Trump administration's actions could be staggering.

The Trump administration has claimed Harvard has done not done enough to combat anti-Semitism, but Judge Burroughs called the government claims mind-boggling.

She noted she is Jewish and questioned the relationship between cutting funding for cancer research and ending anti-Semitism.

Trump reacted to the hearing by attacking the judge, saying she's a quote, total disaster.

And those are some of the headlines.

This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, the Warrant Peace Report.

When we come back, as the Trump administration vows to arrest up to 7,000 immigrants to a day.

We'll speak with an attorney who represents a six-year-old boy from Honduras with leukemia.

He, his nine-year-old sister, and his mother were detained for two months by ICE.

They've just been released.

Stay with us.

Sola va mi condena.

Correres mi destino.

Para burlar la ley.

La grande Babilon.

Me dicen clandestino.

Fauna Ciudad del Norte.

Yo me fui a trabajar.

Soy un narraya en el mar.

Dice la autoridad.

Lila Downs performing the Haitian musician Manu Charles Clandestino in our Democracy Now studio.

This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org.

I'm Amy Goodman.

We begin today's show looking at how the Trump administration's pushing ahead on its aggressive quota of as many as seven thousand daily immigration arrests, up from three thousand.

Homeland Security Secretary Christy Gnomes spoke Friday at a news conference in Nashville, Tennessee.

President Trump has been focused ever since he's been in office on making America safe again.

And that is what my job is as a secretary is to make sure that we're following through on exactly what he promised the American people, to make sure that we're going after the worst of the worst every single day.

Get the murderers, the rapists, the child pedophiles and pornographers off of our streets and out of this country.

The worst of the worst.

But according to figures from ICE itself that were obtained by the Cato Institute, over 93% of immigrants arrested this fiscal year were never convicted of any violent offense.

Still, Congress approved some 45 billion dollars to expand ICE's immigration detention capacity, including the jailing of families and children.

We begin today's show with a story of one Los Angeles family arrested after they dutifully showed up at their immigration hearing.

They were then taken to a family detention center in Dilly, Texas that Trump reopened.

On May 29th, plainclothes ICE agents detained a six-year-old boy from Honduras who had acute lymphoblastic leukemia, along with a nine-year-old sister and their mother, as they left their immigration court hearing, in which their asylum case was dismissed, even though they followed every rule of the immigration process.

In detention, the boy missed a key doctor's appointment disrupting his cancer treatment.

The family also said his sister cried every night, afraid as pressure grew over their conditions, the family was released on July 2nd.

And Ice spokesprints and claimed, quote, any implications that ICE would deny a child proper medical care are false, unquote.

Vermore, we're joined by Elora Mukherjee, an attorney who represents the boy and his family.

She's a professor of law and director of the immigrants' rights clinic at Columbia Law School.

Thanks so much for joining us from Columbia.

Elora, tell us the story of this young family and the six-year-old boy with leukemia.

Thank you for having me, Amy.

So this is a family that did everything right.

While they were in Honduras, they faced imminent menacing death threats.

The family then fled to the United States, but they didn't cross the border unlawfully, illegally.

Instead, they waited in Mexico until they had an appointment through the CBP 1 app to enter the United States.

They showed up at exactly the date and time that they were assigned by the U.S.

government.

And at that point, the Department of Homeland Security paroled the family into the United States, necessarily finding that the family posed no danger to the community and no flight risk.

The family then integrated into their community in Los Angeles.

The kids were enrolled in school.

The family attended church every Sunday.

The little boy loved playing soccer in the park with his friends, and they did everything right.

They had never been accused or charged with any crime anywhere in the world, not in the United States.

And then, as you said, they dutifully showed up to their immigration court hearing on May 29th, 2025.

That was a routine immigration court hearing.

All three of them went.

And at the hearing, the mom explained to the immigration judge that she wished to continue with their asylum cases.

But DHS moved to dismiss those cases.

And as soon as the immigration judge granted the motion to dismiss, the family stepped out of the courtroom, and there they were met by men dressed in civilian clothing, ICE officers who arrested them and detained them, told them they couldn't go home, told them they couldn't make a phone call.

The family was first detained in the courtroom in the courthouse itself, and then they were taken to an immigration processing center in Los Angeles.

There, the family was held overnight, not given adequate food.

And while the family was there, an ICE officer lifted his shirt, which displayed a gun.

This terrified the little boy, he urinated on himself.

He was left in wet clothing for hours overnight until the family was put on a flight to Texas the next day.

Then they were detained for over a month.

And throughout that month, I repeatedly begged the Department of Homeland Security to release this family.

The department didn't do so.

That is why, with co-counsel, I filed a federal habeas petition on behalf of the family, and we are all extremely grateful that the family was released earlier this month.

So they were held for just over a month.

You have an ICE spokesperson claiming any implications ICE would deny a child proper medical care are false.

Elora, can you explain?

Can you respond to what that person said?

The mom of this young boy was terrified throughout their time in detention that he wasn't receiving appropriate medical care.

He showed signs of easy bruising.

He lost his appetite.

He and his sister cried every night and prayed to God that God would let them out of this attention center.

And this connects to a broader theme.

Right now, there are hundreds of families who are detained at the Dilly Immigrant Processing Center in Texas.

And for asylum-seeking families and children, detention is just not appropriate.

All the major medical associations, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and other medical organizations have condemned the use of family detention for immigrant children who are seeking asylum, because even brief periods of detention can have long-lasting mental health effects on the children who are affected.

Taking this particular family, it's worth noting that although they've been released from detention, the children are still facing the consequences of their law of their month of detention.

The little boy doesn't want to leave his home.

He's terrified.

He sobs, cries, and screams when his mother takes him out of the house.

The nine-year-old girl lost her appetite while she was in detention, and she's still not eating properly, and their mom is trying to get both kids the medical care that they now need as a result of their time in detention.

You worked on the flora settlement.

Trump is trying to get rid of it.

What is the significance of this?

That children aren't supposed to be held for more than a number of days.

Yes, that's exactly right, Amy.

The Flora Settlement Agreement was reached in 1997.

It has two basic components.

First, it guarantees children in federal immigration custody basic minimal protections, access to adequate water, access to adequate food, access to basic sanitary conditions during their detention.

And two, it prioritizes the release of children as promptly as possible from detention in recognition that detention is not appropriate for children who are seeking asylum, survivors of trauma.

And the Trump administration has moved to terminate the Flora Settlement Agreement, leaving children with no protections in federal immigration custody at a time when 45 billion dollars have been allocated for immigration detention, including for the detention of immigrant families.

What happens to the family now as we wrap up?

For this particular family, they will continue to fight for their right to stay in the United States.

They're pursuing humanitarian relief, specifically asylum.

They have a strong asylum claim, and if they are given a fair opportunity to present their case, I hope that they are able to stay in the United States and continue to make contributions to this country.

We turn now to plans by immigration and customs enforcement, ICE, to nearly double ICE's detention capacity to 100,000 people.

ICE is reportedly racing to build more than uh more detention tent camps after Congress allocated an unprecedented 45 billion dollars in new funding over the next four years to lock up immigrants as part of Trump's massive tax and spending package.

The Homeland Security Department is also reportedly preparing to start detaining immigrants at more military bases, including in New Jersey and Indiana, as well as to transfer more immigrants to the U.S.

naval base at Guantanamo, Cuba.

That's according to MPR, which says Defense Secretary Pete Heggseth approved the plans earlier this month.

As ICE jails across the country face dangerous overcrowding amidst nationwide mass raids, the Trump administration's now moving to revoke access to bond hearings for people who enter the U.S.

through non-approved channels.

The new policy could potentially impact millions of undocumented people and orders officers to detain immigrants for the length of their removal proceedings, a process which can take months or even years.

The rule will apply to people who've recently entered the U.S.

as well as immigrants who've been living here for decades.

From where we go to Washington, DC, where we're joined by Adriela Roscoe, Senior Policy Council of the American Immigration Council.

Welcome to Democracy Now.

What does denying bond mean?

It means that unfortunately, you know, people who have been living in the United States for decades will have to fight their cases behind bars.

We know that these detention centers have histories of medical neglect of horrific conditions, and well, malnutrition.

And so we know that this is one more tool that the Trump administration is trying to use to really scare the community and to get people to give up on their cases because people do not want to remain behind bars during the duration of the removal proceedings, like you said, can take years.

Yeah, that's right.

Uh, you know, I've had clients in the past who have had to stay in detention centers for three months at a time, and they've decided that they would rather accept the removal order because uh they don't have access to be able to talk to their family, or sometimes it's really difficult to even talk to their attorneys.

Uh, and the conditions inside, it's freezing.

Uh, right now we know that at least a fourth of the immigrant detention centers in the country, at least of April, using ICE's data, were overcrowded, and so people are not getting enough to eat, uh, people are having to sleep on floors, and so it's it's pretty horrific what people are having to experience right now in detention centers.

Uh, the American Immigration Lawyers Association said members had reported immigrants were being denied bond hearings in more than a dozen immigration courts across the country, including New York, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Oregon, Virginia.

Um, can you talk about what this means?

Yeah, and so, you know, one of the most troubling aspects of this likely unconstitutional memo is that you know, usually when a person who goes uh before an immigration judge and is in detention, they can ask for a bond.

They can show the immigration judge that they're not a flight risk or that they're not a public safety threat.

And we know that a majority of individuals in immigrant detention right now don't have a criminal conviction.

And so unfortunately, what that means is that uh many of them will not have the opportunity to go before an immigration judge, or an immigration judge might side uh with ICE's interpretation of the law and deny them even a hearing for bond.

And so people who have uh no criminal histories or non-serious criminal histories will have uh U.S.

citizen children in the United States will not even have the opportunity to show that they shouldn't be held in detention.

So this will fill guarantee that um they will need more jails built when people don't get bond.

It means they stay obviously in these jails longer.

Yeah, you know, obviously we understand that this administration is, you know, using every tool that it has to target the immigrant community to scare the immigrant community to hopefully on their end, uh, you know, discourage people from staying in the United States.

And so what they're trying to do here is they're creating a national policy of detention to fill the beds that unfortunately Congress recently funded.

Congress gave 45 billion dollars to ICE to build more detention capacity, which is 13 years of current funding uh that has to be spent within four years.

So we're gonna see a massive expansion of detention, and this policy is to fill those beds.

And so, as we see that massive expansion detention, we're gonna move next into a segment on what these jails look like.

We're gonna go to a human rights watch report.

Adriel Orozco, I want to thank you so much for being with us, senior policy counsel at the American Immigration Council.

When we come back, we'll look at the report.

You feel like your life is over.

Abusive practices at three Florida immigration detention centers since January 2025.

Back in 20 seconds, we have no paye.

So we end up with them, he thought everyone in the field being back.

If you're coming for me by Maku Sound System here in our democracy now studio, this is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, the War and Peace Report by Mamie Goodman.

You feel like your life is over.

That's the title of a new report released jointly by Americans for immigrant justice, The Sanctuary of the South, and Human Rights Watch.

It details dangerous and abusive conditions at three immigration detention centers in Miami, Florida, since Trump returned to office.

One of the detained people they spoke to said detention officers made men equal shackles with their hands behind their backs.

One man said, quote, we had to bend over and eat off the chairs with our mouths like dogs.

The report also describes how detained immigrants are routinely denied access to legal counsel and critical medical care.

Some have been held incommunicado in solitary confinement as an apparent punishment for seeking mental health care.

For more, we're joined by Balkis Villa, an associate director in human rights watch's crisis, conflict, and arms division.

Author of the new report, you feel like your life is over.

Abuse of practice at three immigration detention centers.

Talk about what you found.

What we found was that since January 20th of this year, there has been an upsurge in immigrants being detained, including in particular in in Florida.

And what this meant was that tons of people were being brought to these immigration detention centers.

One of the ones we look at, Chrome within the first three months of the year was suddenly at uh, you know, two, three times its capacity, uh, in terms of the number of people being brought, and and and with that overcrowding came truly horrific uh conditions, unsanitary conditions, people being unable to get access to medical care, both to see medical health professionals and to get um key treatment that they need for chronic health conditions.

Um women being brought to ma a male-only detention center, being held there, and denied any access to medical care because they were told this is a male only facility.

In a TikTok video that went viral in March, an unidentified immigrant from Mexico, uh detained at the chrome ice jail in Miami, begs for help as he secretly records the inhumane conditions inside his overcrowded holding cell.

Several other immigrant men are seen sleeping on the floor.

And the significance of it, what it is showing.

So what we what we see in that video is exactly what was described by these men that were to what that were held at Chrome detention center.

These cells are being used for the quote unquote processing period when people are first brought in.

Now, these cells are only meant to hold a small number of people for a matter of hours.

Those conditions you saw, those are men who were held in there for one week, two weeks in those rooms.

They do not have regular access to showers.

They're in frigid temperatures with the air conditioning blasting.

They're sleeping on concrete floors for days.

Some of the rooms don't have uh, you know, regular access to a sink and soap to wash people's hands.

And as I mentioned, those same cells were being used at some point to hold women being brought to Chrome.

Again, a male-only facility.

The women told me that in their cell they had a toilet, but with the way that the windows were only partially glazed over, male detainees from other cells could actually stand on a chair and look in and watch them while they were using the toilets.

So if you can talk about um the people who have died in detention in Florida, what we saw across all three uh detention centers that we looked at was really a concerning and chronic lack of access to appropriate medical care.

And uh, and what we saw was that people with you know chronic health conditions who um where their records were on file, it was clear that they had uh diabetes or they had HIV or asthma or any number of conditions, they were not being given regular access to their medication, and in some cases, people begging to see a doctor were not given access to a doctor.

And in the case of two instances, uh a Ukrainian man, Maxim, who was brought in, you know, he was in very good health.

His wife said, until he got brought to Chrome.

He got sicker and sicker, was begging to see a doctor.

Uh, he saw medical health professionals that were not prescribing him medication to address his illnesses.

And we spoke to a cellmate uh who describes how in the middle of the night, suddenly he started foaming at the mouth, vomiting, defecated on himself.

That day, again he had been insisting to see a doctor and had not seen one, and he was uh taken away on a stretcher and then died.

And there was also a Haitian woman, the same age as Maxime, also 44, uh, and we interviewed uh a woman who was in the cell opposite her who saw her collapsing.

This is not the Ange Blaise.

Exactly.

This is Marie-Ange Blaise, and and and the woman we spoke to watched as it took um far too long for a guard to come as as as cellmates were screaming for a guard.

The guard came, sauntered over, then walked away slowly before calling the medical team.

They took, you know, 10 15 minutes to arrive, and then one signaled to the rest of the group, you know, it's too late, uh, and and the woman was taken away and then pronounced dead.

So uh she was held at Broward Transitional Center, BTC.

You also report on federal detention center, and of course, Chrome in Miami.

Um, can you talk about what it means when these companies, when these, I didn't actually say it that wrong.

When these jails are privatized, they're companies, and what role do they play in, for example, when they don't have enough food for people?

You save money by not giving them so much food.

Absolutely.

So Broward uh transitional center, BTC and Chrome are both run by private companies that have contracts from uh ICE to run them.

And at a facility like Chrome, as I said, you know, within the first three months of the year, they became, you know, far over capacity of the facility.

And detainees explained to me those that were already detained in 2024, the change in conditions.

Suddenly they weren't getting uh, you know, uh substantial and warm breakfasts anymore, suddenly their meal portions for lunch and dinner were cut.

They were they couldn't even eat in the canteen anymore.

They were required to eat in their cells, which is still the case because the facility is so overcrowded.

And as you said, that's a financial matter that, you know, that's a way of of saving on the money being spent on food.

When we wrote to the companies that are running Chrome and BTC, we got no responses to our substantial allegations.

One company simply wrote back and said, You have to talk to ICE.

Uh, we can't respond to any of your allegations.

Um what exactly is human rights watch calling for now?

I mean, these three detention centers uh in Florida are small example of the mass expanding detention uh complex that is growing across this country from places and swamps like the Everglades, what um the Republicans have called alligator Alcatraz to make it sound a bit cute, um, to uh the new expanding detention centers on military bases.

Absolutely.

I mean, as you said, this is just a small example of a system that is abusive and is treating immigrants in detention in a dehumanizing manner.

One immediate thing uh that that could be done uh by the government uh that would really limit the number of people who are at risk of ending up in these facilities, is to reinstate programs like the humanitarian parole and TPS programs, programs that invited people from Cuba from Haiti, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, to come to this country lawfully, and these people were told they could come to America and got this protection until the situation in the country uh of their origin improved, and instead suddenly we saw a political decision taken to strip these people of their status, and now all of these people, uh, as as their status gets terminated are at risk of being detained at these detention centers.

So that's one very easy and quick fix.

Um, but you know, there are also so many alternatives to detention for immigrants.

It was ICE itself in 2004 that developed an alternative to detention program, a program that by by many measures was effective.

Why do we are, why are we seeing a system that is using detention centers as the default when we're showing very clearly these detention centers are carrying out abuses and not just abuses of international human rights law, but abuses of ICE's very own detention standards.

What does it mean?

And maybe you can't answer this, but when uh ICE jail is placed on a military base, already Congress members who have every right to go at any time unannounced to an ICE jail to investigate, to inspect, are having trouble getting in under the Trump administration.

But if they then have to get not only permission from ICE, but from the Pentagon to get onto a military base.

That's of extreme concern.

Uh so much of the the immediate solution that's needed to address and reign in these abuses is oversight, and oversight includes an ability for uh those in power to visit these facilities and to ensure that abuses are not being carried out.

What we heard from people at facilities like Chrome is that when the management of the facilities and ICE found out there was going to be a visit, you know, a few nights before, suddenly a hundred men would get transferred out, a wall would get repainted, so that it, you know, the reality of the facility and its overcrowding would not be properly seen.

So when you're talking about facilities that are even harder to get access to, it really means we're talking about a black hole that does not allow for appropriate oversight of conditions.

Belgisville, we want to thank you for being with us, associate director and human rights watch's crisis, conflict and arms division.

We'll link to your new report.

You feel like your life is over.

This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, The War and Peace Report, I'm Amy Goodman.

As the federal government begins to implement some one trillion dollars in Medicaid cuts called for in President Trump's budget bill, which gives massive tax breaks to the wealthy.

We end today's show with a new investigative documentary that examines the moral dilemmas and profit motives surrounding assisted dying that members of the disabled community could face.

It's called Life After, directed by acclaimed filmmaker Reed Davenport.

As one reviewer put it, Davenport is uniquely positioned to tell the story.

He himself has cerebral palsy.

This is the trailer for Life After.

Elizabeth Bouvet is asking for help.

Trapped in a useless body.

She says she deserves the right to die quietly.

What was your purpose in being a meditaric hospital?

Sorry for myself to death.

The more research, the more beginning to think that we're still.

Requests for medical assistance in dying are increasing across the country.

We're beginning to hear more stories about people feeling it's their only recourse from excruciating circumstances.

I didn't want to really end my life.

But it really just came down to a matter of funding at that point.

The health system is basically gonna tell you you should kill yourself because that's the cheapest option.

Many people are afraid of disability.

They've never had to interact with it before.

The decision makers are really ruining our chances of surviving.

I feel that this film will be dismissed as cynicism.

But the death of disabled people has been justified for so long.

Doctors encouraged me to pull the plug.

It's about the phenomenon as these disabled people desperate to find their place in the world that perpetually rejects them.

There are too many uninsured questions.

That's the trailer for the new investigative documentary Life After, directed by Reed Davenport and produced by Colleen Cassingham with multitude films.

They both appear in the film.

I spoke to them on Monday.

Congratulations on winning the US documentary special jury award at Sundance, where the film premiered earlier this year.

Um I wanted to start off by asking you about why you made this film and how it ties into this current moment, where we're gonna see something like in the next few years, 17 million people losing their health insurance with millions losing their Medicaid.

Reed.

I write about Boom Bay about eight years ago.

I was injured, I was just story, because many disabled activists who are done as progressive, also are very interesting, freaking British and then with a figure, she could possibly be alive.

That was a new that this was a film.

Unfortunately, this film is growing into other rents, they brought out with the medicated guts.

Um disabled people alive, but barely.

We're only deep in abuse poverty, and you have disabled people to early graves.

And Colleen, if you can talk about your involvement with this film.

Sure.

Reed brought this film to me and to my team at multitude of films back in 2020 or 2021, and it was um around the time that um Canada had just expanded its assisted dying legislation made um to include eligibility for disabled people on the basis of disability.

And so um, you know, I knew this was a film that we wanted to be involved with just because of the sort of personal political perspective um expansion it had for me.

You know, I personally thought I was um for assisted suicide legislation.

It seemed like it to me it was a matter of personal choice and bodily autonomy, which I'm deeply committed to, and it was working on this film with Reed that really changed my perspective to um understand that these questions are really about what kind of society we want to be and how we want to care for and uphold each other's dignity.

Um, and there's so many uh layers of ableism and systemic failure that influence the ways that assisted suicide legislation is able to be implemented that make it so dangerous for disabled people.

So, you know, with the Medicaid cuts um on the horizon.

The reason I feel this film is so important right now is because people with disabilities experience already experienced huge health disparities.

And so when you introduce a policy like assisted suicide, it takes a group of people who are already incredibly marginalized by our system and gives the institutions and the people with power a profit motive for denying those people care.

This film is particularly relevant here in New York as Governor Hokel has a bill on her desk, uh, which she has not yet signed.

Can you explain its significance?

New York is said to be one of about 12 states that would allow assistance suicide uh for people who are terminated ill.

Um, however, we know it that appears to happen.

We know that disabled people who are not dying are able to uh use doctors to record their way into this line, uh dumping returning, for example, people who have diabetes are technically with their incident, so that that can be used to another diabetes who is not dying to access assistant service.

I want to go to another clip from Life After.

It's with Melissa, the wife of Michael Hickson, an Austin man who in 2017 suffered an anoxic brain injury that made him blind and damaged his spinal cord.

The hospital that was treating him wanted to end life-saving measures when he needed to be treated for COVID at that Austin, Texas hospital.

Michael went into sudden cardiac arrest while he was driving me to work.

As a result of that, he had an anoxic brain injury, he was blind and had a um spinal cord injury that caused him to be quadriplegic.

Several doctors kept saying to me, it's all you know, we can just let him go.

We know if you want us to, we can.

In fact, they encouraged it.

My goal for him was to go to a place where they specialized and care for people with brain injuries and spinal cord injuries.

That was never what they wanted.

I was villainized for trying to get the care that Michael needed the whole time.

I was always encouraged to let him go to pull the plug to not treat.

It would just be easier.

Did you expect doctors to be discriminated to it, or was this a shock for you?

I think as most people believe that doctors are healers, that they're there to help you get better.

I never thought that a doctor would ever question life.

So that was Melissa Hickson being interviewed by Reed Davenport, the director of Life After.

At the end of this interview, Reed, you hug Melissa.

Talk about why you reached out to her.

Um, she really can't do because Michael's showing was so devastated.

Um, and it wasn't getting the attention that it was uh, and we were asking medicine to bear some very deep, pretty new rooms that do the interview.

I think it was just about trying to be a decent person, recognizing we were there to do something difficult, and trying our best to use the pain and make it uh to make it less hard.

I want to go to another clip from your film Life After, where you speak to a Canadian man named Michael Calazan, who has spinal muscular atrophy.

He lost his mother, who is his primary caretaker, and is considered dying through Canada's maid program.

That's MAID, medical assistance in dying.

When we heard mom's diagnosis, I had basically three thoughts.

My first thought was OMG, Mom's going to die soon.

My second thought was OMG, I'm going to die shortly thereafter.

And then I thought, OMG, how do I get my together?

I didn't want to really end my life.

Right.

You know, it's really just came down to a matter of funding at that point.

There's a facade of universal health care in this country that claims to take care of anyone who gets ill.

But the truth is we have these points of crisis in our healthcare system where people are falling through not cracks, but massive openings in the system.

That's Ash Kelly, a Canadian journalist.

And before that, Michael Callison said he didn't really want to die.

But since his mother was his main caretaker, M.

Reed, in this story, what's surprising as it's pointed out is that Canada has national health care.

Yeah, I think as a very count, especially if you're on the left, can you look up to Canada as this mobile country where everybody has health care, but their health care, even if it's nationalized, extremely overpurdened, and it's on the virtual life.

The we lines are endless.

It can take years to see us passionists or even a therapist.

The health care is by no means again in Canada.

That's Reed Davenport, director of the new investigative documentary Life After, and producer Colleen Cassingham with multiple films.

The film has won major awards at Sundance.

There will also be virtual companion screenings as well, so the film will be accessible.

You can check their website, life after film.com for locations and dates.

And you can go to our website to see our 2022 interview with Reed about his first documentary, I didn't see you there, in which he is a disabled filmmaker reflects on the portrayal of disability in media and popular culture.

We have job openings.

Go to Democracy Now.org.

Democracy Now is produced with Mike Burke, Renee Feltz, Dina Guster, Messiah Rhodes, Nermin Shay, Maria Tarasena, Tammy Waranoff, Charina Nadura, Sam Alcoff, Tamarie Astudio, John Hamilton, Ravi Karen, Honey Massood, and Safa Nazal.

Our executive director is Julie Crosby.

Special thanks to Becca Stalin, John Randall, Paul Powell, Mike DePolippo, Miguel Negera, Hugh Grant, Dennis Moynihan, David Crude, Dennis McCorbitt, Matt Ely, Anna Ozbeck, Emily Anderson, Dante Torrieri, and Buffy St.

Marie Hernandez.

To see our Democracy Now video and audio podcast, you can go to where you like to get your podcasts.

We're also all over social media.

Tell your friends about Democracy Now.

We are corporate free people powered.

I mean, good thing.

With the economy being up and down, it's so hard to pay your rent, your mortgage, and even stay connected online.

But guess what?

Help is on the way.

Oak Wi-Fi is hooking the community up with free Wi-Fi.

I know I need it, so I know you need it too.

Between live stream YouTube and staying relevant on social media, I can use some free Wi-Fi.

Visit Oakland CA.gov slash Oak Wi-Fi.

Let's get connected, Oakland.

Hello everyone, and welcome to this edition of Oak Talks, our very own opportunity to create a platform for Oakland small business community to talk about their hopes, their dreams, their challenges and aspirations for running businesses here in the city of Oakland.

I'm your host today.

I'm Christy Johnson Limon.

I'm the deputy director of economic and workforce development here.

And welcome to Cape Top Studios.

So today we're going to be hearing from three locally owned independent businesses in Oakland.

Why does that matter?

Well, because businesses are the heart and soul of our city.

Here in Oakland, we are a small business town in the town.

Almost 100%, I would say about 93% of businesses here in Oakland are run by families by independent business owners, and so they are a core part of why we call Oakland Oakland.

And so I'm glad you're here with us today.

I also want to thank our partners, the Oakland Fund for Public Innovation.

What they've done is they have embedded what are calling cultural strategists into city government.

And so today's Oak Talks series was brought to you by our cultural strategist, who is uh the owner of the Bay Area Organization of Black Owned Businesses, Bayobob.

And with that, I want to welcome Yavet Holtz over here to give you a little bit more information about our cultural strategist than what you're going to hear today.

Please welcome Yvette Holtz.

Thank you, Christy.

It is amazing to see all these beautiful faces in the audience today.

I'm so happy y'all are here.

Oak Talks is really the response to the question how do we get qualitative information about the life and experience of small business in Oakland?

And in my opinion, the best way to do that was to ask them directly and to give them the opportunity to really speak and be heard and not just listened to but heard.

And that's what Oak Talks is.

And today, as Christy said, we have three speakers.

Our first is a business owner who's rooted in Deep East Oakland, a homeowner, a business owner, and a community engaged person who is doing work with youth.

And also with retail that is bringing a message to Oakland.

Shanti Jackson is the founder owner of Oakland Don't Play.

And if you would please join me in uh welcoming her to the stage.

Thanks.

Thank you guys for coming today.

Uh, as you've had said, I am Shanti Jackson.

Uh Oakland Don't Play is actually in my backyard.

We are a short walk from the Coliseum.

So I started Oakland Don't Play in 2020.

Oakland Don't Play was a rise to a lot of ginger gentrification and discrimination that we have started to see in Oakland.

Uh 2020, we had the barbecue Becky incident and a lot of other things like that with the Proud Boys walking around Oakland.

And we said, Oakland don't play that.

Stuff like that doesn't happen here.

Nationally, we're used to seeing things like that, but not here.

So Oakland Don't Play was my way of putting out a message on clothing to let people know this is this is not how we rock.

We put out some pretty controversial in your face designs, denouncing white supremacy and also highlighting our blackness.

But the city said they wanted more.

They wanted more things from us, more designs, and that's what we did.

In 2022, we opened our storefront in our backyard.

And our storefront also doubles as an event space.

So we host parties and do a lot of different things for our community.

Some of the events that we do are backpack giveaways, where we're able to provide over a hundred backpacks and free haircuts for children.

We also do Halloween parties, Easter egg hunts, and things like that.

As you can see, we have the firefighters and we have other community groups come in so that the people in our community can build bridges with the people that are serving us, right?

We believe that Oakland Don't Play.

If we invest in the youth and our community that eventually those kids are gonna grow up, and those kids are gonna be a part of the change.

And then if our community knows each other, then if something's happening outside, I can call my neighbor.

I know the guy across the street.

I know our store man, right?

So our events help cultivate that community.

Despite all the great things that we do at Oakland Don't Play, there will be people who never get to experience it.

There will be people who never see Oakland the way that I see Oakland.

Why?

Right?

Because we're in Deep East Oakland, and this is what it looks like around the corner.

All these pictures I took on my walk.

I walk my dogs every morning.

We walk up 85th, past the 81st Library, make it right on San Leandro Boulevard, make it right at the Coliseum, and we head home.

This is disgusting, it's unsanitary.

It's scary for somebody who's not from Oakland.

But I'm from here, and I know what Oakland is, and I know what Oakland can be, but when people are coming for these different events at the Coliseum, they don't they don't know our background.

They've only heard the things on social media or the news, the negative things about Oakland.

And when they see this trash, it's a confirmation.

Obviously, would you want to walk with your kids down this street after a ball game?

Would you?

No.

Absolutely.

Right?

So the people who are all this foot traffic that's coming to the Coliseum, coming through the bar station, we'll never see it.

Right?

Yeah, obviously, this is a deterrent for sales and things like that, but it's also unfair to the people who live in these communities.

I shouldn't have to pack my dogs up and go to Alameda or go to San Leandro Marina for a clean, peaceful walk.

Most people go for a jog in their neighborhoods.

I do.

But most won't.

In addition to the trash, we have the abandoned cars.

Those abandoned cars attract crime.

People with mental health and substance abuse issues are coming scavenging for parts.

Do you think they're stopping at that vehicle once they're in our neighborhoods?

They're not.

So for the people who are in the community, we are affected by this.

But if I was a tourist, I wouldn't park my rental car on this street either.

Right?

So as I spoke about these are some of the things that are impacting us, right?

And when you see things like that, it gives us an additional, a loss of confidence in our city.

We're paying taxes, we're paying waste management.

But yet this is happening.

I know you guys get it.

Dumping is an issue, it's preventing tourism, it's preventing our economy from growing, and we have a great opportunity with the Coliseum Corridor.

But what can we do about it?

I do want to say I'm sure there are people in this room who are a part of initiatives and have tried things, and I want to say thank you.

I've been in Oakland all my life, so I know that this deep East Oakland trash situation is not new.

I've seen things tried, and today I just want to propose a couple ideas, right?

There are amazing things that the city already offers, like free dumping once a month, you go to the dump, it's free.

I want you guys to think outside the box to consider even an initiative like that, that's great.

But that's assuming that people have vehicles to get to the dump.

What about the people who can't get there?

And I'm not talking about the unhoused population, there are people without vehicles.

In addition to that, there could be a situation where a family of five is in a one-bedroom apartment.

And there's a very small can.

If they have any celebration or engagement, their trash can is overflow.

When your trash is overflown, waste management will not pick up the trash.

So I just want you guys to think outside the box when we're thinking about the people who are dumping and the initiatives that can be put in place, and I would like to say, on these walks with my dogs, there is a lot of this trash that is construction related.

Unhoused people aren't painting houses.

They're not coming with these couches.

So I don't know if you know.

I know when we plan parties and we request permits, we have to provide a plan to say, hey, this is what we're gonna do with our recycles, this is what we're gonna do with our trash.

Is there something like that in place for developers?

I'm not sure.

My apologies for not doing my research if it is.

But these are the things we have to consider.

311 is another amazing initiative that the city has.

Next day it's gone.

I mean, it's kudos to anybody who's a part of that initiative.

It works great.

But can we be proactive?

We have the data from the high dumping areas.

Can we add dumpsters to those areas?

Can we maybe take one of the drivers from the route and just have them just dump those?

Can't maybe oversimplifying it, but I don't really think we have much to lose.

Some may say it's gonna welcome more trash.

It can get any worse than that.

So today I want to encourage you all to think outside the box.

If there is a way for us to be proactive in some of these situations, let's try it.

There are people who live in these communities.

There are people who walk their dogs.

I've met a lot of my neighbors on morning walks.

I see a lot of people walking their children.

Walking past trash or walking in the street.

And we know walking in a crosswalk in Oakland is not safe.

So thank you guys.

I appreciate it.

If there are any questions, I'll be happy to take questions.

The real reason why I even decided to stand up, because I just wanted to say shout out to you.

You went through whatever you didn't been through in town, like everything.

And you still dreaming.

You still think in transformation.

What what what makes you tick?

What makes you continue to believe?

That's a good question.

I love Oakland.

I love Oakland a lot.

Oh goodness, don't start.

But I really love my city.

And I know what I'm 34 years old and I knew what it was.

And I have an older sister who's in the audience, and she talks about like the lake when the lake used to have it the big concerts.

And I remember going to Anne One, you know, when Anne One used to come to the Coliseum, and the the Silver Bowl being at the Coliseum, and it was safe.

Like it was always Oakland, but it was safe enough for us to be able to ride our bikes or walk to parties.

We used to walk from seminary to like 85th.

I think about that now.

And it's like I have a son that's six years old.

And I don't, I want him to be able to experience the Oakland that I experience.

I have family that's migrating out of the state because you know they want to get banged for their book and they don't want to have to fight with the crime.

And I'm invested.

You know, and and we, you know, and and I'm on the outside now.

I'm it's worth it, and I'm willing to thug it out and taking opportunities like this to speak, you know, um, and come up with ideas.

I mean, literally, we talk about this stuff all the time.

So I'm with you.

Absolutely.