All Yeah.

Yep.

Good morning, everyone, welcome to the rules.

Rules and legislation committee meeting of Thursday, October sixteenth, twenty twenty-five.

The time is now ten fifty-five AM, 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.

If you are here in chamber and wish to speak on any item on this agenda, please fill out a speaker's card and hand it to a clerk representative.

Speaker cards will be accepted within the first ten minutes of this meeting.

This meeting came to order at ten fifty-five AM.

Therefore, we will be accepting speaker cards up until eleven oh five AM.

I will now proceed with taking role of council members present.

I'll move approval.

Second.

There's a motion made by Councilmember Fife, seconded by Councilmember Brown, excuse me, to accept the draft minutes.

On roll, Council members.

Aye.

Brown, thank you.

Fife?

Aye.

Rama Chandran.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with four ayes.

Moving to our discussion item before we go to new scheduling.

To item number six.

Adopt a resolution accepting the police commission selection panel slate of two commissioners, Ricardo Garcia Acosta and Omar Farmer to serve on the Oakland Police Commission.

Move to wave the presentation.

Move approval.

Second.

There is a motion made by Council President Jenkins, seconded by Councilmember Ramachandran to approve the recommendations of staff and forward this item to the October 21st City Council agenda on consent on roll.

Council members brown consent.

Non consent.

Aye.

Five.

Oh wait, wait.

Public comment.

My apologies.

We do have some speakers for this item.

Miss Asada Olabala, Rashida Grenache, Elise Bernstein, Laurie Lay Bosserman.

Through the chair, I do not have a number for Heather Devison.

I have a speak maybe for six as well.

Charles Edelson, Rajni Mandal, Wilson Files, Carol Dreza, Millie Cleveland, Paula Hawthorne, John Jones III.

No name from selection panel.

Mariana Cantrans, Carlos Eddy, Annx, John Lindsay Poland.

In no particular order, please state your name for the record.

If you heard you heard your name in Zoom, please raise your hand in the Zoom application.

Good morning for the record, John Jones III.

I would I definitely urge the reappointments of Commissioners Ricardo Garcia Acosta and Omar Farmer.

We know that our OPD chief has tendered his resignation.

So this body, the police commission is tasked with among other things.

I have to find some prospective chiefs.

And it's my understanding that there's already two vacancies on this body.

So at a time where we hear about a lot of challenges in our city, let's make sure we're doing everything we can to equip these wonderful folks, right, with the tools.

And most of all with the capacity to do the work that they're tasked to do.

So thank you so very much.

Good morning.

My name is Paula Hawthorne, and I am the former chair of the Measures Oversight Commission, where Omar Farmer was a member when I was a member.

When I was chair, he was the co-chair.

When I decided to step down, I asked him if he would become chair.

He was unanimously voted chair.

He is an amazingly good, hardworking, intelligent person who is a great value to any commission that he is on, and he's been on several in Oakland.

The police commission definitely needs his presence.

It's hard to get people who will read every one of the reports that's given to them.

It's a volunteer commission.

People have other lives.

Omar, those of us who've gotten his middle of the night emails.

No, Omar works really hard, and he is and has incredible integrity.

As does Ricardo.

These are two people who belong on the police commission, and we shouldn't even be having to discuss it.

It should be very easy to call this.

It is, they are two great people.

Thank you.

I know Ovar Farmer from his work that he did with the reimagining task force.

I know Omar Farmer with his work working for Measure Z.

I know Omar Former with his work on the police commission, the ad hoc committee.

I know Omar Former for being a veteran in the Navy in his participation on the Veterans Board.

I know Omar Former.

I voted for him last March when he ran for uh Alameda Cana Board of Supervisors.

I have never met an individual who has the integrity of Omar Farmer, who can work with different groups of people, who is non-confrontational, who does his homework, who speaks, he worked for the alarm system that came before you.

We worked with Kaplan on that.

I know Omar Farmer because he puts in the work.

When he made a statement when he was before the commission that he had been a victim of police brutality, he works with a group that deals with racial profiling.

I mean, what more do you want?

Why is this an issue about him?

And I have seen Mr.

Acosta do the work effectively, being a good leader.

I'm not as familiar with him, but I've observed him.

I was in the meetings this week with Mr.

Omar Falmer.

How he led the name is Wilson Riles, and I speak to you as a former council member, as well as a multi-year member of the police commission.

That's to say that I was a member of prior police commissions, which did not function as well as the present police commission does because of the current membership that we have, including Omar Farmer and Mr.

Acosta.

The criticisms that have brought against them are bogus.

Is that he directs the staff?

He directs the staff no more than you do.

When you sit in a meeting, you're discussing an item, and you ask the staff to provide information.

Some one of you, it comes to your mind first to ask, but all of you are in consent about the need for that item.

It's not a uh benefit for any individual, one of you.

That is what happens with Omar Farmer when the charge is that he's directing staff.

He's not directing staff, he's part of the commission, and the commission needs and wants that information by consensus.

This needs to be moved forward by the rules committee to the city council.

Mike's on Mike's on, yes.

Hi, I'm Oni Crivera.

I'm a panelist on the selection panel.

Um, couple of items that we had was we did follow a rigorous process to um for these candidates to choose them.

We have background checks on them.

We have reference checks on them.

I looked at our documentation, it's all in line.

Also, we did um scoring cards, and we have a scoring cards from everything from interpersonal to judgment to analytic analytics, values, and level of interest.

So we have five parts, and we do follow that.

One of the things I am disappointed in city council is that we do have openings for district four.

We will have to appoint someone because district four still has not appointed somebody to our panelists board.

So our work is very necessary because we don't have the support to keep it going any other way.

We will lose and we'll have to choose again, and we'll be up here in another couple weeks.

Our process took about four months.

We've sent it out to several different organizations.

I personally send it out to about 300 organizations to get uh candidates.

This time we've got nine, and we were able to interview four.

Some of the ones that the public said that they were interested in, did not show up.

Again, we didn't have enough people on that.

The second part, any of the complaints about any of the candidates does not come to us.

It should have been directed to the public ethics commission.

If there is rules or decisions, that wasn't a reason to send it back to us.

But our process is in order, our documents in order.

So I just wanted to know what other issues we had with our panelists' choice.

Thank you.

Councilmember Ramachandra.

Thank you.

For the record, I did submit a name for the selection panel from District 4 back in March.

Order in the chambers.

Good afternoon, Mariano Contreras, a community remember of the negotiated settlement agreement for the police commission ad hoc.

I'm speaking on behalf of Commissioner Farmer and Chair Garcia Acosta to be moved along and confirmed at the City Council.

If you folks uh review charter 60, the uh section 604 of the charter, it clearly states that there is a selection panel, that they do the selection, they move it along to rules, rules move it along.

If there's any issues with that, then they should have been taken up at the level of the selection panel.

Um the job of a commissioner is, and so the system is working.

Uh, back in uh twice the the Oakland voters voted in that charter, so it's working the way it the way it was intended to work.

The job of a commissioner is to ask the difficult questions.

That's one of the criticisms of these of one of these commissioners.

And the other accusation is that one of them perhaps has an has an agenda, and I believe that agenda is to make sure the constitutional policing is insured at this level and in our city.

So I don't know who's who has a hidden agenda.

You know, there is seems to be a conservative element in the city of Oakland that wants to eliminate police oversight, and we don't need that.

We need to make sure that we don't roll back to the 1990s of the writers.

Thank you.

I am here as a member of the coalition of police accountability, and a member of a resident of District 4.

Um, I want to support the slate of both Ricardo uh Garcia Costa and Omar Farmer.

I think uh people have spoken about how productive they are.

I think in particular that uh with ICE coming into Oakland, uh Ricardo is the only Latino on the police commission, and I think that's uh would be a significant loss for you to vote this slate down.

I think Omar Farmer has demonstrated his ability to provide uh very constructive um comments at the uh police commission.

But I also want to raise that I am concerned that if you had concerns about this issue, why didn't you call whoever you appointed on the selection panel?

You could have gone and reviewed the video, but some random person comes and gives you a letter and you have a knee-jerk reaction to pull the names, these names were submitted September 25th.

If Rule 19 requires you to have some sort of consideration, then why wasn't consideration considered September 25th?

This is clearly an attempt to delay the appointment of qualified commissioners.

Um my name is Carol Dreisen from CPA and um SCIU 10 to 1.

Um, I'm here, I don't need to elaborate because people have been talking about the candidates who are very good.

I'm here to urge their reappointment to the commission, and we have gone through a process.

They have been vetted, they have actually participated, they have done a good job.

There is no reason that they shouldn't be appointed.

I have not yet heard a real good rationale for it or or a justification for why this is being delayed, except for what I suspect is the ongoing trumpification of our politics, even in the city of Oakland, and I don't think that's proper.

Thank you.

Good morning.

I'm John Lindsay Poland of the American Friends Service Committee.

I am also here on behalf of AFSE to speak in support of these two nominations.

I have worked as a community member of the Military Equipment Ad hoc committee of the commission and have found Mr.

Farmer to be always well prepared, always respectful, always hardworking, always looking for agreement, always looking for clarification.

That is something that is clearly needed.

And I am disturbed to have the sense that there is political interference in the selection process, that there are some members of this council who are seeking to politicize the process in spite of a unanimous recommendation by a selection panel, and as you heard, a correct process by that panel.

As I understand it, these uh recommendations were given uh more than 60 days ago to the rules committee in early August.

And I wonder from the city attorney what date the clock starts to go in order to for the 60 days to run out to make their appointments automatic.

I would I think it would be helpful to have an opinion on that since the rules committee should not be incumbent on when the rules committee agendizes a matter, but when the selection panel actually submits those nominations to the rules committee.

Thanks so much.

Good morning, members of the rules committee.

My name is Charles Eddy.

I live in District 3, and I am a member of the police commission's selection panel.

Please respect and support the careful work of this panel and schedule on the council's calendar our unanimous recommendations for new full-term appointments of service on the Oakland Police Commission for Commissioner Ricardo Garcia Acosta and alternate commissioner Omar Farmer.

We followed all of the required protocols for recruiting candidates, reviewing resumes, conducting interviews, considering public comment, checking resumes, and selecting finalists to forward to the council for their approval.

I stand with my selection panel colleagues in full support of Ricardo and Omar.

They are both clearly the best qualified candidates by virtue of their knowledge of relevant issues, long histories of support for constitutional policing, their outstanding service on the commission, and their demonstration and commitment that Oakland can oversee itself and finally emerge from federal oversight.

The selection panel's good work has been done, and we continue to support both of these well-qualified.

No legitimate reason was provided as to why the police commission appointments were initially rejected by the rules committee.

Although we are not an investigative body, we do pay attention to issues that the police commission addresses and their conduct.

We interview candidates, review submitted applications and supporting documentation thoroughly, check references and hear public opinion.

The initial rejection and postponements will now affect quorum and stall the work of the police commission while they navigate the process for the selection of a new chief.

Oakland can't afford to delay the selection of a police chief.

We made these police commission appointments in July of 2025 for the Rules Committee to question the selection panel's appointment without basis, is a disrespect to the work of the members of the selection panel.

We fact-checked through review of footage of police commission meetings and found no verification of the allegations or adverse opinions, thus making the appointments unanimously as a group.

The selection panel stance is that our work was completed with fidelity, and we stand behind our unanimous appointments.

And now I, Ann Janks, would just like to shout out Ken Houston.

Ken Houston, when there was a vacancy on the selection panel, he quickly made an appointment.

His appointee was able to participate in these considerations that resulted in the unanimous vote.

He's also attended selection panel meetings.

I'm very disappointed at council members who have not engaged with a selection panel until they decided to interfere.

Thank you.

My name is Rajni Mundel from District 4.

I'm a mom in Montclair, and I'm also here representing over a thousand neighbors in the North Hills Community Association.

I'm here to speak about the reappointments of the police commission.

I hope this item is placed on the council's non-consent calendar because it does deserve discussion as we've heard today.

As I've said earlier, I do not approve of the reappointment of Womar Farmer.

I have sent you a letter outlining how he has a conflict of interest due to complaint against OPD, has had unauthorized contact with the Federal Monitors team, has involved himself with administration of staff and more.

But what I haven't said is that I believe both of the commissioners' behavior has contributed to the resignation of our chief of police, who is required to attend these multiple hour long meetings and endure questions and comments, challenging his experience and authority.

Mr.

Farmer and Chair Garcia Costa have repeatedly challenged the chief's comments about discipline, expertise about military equipment, and judgment about running his department.

Both of these commissioners' reappointments require debate and discussion.

Please place this item on the non-consent calendar.

Thank you.

If you heard your name and you are in chamber, please approach the podium if you still wish to speak.

Other than that, I will go to our Zoom speakers, starting with Lori Lay Bothman.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

Okay, thank you.

My name is Lorelai Bosserman.

I used to be on the selection panel.

I was on the selection panel when Ricardo Garcia Acosta and Omar Farmer were first selected to be on the police commission.

I was impressed with them then.

I have continued to be impressed with them as I have watched the work they have been doing.

The selection panel does not always recommend that an incumbent commissioner be reappointed.

Selection panel members keep track of what a commissioner does in the role.

They solicit feedback from other commissioners about how effective the incumbent has been and what the incumbent is like to work with.

We also re-interview the incumbent, asking for examples of what they have accomplished and what they plan to do if they are reappointed.

When the selection panel recommends appointing, reappointing an incumbent commissioner, it is a carefully considered decision.

Please accept the selection panel's recommendation to reappoint Commissioner Omar Farmer and Commission Chair Ricardo Garcia Acosta.

They are both dedicated to the work, they are both willing to listen to alternate viewpoints, and they both understand the mission of the police commission, which is to oversee OPD.

The selection panel tries to stay out of the politics, but sometimes the politics come to the selection panel.

A handful of very vocal people have started coming to meetings and calling for less police oversight.

Please don't listen to advice from people who don't think police oversight is necessary.

The police commission was created to address OPDs on.

Thank you for your comments.

Moving to our next Zoom speaker, Charles Idleton.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments, Charles.

Yes, thank you.

My name is Charles Adleson.

I'm a resident of District 4.

If you were doing your job addressing public safety issues robustly for public safety, it would help you understand, it would help if you understand the role of the police commission.

You're supposed to address general public safety, and the police commission is supposed to make sure the Oakland police department does constitutional policing.

The misbehavior in the OPD, which has made us less safe and cost the city more money, as you know, as you well know.

There are there are two very serious scandals in the last few years.

One is requiring a review of a hundred felony cases.

The lawsuits and appeals cost money that is not available for addressing real public safety.

It also hurts the police department.

I saw the council members were recently very upset about the turnover of police chiefs that made the news.

But the cost of scandals are what results in the turnover, not the oversight.

The oversight is our way out of the space cycle.

That's why the police union and their lackeys are fighting it so hard.

You probably know that there was recently a ruling in Vallejo finding a common practice of police misconduct, which is which is right for Phileo, but it's also true in Oakland.

You should follow the and support the police uh review commission.

Thank you.

Thank you, Charles.

Moving to Heather Davison.

You may unmute Heather and begin your comments.

Can we start the clock, virtual clock through the chair?

Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Heather Davison, and I've been an Oakland resident since 1989.

Uh I love the city.

Of late, it doesn't seem as if the city council is doing much to address some significant concerns that I have.

I'm far from alone.

Um scores of my neighbors and friends have similar issues.

We want to see real action on illegal dumping.

The blight on Oakland streets has increased enough over the last year to make it front page national news.

We want police working with the communities they're assigned to.

We want macro to answer low level 911 calls so the police officers can deal with more urgent calls.

We want civilian workers to do administrative work so sworn officers are freed up to do any real public safety work.

We want a professional, honest, ethical, and transparent police department.

We need the oversight.

We want the council to pay real attention to police overtime that crushes our city budget every year.

These are issues all supported by the majority of Oaklanders and certainly those who have spoken before me.

Instead of working on solutions for concerns you hear on a daily basis, uh, any movement forward has often been impeded, this time because of an unresearched and inaccurate letter.

This latest delay is unacceptable.

Rather than listening only to the police union talking points, please make a proactive move and put the appointees on the agenda for a vote by the council.

Thank you.

And the buck stops with the council.

This item deserves the council's full attention.

Public safety is the number one concern of residents, and the small business community have been asking for it.

I joined ad hoc military equipment committee.

And let me tell you, citizens' voice is we're silenced.

That's why I'm rushing here to appeal to you personally.

There is a consideration to use.

Excuse me.

Do you want to take some time to catch your breath?

Sorry, to really rush you.

No, let me continue.

There's a consideration to use the bear cat, which is an armored vehicle that we need, and right now the commission is considering to not approve it.

But we need the bear cat to rescue hostages when there's a school shooting.

They're saying these are military equipment, but these are emergency vehicles that show up when residents call when there's a 911 situation.

If there are school kids that need to be rescued, we need vehicles that are designed to be ballistic resistant.

When we have side shows that are people throwing Molikov cocktails, we need the armored vehicle that is fire resistant to break up these sideshow and not harm our our residents or or uh emergency responders.

So these are critical issues that has to do with public safety.

The number one concern of Oakland residents, it's is incumbent upon the council to act and move this to the consent calendar.

Thank you.

Returning to our Zoom users, Rashida Granage.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Rashida.

Okay.

Media ministry.

Media ministry table.

Good afternoon.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

I am in my name is Ms.

Berlin Jenkins from the Coalition for Police Accountability.

I'm calling to urge the council to support the adoption of the police commission selection panel slate.

These people volunteer their time to come in and look over things for our city.

These people do not get paid for these things.

They leave their family, including the commissioners, to do a job that no one else can do to do a job that the city of Oakland cannot pay to do.

These people, Omar Farmer, and Ricardo Acosta, these are human beings who have been through the selection panel before, who have made waves in the commission.

And I just don't understand with the with ICE being threatened coming into San Francisco Cisco, as the president said a few hours ago.

Why are we delaying our only Latino person to come in and help?

Let's let's get this in order fast.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair Jenkins, all names have been called.

We have a motion and a second.

We do.

There is a motion made by Council President Jenkins, seconded by Councilmember Ramachandran to for this.

Do people want it on consent, non-consent?

Do you guys want to allow the other colleagues to address us?

Council Member Fife.

I think it's been stated at this committee multiple times that the discussion that needs to happen before items go to the full city council needs to happen at the committee level.

So I think that we either have the discussion now because it's been delayed, or we move this item to consent.

The selection committee has done what they're going to do, and if we continue to delay, they'll they'll they will continue to advance the slate that they've advanced.

So I think this is to require um debate at the full city council further um extends the city council meeting.

And again, I would suggest that we have the debate now, or we move this item to consent.

I do have a question through the chair to our parliamentarian regarding the 60-day time clock because I want to understand when that countdown begins for the automatic um appointments of these individuals.

And as a follow-up question to the parliamentarian, I believe the charter states that the selection committee slate must be heard by full council.

Is that correct?

Through the chair, Ryan Richardson, Oakland City Attorney.

So I'm gonna read um the charter the charter section that everyone's referring to, uh, the relevant piece.

If the city council does not accept or reject the entire slate within 60 days after the completion of the background checks and submission by the selection panel, all designated replacements shall be deemed appointed.

So the question is when does that 60-day clock start to run?

Uh, our understanding is the background checks were completed before the selection panel submitted anything for scheduling the council.

So the question is when were the when was this slate submitted to the city council?

We've looked at this question before, and what our office has said is that the first day that it appears on a rules committee agenda for the rules committee to consider scheduling it, that is when it's the is the most fair point to deem that it has been submitted to council.

This first appeared before the rules committee for scheduling on September 25th.

So the for the council to uh accept or reject the entire slate within 60 days, the council would need to have accepted or rejected the slate on or before Monday, November 24th.

To the second question, does this item need to be heard in front of the full council according to what is it?

Section 603?

So it the I think the relevant section is really the same one.

It's the this the council is tasked with accepting or rejecting the entire slate, and if the council doesn't do one of those two things, the slate is deemed appointed.

So to answer the question, yes, it in order for the council to either vote to accept the slate or vote to reject the slate, it does need to go to the full council.

Okay, council member Houston.

I'd like to say, can we have it uh go to not consent because I'd like to weigh in on this full council?

I wanted to go to Knock is it.

Order it.

Council member five.

Uh since Council Member Excuse me, order in the chamber.

Please.

Since Council Member Houston is here, we should probably in weighing in on this issue, we should adjourn into a special um meeting, and I'll make the motion second.

Thank you.

At 11 30 a.m., Councilmember Fife made a motion seconded by Councilmember Brown to adjourn the rules and legislation committee meeting and enter into a special city council meeting to due to the presence of council member Houston on roll to enter into a special city council meeting.

Councilmember Brown?

Aye.

Aye.

Fife?

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes.

We have entered into a special city council meeting due to the presence of councilmember Houston.

Councilmember Houston.

Did you have more to say that?

Yeah, I like I'd like to weigh in.

I feel that this should go to full council.

I have a bunch to say about um the police commission about why this um the the chief of police resigned.

I mean, I went to all these meetings, I brought things up that wasn't even addressed at the police commission when they were serious concerns.

So I want to weigh in on this.

So I like this to go to non-consent.

Do somebody go ahead and order in the chamber.

Order in the chamber.

Do any of my colleagues have an issue with um council member Houston's request?

I don't have an issue with council member Houston's request.

I don't think it is applicable to this item.

It is really approving or denying the slate.

I want to articulate that um I know there was a letter sent in about Omar Farmer.

I have concerns about the legitimacy of the claims raised in that letter.

And I also um think that again the selection committee made their decision.

That is not the role of the city council to weigh in on the selection committee um proceedings, just whether we approve or deny um the slate as as presented.

And Omar Farmer is not a voting member, he's an alternate member, and the the issues being raised today about the police commission overall do not should not impact our decision to lift up or or vote down the slate.

There are four members of the rules committee to vote on whether this should be on consent or non-consent.

And we sh if we're if we have questions overall about the role of the police commission, I think that's a separate item that deserves a separate debate, not the selection committee appointments.

I think those are two different things.

So I would like to see this item on consent.

Council member Houston.

Excuse me.

Councilmember Houston, do you have relevant concerns about the selection committee appointments outside of the police commission?

Do you want to discuss that at city council?

Yes, I do.

Okay.

No, that's that's the same thing.

No, no, no, it's the same it's the same thing.

So it out of respect for council member Houston, I'm gonna accept this be placed on consent, but I'll take a I will take advisement from the rest of the rules committee.

Consent or non consent.

Councilmember Brown.

Um I think that it should go on non-consent.

Okay.

Councilmember 5, I know where you are.

Council member, do you care or not?

Non consent.

Okay.

So the motion is for non-consent.

There is a motion made by Council President Jenkins, seconded by Councilmember Rama Chandren to approve the recommendations of staff and forward this item to the October 21st City Council agenda on non-consent on roll.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five?

No.

Rama Chandron.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

All right.

Thank you.

The motion passes with three eyes one no five to be forwarded to the October 21st City Council agenda on non-consent.

Going to new scheduling, starting with item 3.1, which will need an urgency finding and a rule 24.

Adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to enter into a first amendment to the amended and restated management agreement between the city of Oakland, the County of Alameda, and the Oakland Calam Alameda County Coliseum Authority to allow the authority to manage the Coliseum complex while the city and the county both own complex to go on the October 21st city council agenda on consent.

Is there urgency finding from District 6?

Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Misha McLaughlin.

I am here on behalf of Council President Kevin Jenkins.

And this item uh is important and there is an urgency because in order to um for the routes for them to sell the tickets um for the for the next uh upcoming season, we need to um move this immediately to the council meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And if you can stay, Miss Misha for item 3.2 through the chair, adopt a resolution authorizing the City Administrator to approve a license agreement between the Oakland Alameda County Joint Powers Authority and Oakland Pro Soccer LLC, subject to approval by the county of Alameda and certain other contingencies for a long for a term ending the earlier of December 21st, 2026, or the date when either the city or county convey its ownership interest in the colosim complex and for flat event expense fees between 138,000 to 300,000 per game day event and a base license fee of fifteen hundred dollars per month for storage area to go on the October 21st, 2025 city council agenda on consent, and we do have staff here to address the urgency finding in Rule 24.

Yes, um a lot a lot a lot like the first item, these items are pretty much related, and um we need to get this to the city council meeting as well so we can start the ticket sales for the upcoming season.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Moving to item 3.3.

Adopt a resolution waiving the competitive requests for proposal qualifications process and the local small small business enterprise program requirements and authorizing the city auditor to enter into a professional service agreement with my CS Ginny and O'Connell LLP through December 31st, 2026 for a total contract amount not to exceed 400,000 dollars to go on the October 28th, 2025 Finance and Management Committee agenda.

Item 3.4 receive an informational report from the city auditor on the audit recommendation follow-up report as of June 30th, 2025 to go on the October 28th, 2025 Finance and Management Committee agenda.

Item 3.5, receive an informational report from Andy Wong on illegal dumping and commending him for working to keep Oakland clean to go on the October 28th, 2025 Public Works and Transportation Committee Agenda.

Item 3.6, adopt a resolution expressing the city of Oakland's support for a San Antonio BART station in calling on the Bay Area Rapid Transit District BART to conduct a feasibility study to go on the October 28th, 2025 Public Works and Transportation Committee Agenda.

Item 3.7.

Adopt a resolution one authorizing the city administrator to submit an application with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for regional discretionary funding in the amount of two million two hundred fifty six thousand dollars.

Two accepting and appropriating two million two hundred fifty six thousand dollars from MTC for the 42nd in High Street I 80 Access Improvements Project.

Three, commit matching funds in an amount up to $12,300,000.

Four stating assurances to complete the 42nd in the High Street I 80 access improvement project and adopting SQL findings to go on the October 28th Public Works and Transportation Committee Agenda.

Item 3.8 adopt a resolution awarding a construction contract to Bridgerick Construction for the 27th Complete Streets Project, the lowest in response responsible responsive bidder in accordance with project plans, specifications, state requirements, and within contract contractors bid, and the amount of $10,400,573.50, and adopting SQL findings to go on the October 28th Public Works and Transportation Committee agenda.

Item 3.9 adopt a resolution confirming establishment of the right-of-way repair fund authorizing the ongoing appropriation of fund revenues generated through Oakland's notice to repair program for private sidewalk sidewalk repair projects, transferring transferring all funds to fund the project for private sidewalk repair projects to go on the October 28th Public Works and Transportation Committee Agenda.

Item 310, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and execute a lease agreement between the city as tenant and the port of Oakland as landlord for a 52,000 square foot warehouse located at 7200 Earhart Road Northfield building for use as an emergency response facility by the Oakland Fire Department's urban search and rescue team for a term of six and one-half years, six and one-half years at an initial rate of twenty-nine thousand six hundred and forty dollars per month or annual rent of three hundred fifty-five thousand six hundred eighty dollars with a two percent annual increase in adopting sequel findings through the chair to administration.

Good morning, uh Candace from the City Administrator's Office.

Um we're asking that this item through the chair and um if it's the purview of the chair of the CED committee and noting that uh this committee may be heavily impacted on the October 28th date.

We're asking that this item be moved to the November 4th City Council on consent.

Is the chair okay with that?

Um I guess just through the chair to staff on this one.

Do we just make that decision to move it and can you restate that?

Due to the potential heavily impacted agenda on October 28th, the CED committee agenda will be heavily impacted with about seven items.

Um one, which is a just a study, which may take some time.

So we are asking that this item be um rescheduled or scheduled for November 4th to help alleviate the impact of the October 28th CED committee.

Yep.

Thank you.

And the date of the council meeting is November the 4th.

Yes, November 4th.

Um, on consent if that is your um yes, that works.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Noting the rule 24 and the request to go to November 4th City Council on consent for item 310, moving to 311, adopt the following pieces of legislation.

One, a resolution amending the resolution authorizing to the city to apply for and accept and appropriate funds as a local agency, joint partner under the California Department of Housing and Community Development's Home Keep Program for the Mark Twain Homes Affordable Housing and the amount not to exceed $35 million in making uh related CEQA findings.

Two a resolution amending a resolution authorizing the city to apply for and accept and appropriate funds at a local agency joint partner under the California Department of Housing for 34th and San Pablo project and an amount not to exceed $35 million dollars in making CEQA findings.

Three, a resolution amending the resolution to authorize the city to apply for and accept and appropriate funds as a local agency joint partner under the California Department of Housing and Community Developments Home Key.

Four Maya Hotel Affordable Housing Project at 4715 Telegraph Avenue and an amount not to exceed 8.5 million dollars in making related sequel findings, and four a resolution amending the resolution authorizing the city to apply for accept and appropriate funds as a local agency joint partner under the California Department of Housing for 3515 San Pablo Affordable Housing Project and an amount not to exceed 5.5 million dollars in making sequel findings to go on the October 28th Community and Economic Development Committee Agenda.

Item 312.

Excuse me.

Can we go back to 310?

Uh there needs to be an urgency finding for 310.

Through the chair's apologies, Candace from the city administrator's office.

Yes, I should have stated a rule 24 of why we're requesting to bypass committee and basically what I stated earlier in regards to the October 28th CED committee being heavily impacted with multiple items.

We are asking via Rule 24 if this item can bypass committee and go to November 4th council on consent.

Thank you, 2.

Item 312, adopt a resolution and in support of California Assembly Bill 1248 and Senate Bill 684 together referred to as the polluters pay climate superfund to um through the chair to administration.

Oh sorry.

Um this is requested to go to October 28th CD committee.

I didn't know through the chair if someone else was going to apply.

This is being requested to now be scheduled to the October 30th rules committee.

I apologize, I was trying to catch up.

We're at thank you.

Uh, to the uh Candace again from the city administrator's office uh through the chair and apologize to the clerk.

Item 312.

Yes, we are asking that this item um go to rules.

I believe it is the standard practice that these support items go to rules.

So we're asking that this item go to October 30th rules committee rather than the um requested list of CED on this agenda.

Thank you for that.

Moving to item 313.

If there were no objections, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to forgive three million dollars in outstanding principal and six hundred and sixty one thousand and forty two dollars in accrued interest owed by East Bay Highland Palms for the Highland Palms property through the chair through the chair item three twelve.

Um, is through the administration is requesting for this to go to rules as a discussion item as the set Senate bills typically are discussed at the rules committee versus the CED.

Do you have any objection?

Okay, okay, through the chair.

Um going back to item 313, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to forgive three million in outstanding principal and six hundred and sixty six hundred and sixty-one thousand forty-two dollars in accrued interest owed by East Bay Highland Palms for Highland Palms property and five million dollars in outstanding principal and one million ninety-four thousand four hundred and ninety dollars in accrued interest owed by East Bay Capital Fund for the East Lake property to preserve long-term affordability until 2073 and facilitate their sale to a new owner to go on the October 28th CED committee agenda.

Item 314, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and execute a transient occupancy tax sharing agreement with Oakland Pro Soccer LLC and an amount not to exceed 300,000 to support the attraction of a World Cup team to the Oakland Roots and Soul Soccer Club training facility during the 2026 World Cup Tournament to go on the October 28th, 2025 Community and Economic Development Committee agenda, and on the December 2nd, 2025 City Council agenda as a public hearing.

Item 315, receive an informational report from the city administrator on the status of the disparities in contracting study conducted by Mason Tillman Associates pursuant to resolution 89058, including MTA's findings to date regarding disparities in the city's professional services, procurement, and construction contracting activities, and a timeline on when the final report would be presented to the city council to go on the October 28th life enrichment committee through the chair administration.

Thank you through the uh Candace Parker Trig and the City Administrator's Office.

Um we are asking um if it's amendable through the chair to the life enrichment committee chair if this item can be scheduled to the November 18th committees rather than October 28th.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Moving to item 316, adopt a resolution amending the resolution which adopts the city of Oakland's biannual budget for fiscal years 25 through 27 to reallocate funding for the general purpose fund non-department departmental to add one full-time equivalent cultural affairs manager position in the economic and workforce development department as set forth in exhibit one to go on the October 28th life enrichment committee agenda.

Item 317 adopt a resolution one accepting appropriating and authorizing agreements for receipt of grant funds from the corporation for national and community services for fiscal year 2526 and amounts not to exceed $340,000 $340 $537,000 for the senior companion program and $38,823 for the foster grant parent program and authorizing contributions from the general purpose fund and the estimated amount of $37,110 for SCP and $24,973 for FGP and an estimated amount of $62,083 to meet the required minimum of 10% local match funds for fiscal year 2526 and 3.

Authorizing the city administrators to accept and appropriate additional grant funds from CNCS Americorp seniors that become available for the same purposes within fiscal year 2526 to go on the October 28th life enrichment committee agenda.

Item 318 adopt a resolution amending resolution to extend the no parking restriction at the Lakeshore Avenue Cal de Sac near Lake Merritt to go on the October 28th Public Safety Committee Agenda.

319 receive an informational report from the city auditor on the performance audit of Oakland's police emergency response times to go on the October 28th, 2025 Public Safety Committee Agenda.

Item 320, adopt an ordinance amending and reenacting the city of Oakland's conflict of interest code adopted March 23rd, 1993 as last amended by ordinance adopted January 16, 2024, codified as Oakland Municipal Code to update the designation of positions covered by the code to go on the October 30th, 2025 rules and legislation committee agenda.

Item 321, receive an informational report on Caltrans Vision 980 and Interstate 580 truck access studies in the city of Oakland to go on the November 4th, 2025 City Council agenda under special orders of the day.

Through the chair, Council President Jenkins, do you have any comments on this item?

State items.

No comments.

Okay.

Noting the rule 24 that this item is for informational purposes only from the special guests and such items typically go directly to the full council under actions of special orders of the day.

Moving to item 322, adopt the resolution one authorizing the city administrator to accept and appropriate grant funds in an amount not to exceed 304,010 from the U.S.

Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance for Implementation of the Fiscal Year 2025 DNA capacity for the purchases of DNA typing supplies from A Queen for $75,000.

Promega for 118,456 dollars, C niche vision forensics for 40,250, D, Life Technologies for $33,554, E.

Hamilton Company for $23,550, and F.

Aurora Biomed for $13,200 to go on the November 4th, City Council Agenda on Consent, reading the Rule 24 of bypassing committee.

The grant term starts October 1st, 2025.

The analysis of the backlog cases will include case evaluation, biological evidence, examination and screening, DNA typing, technical review, and data entry into CODIS, a minimum of 194 backlog cases requests will be an analyzed using CBTEBR 2025 funded DNA typing regents and supplies.

And OPD Crime Lab has received this grant 22 times, and the funding for these supplies will augment the limited crime laboratory budget, thus increasing our ability to examine more items, ultimately reducing the backlog.

Item 323, adopt the resolution authorizing the city administrator to one enter into a professional services agreement with IMX technology for a total amount not to exceed 667,000, November 20th, 2025 to November 19, 2026, to provide software services, approval future spending authority of 225,000 from November 20th, 2026 to November 19th, 2029 for the Oakland Police Department's TALS staff software application, waiving the competitive multi-step proposal solicitation process.

To go on the November 4th, City Council agenda on consent, reading in the Rule 24 bypassing committee.

This contract is expiring in November.

Vendors cannot be paid without active contracts.

This is a critical OPD tool.

Tell staff is a resource for staff to request and monitor time off while also allowing supervisors to efficiently manage assignments and assure full coverage of patrol operations.

Item 324 has a title change writing in the new title.

Adopt the resolution one approving the annual port of the Rockbridge Business Improvement District Advisory Board, declaring the intention to levy and collect an annual assessment for fiscal year 26-27 for the Rockridge Business Improvement District, including 3% increase in the annual assessments and scheduling a public hearing for December 2nd, 2025 to go on the November 4th, 2025 City Council Agenda on Consent and the December 2nd, 2025 City Council Agenda as a public hearing.

Item 325.

Receive an informational report on the housing and community development department's anti-display displacement strategic action plan to go on the November 18th, 2025 Community and Economic Development Committee Agenda.

326, receive an informational report on the City of Oakland's cannabis equity program to go on the November 18th Community and Economic Development Committee Agenda.

Item 327, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the city of San Leandro establishing that the city of San Leandro will process planning and building entitlements for improvements to an existing structure and parking lot at 1 East 14th Street, 10701 International Boulevard, a property located within both jurisdictions and act as lead agency for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act to be withdrawn from the October 28th CED agenda and be rescheduled to the November 18th CED agenda through the chair to the administration.

Good morning again, Candace from the City Administrative Office.

We are asking asking that this item actually be scheduled to December 9th CED rather than the 18th.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Moving to item 328, adopt the resolution to enter into an agreement with the Youth Ventures Joint Powers Authority through its fiscal sponsor philanthropic ventures foundation in the amount of $150,000 per year for fiscal years 25 through 26 and 26 through 27 for the City of Oakland's annual contributions to go on the November 18th life enrichment committee agenda.

329, believe has a title change.

The new title is just to correct a few items, and it should read staff recommends that the city adopt a resolution one awarding grants for the 2025 to 2027 corridor safety ambassador program to nonprofit organizations, black cultural zone, Downtown Oakland Association, Laurel District Association, Jack London Improvement District, Oakland Chinatown Improvement Council, Spanish Speaking Unity Council of Alameda County Incorporated and Tribe Incorporated for the fiscal years 2025 to 2027, and an amount set forth in Table 1 for a total amount not to exceed $2 million dollars to immediately enhance safety ambassador and personnel and safety programs throughout the program year and high priority neighborhood business corridors, including Chinatown, Diamond, Downtown, Elmhurst, Laurel, Little Saigon, Havens Court, Hegenberger, and Fruitville Business Corridors, and to establish a community of practice linking city services and training for safety ambassadors and personnel, and two, authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and enter into grant agreements with grantees for fiscal year fiscal years 2025 to 2027 with authority to exceed the terms without increasing the amount of the grant awards.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If I made the uh candidates from the city administrator's office, and we are also asking if it's amendable by the um CED chair that this item actually with the same Rule 24 reasoning that we stated earlier that the October 28th CED will be heavily impacted with multiple items.

So we're asking that this item be scheduled to November 4th consent to alleviate the impact to the October 28th CED.

Yes, and that works.

Thank you.

Reading in item 330.

Adopt a resolution.

One approving the Oakland Police Department surveillance use policy, community safety camera system, and acquisition for of security cameras and related technology, awarding a two-year agreement to flock safety for acquisition of automated license plate reader and pan tilt zoom cameras operating system technology and related services at a cost not to exceed two million two hundred and fifty-two thousand five hundred dollars and waiving the competitive multi-step solicitation process.

Took on the October 28th public safety committee agenda.

Moving the um is Councilmember Wong.

Yes, okay, so Councilmember Wong has asked for this item to go to full council.

Um to expertise.

Do any of the council members have any issues with that community?

So she wants to go to full committee and to full council and to bypass our committee.

No, I'm not.

Um I'd like for this to go to committee first.

Okay.

Moving to the recommendations from this week's committees.

Recommendations from the October 14th special community special.

Reading reading in item 331.

Reading in the recommendations from the special public safety committee starting with item 331.

Adopt the resolution.

I'm sorry, um, reading in the short titles, a resolution regarding the California Fire Safe Council grant, the public safety committee approved the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the October 21st, 2025 city council agenda on consent.

Moving to the recommendations from the October 14th, 2025 Public Works and Transportation Committee.

A resolution regarding the regarding the WW Williams Company LLC item 332.

The committee approved the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the October 21st, 2025 City Council Agenda on Consent.

Moving to the recommendations from the October 14th Community and Economic Development Committee item 333, an informational report regarding the RAP annual report fiscal year 24 through 25.

The committee approved the recommendations of staff to receive and forward this item to the October 21st City Council agenda on consent.

Item 334, a resolution regarding the contract amendment for tenant representation at RAP proceedings.

The committee approved as amended the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the October 21st City Council agenda on consent with the following amendments.

One, an annual report will be included in the context of the resolution that focuses on community-based partnerships and to what extent they are meeting equity goals.

Two amend the 201 and limit it to a one-year term with a one-year extension.

And those were the amendments, sorry.

Item 335, a resolution regarding the contract amendment for small property owner representation at RAP proceedings.

The committee approved as amended the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the October 21st, 2025 City Council agenda on consent with amendment to the resolution with a one-year term and with a one-year option for extension.

Item 336, a resolution regarding the Central Legal Dalla Rasa, Oakland Housing Secure Grant Agreement.

The committee approved the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the October 21st, City Council agenda on consent.

Moving to the recommended recommendations from the October 14th life enrichment committee.

Item 337 is a resolution regarding the early childhood and family services division amendment agreement with child care careers LLC for fiscal year 2020 through 2027.

The committee approved the recommendations of staff to forward this item to the October 21st, 2025 city council agenda on consent.

Item 338, a resolution regarding the head start grant continuation application, fiscal year 25 through 26.

The committee approved the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the October 21st, 2025 City Council agenda on consent.

Item 339 is the duplicate item as it was heard under item 3.3.

And this concludes your new scheduling for this week.

Councilmember Brown.

The item polluters pay climate superfund act originally scheduled to 1028 C D, which we were gonna move to rules, but I think items that are for um support to support state legislation usually can go straight to council.

So I wanted to propose November 4th City Council on consent.

If the authors of the um resolution, if that would work, council member five.

Councilmember Unger and I are flexible.

Um we just want to make sure that this item gets heard in time to be uh a part of the statewide legislation, so that I'm amenable to that.

Trinity Matt, whoever wants to come first, um council member Zach Unger's office.

Um, as council member five said, you know, we're amenable to what the rules body wants to do.

If you want to hear that, um, hear that straight to council.

We're happy to do that, and then on that one, just to note, um, there's a typo in that one as well.

If we can make a quick title change on it as well, too.

Um, it's the fourth word, the and there, so it would read adopt a resolution in support of California Assembly Bill AB 1243 Addis and Senate Bill SB 684.

Many of our together referred to as the polluters pay climate superfund act of 2025.

Um, I'll settle into the clerk's office.

Thank you.

Please proceed.

Good morning, Trinity Hall from the Office of the Center of Oakland, King Houston District 7 Council member.

I am requesting to schedule a special city council meeting for October 27th at 9 30 a.m.

Can you come back to item number four?

Yes, okay, thank you.

And then on 318, if um council member uh Unger's staff is still here.

So 318 seems like a transportation and public works issue.

Are you guys okay with the going to public safety?

Yeah, but it there seems to be a transportation related issue extending no parking restrictions.

Seems like it should be going to public works and transportation.

Matthew Most More Council Member Over's office.

Um I don't believe the agenda is super impacted, so if you would prefer that to go to public safety, we're okay with that.

Public works, public works, my bad.

Any okay, that'll go to public works.

Through the chair, going through to um speakers for this item.

Believe I just have one speaker signed up for item three, Rajni Mondal.

If they are still in chamber, Rajney Mandal District 4.

I just wanted to request that item 3.30 OPD's camera policy be expedited to council.

This policy was delayed by the privacy commission for five months, and it was an urgent request from OPD.

It garnered much debate in the community with several hour-long uh privacy commission uh speaker sessions, uh public speaker sessions, and would benefit from one public forum rather than two.

And I also wanted to uh give a shout out to Andy Wang Pengweather for item 3.5.

It's much deserved.

Thank you.

Thank you.

See no more speakers, any comments from the council members.

Okay, going slowly, 3.1 urgency finding from staff, rule 24, 3.2 urgency finding from council president's office, three rule 24.

That's for 3.1 3.2.

3.3 and 3.39 are duplicative uh duplicative items.

310, we're gonna schedule to the 114 because of impact schedule rule 24 on consent.

Um 3.12 will be scheduled to the 10 30 rules.

3.15 will go to 1118 LEC.

3.18 will go to public courts 1028.

3.22 will be rule 24.

3.23 will be rule 24.

3.21, rule 24, 3.24 will have a title change, 3.28 scheduled to the 129 CED, and 3.29 title change and schedule 11.4 council.

I'll entertain a motion.

And through the chair, for did you mention 327 to December 9th CED?

Yes.

No, 3.27 to which C D?

December 9th, C D.

I'll entertain a motion.

And I apologize.

If I may through the chair, did I hear you say 312?

Is it going to November 4th or rules?

I thought you said okay.

11.4 council on consent.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Now I'll entertain a motion.

I'll move the agenda with the amendments.

Second.

Thank you.

There was a motion made by Councilmember 5, seconded by Councilmember Brown to accept item three as amended with the amendment stated on record by Council President Jenkins on roll.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with four ayes as amended.

Moving to item number four.

Review of draft agendas pending lists city council and committee meetings.

Good morning, Candace from the City Administrator's Office.

If I may bring your attention to the October 28th CED agenda, item number three, which is the MOU between the City of Oakland and the City of Sal Leandro.

That item was rescheduled to December 9th under new scheduling, so we would like to withdraw that from this October 28 CED agenda.

Thank you.

What item is that on CD?

Item number three, the MOU between the City of Oakland and Sal Leandro.

Okay, item number three on CD.

It's withdrawn.

Is there a date?

Um it was previously scheduled under item three.

It was scheduled for December 9th.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Thank you, Trinity.

Good morning once more.

Um my Trinity Hall from the Office of the Center of Oakland King Houston District 7 Council member.

I am requesting to special schedule a special city council meeting for October 27th at 9 30 a.m.

And the purpose of the meeting?

Uh we have a major policy that is coming through, and it is set to be very impactful for the city of Oakland.

What's the policy?

The EAP.

Thank you.

Councilmember Brown.

And so I um I just have a question.

Um, I guess procedural procedurally.

Um the EAP was placed on the public safety pending lists.

And so just wanted to find out procedurally.

Are we just moving that item from the public safety pending list to now this special city council meeting?

Can Parliamentarian weigh in?

Through the chair.

Yes, you could uh formally declare that now or alternatively just um schedule this as a new item, but it probably does make sense to say that you're taking it off the pending list and scheduling it to this special meeting.

Thank you.

Can you state what the EAP is, please?

Can't man abatement policy.

Councilmember Fife.

I want to articulate to the public and put on the record that I gave notice to the council president's office that I would be traveling on that date for that week.

I will be in Vatican City with organizations from around the world discussing land, labor, and um housing, discussing how we can work together collaborative collaboratively with other cities on crises around our most critical issues, concluding with uh visit with the Pope.

And so this was not I had not anticipated such a critical item being scheduled at this time.

I want to be present for this discussion around um legislation that will have such a dramatic impact on my district.

So I am deeply disturbed that I will not be present for this special meeting, but I understand that it needs to move with urgency.

Um I just wanted to let the public know that I will not be present for that encampment abatement management encampment abatement plan special meeting.

Councilmember Brown.

Um and and I'm so sorry.

Um, through the chair to the city attorney, um, I I kind of didn't quite hear what you said, what what would be recommended?

Uh the scheduling uh motion could be to take it off the pending list from public safety and schedule it for the special meeting.

Thank you.

So council member Ramanchandra?

Um through the chair to district seven office, is there a second date where councilmember Fife and everyone else can be present that we can look into this that's close to the same time?

Do the chair, unfortunately, no.

Um, just to do the chair to the body, I'm I I would like to have a session on this as as soon as possible, but um I think it'd be great if all council members can be there.

Um is it possible to explore that another day?

So in the urgency, and also I think it's imperative to the council member Fife is involved.

I'll have Misha work on seeing if there is quorum for that Wednesday following the Tuesday.

So we'll work on getting that schedule.

Councilmember Fife, will that Wednesday work for you?

No, no, no, but I just want to know that part.

I'm not scheduling it now.

Yeah, but I I just want okay.

We will have a discussion.

So you are back in town.

I what I was trying to ascertain is will you be back in town as a Wednesday?

That's what I was trying to ascertain.

I will be back in town as of Wednesday.

I will be back um Monday evening.

Thank you.

And I think I would just want to state for the record that um, you know, we have our current schedule, schedule of meetings that the public is well aware of, whether it be um an item that should be scheduled at the committee level and or our regular scheduled council meetings at the preferred time of either uh Tuesday at 3 30, right?

So that um members of the public can also be available, and so I I think my personal preference is that if we um would like the entire body of the city council to weigh in on the encampment abatement policy, um it should be scheduled to a time and date that is already noticed and that the public is expecting.

So that would be my preference.

So thank you.

I really appreciate that when it comes to a policy that is that big and that large where you will have four to five hours of public comment.

It's imperative that it gets the attention that it needs, and I'm right there with you on regularly scheduled council meetings, but uh some of the newer council members are aware of like staying here till 11 11 12 o'clock, and um there's really a challenge.

So we want as many people to be able to comment as possible, as well as council members to have fresh minds when they're um commenting on this important policy.

I'll do my best to address everybody's concern and ensure that ensure that we get to this with the urgency that it deserves and having it in front of the full body of the city council.

Council Member Ramachandra.

Just um to note since it is true, we're probably gonna have several hours of comment if it if it ends up being scheduled on an existing council day.

Um, perhaps moving the meeting just a few hours ahead to start at like 12 or 1 or something like that.

My I'm open to that, but I have no preference on what day.

And um just to confirm we're not setting a date right now.

We're not setting a date right now, me should work with the council offices to find a date for us to discuss with the urgency that has been requested by District 7 and District 3.

Thank you.

Noting that there are no speakers signed up for item number four.

There are no other amendments.

So item CD item three withdrawn.

I'll entertain a motion.

Through through the chair to the um council members, um long as you uh press your button, I will um unmute you so you can speak.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

There was motion made by council member Ramachandran, seconded by council member Brown to accept item four as amended.

On roll, council members Brown.

Aye, five.

I'm trying to get the attention of the president on this scheduling item because what will be communicated from this rules committee is that I held up this urgency.

Not at all.

Let me make that abundantly clear.

Council member five has is not holding up anything, like it is.

I'm happy to provide my amendments to you and to the maker.

Council member five is not holding up anything, it is me.

That is possible, which is why I'm happy to send my amendments that I have prepared for that item to the special meeting on that date.

Happy to share those with council member Houston as I as I told him a few days ago.

I'm happy to share my amendments if they can be held by this body.

Understand.

Is that aye?

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with four eyes to accept item four as amended.

Moving to our discussion item.

Next item, item number five, adopt a resolution delegating authority to the city attorney or their designee to facilitate and authorize the legal defense of city off officers and employees in criminal proceedings for acts or omissions within the scope of their official duties upon making the findings required by government code section nine nine five point eight and subject to ratification by the city council as soon as practical practicable.

Can we have a brief presentation?

I know we have about 12 minutes.

This is also important as well, but I'm gonna lose council members pretty soon.

Good morning, Council Celia Warren, Office of the City Attorney.

I will be quick.

The resolution before you asks the council to grant the city attorney the same authority that the city council currently has under state law to allow him to initiate a legal defense of a city official or employee facing a criminal proceeding if it meets the high standard under state law.

The city council would retain its ability to ultimately vote on this whether or not to continue to allow the representation moving forward via ratification after the fact.

And the authority reso does not guarantee any particular employee or official uh representation in any specific matter.

It's just merely a procedural rezo that allows the city attorney to move faster than the council could be convened if the circumstances warranted it.

If the city attorney invokes this authority, if should the council vote to grant it, the council will in every case still be able to vote yes or no as to whether or not they agree that the representation is appropriate under state law, and just quickly, so for the benefit of the record, for the benefit of the council and the public.

The state law requires it sets a high bar.

It requires that the act be within the scope of the officials' uh official duties.

It requires that the defense, a finding that the defense is in the best interests of the city, that the person involved acted in good faith and without actual malice and in the apparent interest of the city.

So issues like uh corruption, actual malice, those types of cases, those are not what you would see in invoking this type of authority, and the city attorney wouldn't invoke such authority for for those types of cases in any event.

Again, I want to reiterate that this does not guarantee any specific official or individual employee any representation uh in a criminal matter.

It just merely allows the city attorney to act quickly if the circumstances warrant it.

And with that, I'll take questions.

Thank you.

Councilmember Ramasandra.

Um, not a question, just a comment.

Um, I've resolved all my questions with the city attorney's office on the side.

I um do support this.

Um, I think just in the interest of the public, I want to restate one thing that you said is that council already has the power to do this, and so this is not something brand new.

Um, and I think the city attorney's office as will council will use their discretion in the kinds of criminal cases that it's gonna choose to uh represent council members in.

And you know, I have full faith that our city attorney's office is not gonna sit and bail out council members if they get a DUI or whatever not is, you know, things that might be expected out of a situation, nor if they're under FBI investigation.

I know that this is really trying to be laser focused on situations where we might be persecuted for simply doing our job in a pretty blue city, if I might add.

So thank you to the city attorney's office for bringing this forward and restating that council kind of already has the power to do this.

This is just slightly expedited by the city attorney's office.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Umber Fife through the chair um to attorney warren.

There were comments that I've I've seen in the media about this uh legislation being brought forward by the city attorney's office to represent former elected officials that formally work for the city uh of Oakland.

Could you clarify if that is what is encompassed in this legislation?

Through the chair.

So technically, under state law, the city council could, and if you authorize the city attorney through this resolution, the city attorney could also authorize a criminal legal defense of a former employee, but it must meet the high bar under state law.

Again, it must be in the best interest of the city to offer that defense in the first place.

It must have been within the course and scope of their duties, they must have acted in good faith without actual malice and in the apparent interest of the city.

So cases involving corruption or fraud, those are not the kind of cases that would meet this high standard.

So we shouldn't, we don't need to worry that uh we are going down that path.

That is not what this is.

Thank you.

Do we have public comment?

Through the chair, we have no speakers signed up for item number five.

I'll entertain a motion.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

There was a motion made by Councilmember 5, seconded by Council Member Ramachandron to approve the recommendations of staff and forward this item to the October 21st, 2025 city council agenda on consent on roll.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five.

Aye.

Ramachandron?

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

The motion passes with four ayes to be forwarded to the October 21st city council agenda on consent.

Item six was dispensed with and will be going to the October 21st city council agenda on non-consent.

Moving to item number seven, adopt a resolution, amending and restating the council's rules of procedure in their entirety in order to one assure council meetings run in an orderly and efficient manner, two, allow for non-consent items to be heard earlier in the meeting.

Three, create an additional presiding officer position to serve as presiding officer in the absence of a council president, and four making non substantive technical edits.

Thank you so much.

So council member Ramanchandran and myself have been working on this item for some time.

It's not uncommon for the rules of procedure in city council to be changed.

If they were lots changed, I believe by Councilmember Ramachandrin, Councilmember Baz, Councilmember Trivo Reed, and I hope I'm not forgetting anyone else.

Council Member Kaplan.

And Councilmember Kaplan.

And so the rules are procedures of the documents in which guide the city council when it comes to our meetings from seating assignments to time of meeting to who the parliamentarian is.

So there's a number of cleanup items that have taken place and substantial items that have taken place, and Councilmember Ramachandran will go through a presentation of some of the items that have taken place, and I believe there's some red lines as well.

Thank you.

I will be brief.

If Kate could please pull up the PowerPoint.

Okay, like the council president said, um, we're bringing forward amendments to our council rules of procedure, um, a little bit of history post-COVID.

Um, this is the fourth time amendments are coming forward in February 2023 was the big change to hybrid meetings.

December 2023 was the amendment authored by the four of us council members to promote efficiency and you know, sort of learn the lessons that we did from having hybrid meetings.

To start off, I'm still proud that we are a city that is still doing hybrid meetings.

This is not something that is required by the Brown Act, but a choice that we are making to promote efficiency, and that's not going anywhere.

Many cities have actually eliminated that because of how difficult it is.

And I want to give a big shout out to the clerk's office for still for making this possible despite how how tricky it still continues to be and the various challengings.

So challenges we're able that we're still facing.

Um, so July 2024 was the first iteration of these amendments.

Um we've worked on it significant.

There was no vote on that one.

Um, we've worked significantly on it since July of last year till now.

So that's you know, a year and three months worth of a lot of back and forth with our city attorney's office or city clerk or city administration, and I think everyone that's been involved in this very lengthy back and forth process over the past year and a half, um, because last year's amendment started back in February.

So it's really been a year and a half process that we've been working on this as thoroughly as we can.

Overarching goals, you know, when it comes down to it, we want council members who can be fully active with their full selves coming to vote on decisions that have immense consequences for the entire city.

We want our staff members to be present and not have to wait eight plus hours for consequential items if needed.

We want members of the public to have a sense of predictability of when items are gonna be heared, and we want to have meaningful input from the public, from council, from staff, um, in a way that's actually going to produce an impact on the way council members vote for decisions that require an active vote, which means our non-consent calendar.

So going over just a couple of the major changes.

The big one is the order of the consent and non-consent calendars.

Now, so you know, you can you can check out the rules, the legislation, and the whole agenda report details these um in more detail, and we have our city attorney um uh Michael Branson here, who's able to go into any specifics if needed, but the big switch is the order of consent and non-consent calendars.

So essentially, when our meetings begin, we will move to consent to non-consent items before consent items.

And the rationale is like I said before, we want the public and council members and staff to be able to comment on things that actually have an active vote going on, not items on the consent calendar that have largely already been heard in committee that a majority of council members are usually likely to pass, because by the nature of what consent is.

So this means because we're gonna we continue to start our meeting at 3:30, the five um we're not gonna have that 5 p.m.

mark of hearing non-consent items because then we'll have an hour and a half from when the council meeting starts to when we can hear any item, which doesn't really make sense.

Um, so that's the first big change.

Um the next the next big change is moving items off consent.

Obviously, if we're having the consent calendar last, we don't want staff to have to wait around a whole lot of time if items are gonna be pulled without prior notice.

Um so instead of a simple motion in a second to pull an item off, it's gonna require a majority vote to pull an item off of the consent calendar and schedule it to the non-consent calendar.

And to remind everyone, council, even this committee is the continues to be the determining body of whether or not an item moves to the consent or non-consent calendar, and any and all council members have the ability to come here and tell us ahead of a meeting that they want something to be on non-consent instead of consent, which we do frequently see, but you know, perhaps we can see more of, so there's not this last-minute push of moving things to a different calendar, which also has impacts for the public who come to speak on an item and don't realize it's gonna have to be on a different calendar now.

Um, rule 17, you know, really just talking about the staff aspect of it.

Um, it is the responsibility, and it has been, but this is just in writing of council members to request staff presence on consent items ahead of the time.

We know this is not gonna happen 100% of the time.

There'll always be exceptions, but as much as possible to encourage folks to let the administration know when they're planning to pull an item off consent, which of course will now have to have majority vote rather than just a simple motion and second.

The next big change is changing ceremonials.

They are now gonna be treated as advisory resolutions.

So basically, there's no, if if these amendments are passed, we will not have ceremonial items at the start of the meeting anymore.

The big change would be then to have ceremonial items be heard at committee or at standalone celebrations, but they will still be voted on and passed by council in the during the consent calendar.

And so you so you can still have the resolution that you can give to people, but it would have to be a separate ceremony.

And this has been done recently by some council members with the LGBTQ celebration with some awards being given in life enrichment, and so we're moving to making sure that the start of council meetings and the bulk of what we discuss are our non-consent items that require active vote, active deliberation, active comments from the public.

Um another big change is the um, well, I wouldn't say big change, it's more of clarification of what the rules committee already has the ability to do.

Um clarifies that we, as the rules committee have the ultimate say of whether an item goes to the consent calendar or the non-consent calendar.

Um the only difference is that our current rule, so this is really kind of cleanup, is that the committee is that the chair currently is the one who makes a recommendation to send something to consent or non-consent.

Now, the entire committee is the one that makes the recommendation to send something to consent or non-consent if the vote was not unanimous.

Um the last major change is the adoption of committee vice chairs.

Um it allows but doesn't require committees to choose a vice chair.

The main um benefit of this and rationale behind this is if a chair is not present or does not want to or is unable to chair a specific meeting, you can still have quorum, you can still run the meeting by a designated vice chair who's automatically gonna step in to run a meeting so that the meeting can still be held.

Um but again, this is based on the will of a committee, not the full council, and it's the committee, not the full council that would vote on a vice chair if they sell elect to choose one.

Um so basically, if the these amendments are adopted, this would be the proposed order of business, start at the same time, roll call, modifications to the agenda, non-consent items, part one, which is public hearings, um part two, all other non-consent items.

Uh the then the consent calendar, and then the same and now council announcements, open forum adjournment.

So again, the only real big switch is no ceremonials and switching consent and non-consent.

Um there's no changes to the meeting start and end time, the processes for speaker cards.

Um, the only difference about the speaker card um rules specifically is that we're codifying what the city clerk has already put into procedure of um if you're submitting e-comment to submit it 24 hours in advance.

Um I know um the city clerk's office is available to explain the rationale behind that if needed, but it is entirely technical and logistical.

It's not that we that the clerk's office doesn't want people to make um submit comments, but the ability to um submit in-person comment cards remains the same.

No change to that.

You can still hear ceremonials and committees and in standalone celebration, and the discretion of the rules committee is not changing.

Um there are a number of non-substantive changes, so really clarifying things that already are practiced that were proposed by our city's attorney's office, um, and our city attorney can go over any of them, but it really doesn't change anything procedurally at all.

Um open to questions, discussion, then I'll pass it back to President Jenkins to wrap up.

Thank you so much.

Uh Councilmember Brown, I believe has a comment.

Yep.

Um thank you so much, um, council members uh Ramashandran and Jenkins for your work on this.

Um I do have a couple questions.

Um and also am interested in hearing from my colleagues on some of these changes.

So just curious if we could move this item, I guess, to the full council non-consent.

That is what we are proposing to do to send this to non-consent because this is something that's gonna affect all of us.

Um, so to have continue to have a broader conversation there.

So I'll make that motion, thank you.

Councilmember Five.

What's the date we're considering moving this to the full city council?

Because I'm I feel rushed right now.

If I'm being honest, I know one of the rules committee members has a hard stop, and so I want to make sure that we have a robust conversation about this that should happen in rules, but I don't know if we can have that today.

So what what are we when are we talking about scheduling this?

So this will go to the November, the first meeting in November to the full city council.

Correct.

Is there an urgency for this coming to um the first full city council before this has discussion in rules?

We do have another rules next week in which we can discuss this again.

That's your preference.

I just won't be here next week.

So I think it's important to have your input.

Um, do you want to say some of the things that like Yes, yeah.

Um I'll just rush, I'll I'll we have five minutes where I can just say some of the concerns.

Um I want to make sure that we're having um as much public participation as possible.

So I'm concerned about how we're moving um the some of the items around.

I'm sorry, I have questions around um rule for the standing committee.

I want to understand what uh problem it solves by changing the standing committees and how they are voting and how a majority I just I have issues with rule number four being changed.

I have an amendment to rule number five, potential amendment of two amendments to rule number five um around modifications of the agenda.

Uh I want to retain language around how council members can move items uh from non-consent consent.

I have issue I I can't do this.

I can't do this in this way.

I'm sorry.

Um happy to have a full conversation, but again, as I stated earlier in our rules committee meeting, I think substantive issues need to be worked out at the committee level before they come to the full city council and with our time constraints today I cannot have an adequate uh conversation so council member five we're um more than willing to work with you on some of your amendments and we have until November 4th um to go to the full city council and we are more than willing to hear your amendments and see if there are some that we can incorporate.

Thank you and I was the one who had to leave but I don't I'm no I no longer have to so I'm open to hearing discussion right now well I think it's council member Brown that has to leave.

So we still have quorum so I'm open to hearing anything right now but in the meantime we can work on amendments before the the fourth if there's interest okay so there are public commenters public speakers on this council member um and so I just want to confirm what is the the preference for this item november fourth full council meeting with yeah and and so then I guess prior to November 4th we can work um I guess walk me through how um if we have some changes and some recommendations how should we just submit those to the attorney's office or how would that work?

Um yeah but these were so we originally had scheduled this for the first meeting in September.

So this has been these have been published for quite a while um so we've been open to feedback and we'll continue to be but we again it's been a year and a half of going through this process so we would like to pass these um to have all suggested amendments in as soon as we can here have them heard so yes feel free to send them to the city attorneys working on it.

So uh and if this desire is to have a conversation in rules we also have October 30th yes okay so we'll send this to the October 30th rules we'll hear it again after um and then after that it'll go if this committee so deems it'll go to the November 4th full city council meeting can we also have the presentation that was made today included as a supplemental so that's available before uh the 30th yes and some of the substantive changes were not available a year ago they just became available publicly last Friday last week so those are some of the things September they were available in September.

I'm just saying that there was a new addition a new supplemental that was added last week so thank you.

Councilmember Raman Sergeant are you okay with that October 30th hearing it October 30th yes but I would still like this to be scheduled to November 4th okay so heard at October 30th scheduled to the November fourth rules on nonconsent through the chair was was that's your motion to schedule to continue this item to the October 30th rules committee as a discussion item so we also want it we want it stated in the motion that it will go to the November 4th rule to November 4th city council meeting through the chair you would proactively like this to be placed on the November 4th special city council agenda that's correct on non consent on non-consent okay we have a motion made by council president Jenkins do we have a second second any public speakers through the chair we do not have any speakers thank you this item was moved by council president jenkins seconded by council member Ramachandron to continue this item to the October 30th rules committee with requests for this presentation be included in the packet as well as this item to be scheduled and placed on the November 4th special city council agenda on non-consent on roll council members Brown aye.

Five.

Aye.

Ramachandron.

Aye.

And President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with four eyes.

Two can be continued to the October 30th rules agenda as well as be placed on the November 4th, City council agenda on non-consent.

Moving to our next item.

S8.

This item was on last week's agenda rules agenda, but we uh canceled that meeting.

So we do need an urgency motion to hear this item as it was placed on the agenda at the three-day.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

There was a motion made by Council President Jenkins, seconded by Council Member Ramachandron to hear this item on the urgency motion vote.

Councilmember Brown is excused.

Councilmember Five.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with three ayes, one excused Brown on the urgency motion.

I will now read the item into record.

Approve the report and recommendation of the 2026 legislative calendar for the city council committee meetings report and distribution schedule.

Please give the speaker 45 seconds.

Thank you so much.

I will just highlight some of the things I would like you to notice.

It does carry over the standard of council meetings being on the first and third Tuesdays with committee meetings on the second and fourth.

But just bringing highlights to the April meetings.

So the proposed date for council spring recess concides with Oakland Unified School District spring recess.

Please note that due to the cancellation of the March 31st meeting for Cesar Chavez Day, the calendar would have back-to-back committees.

This calendar proposes a special city council meeting on April 14th and special committee meetings on April 21st and reserving the April 28th, Tuesday for a special city council meeting for the Oakland Public Safety Planning and Oversight Commission, which did replace the SSOC and is required by measure in summer recess is standard according to your adopted rules of procedure to start in April.

That does not change.

I'm sorry, August that does not change on this agenda.

The council meetings for September 7th.

We recommend canceling the September 7th Council meeting and the rules and legislation committee due to Labor Day and Admissions Day being in the same week.

November meetings, we are recommending canceling the November 3rd City Council meeting as it is election day and instead scheduling a special city council meeting on November 10th and special committees on November 17th to balance out the meetings for November and also the proposed Thanksgiving recess dates would be November 23rd through Friday, November 27th.

And I'm available if you have any questions.

Thank you so much.

Move approval.

Second.

Do we have any public speakers?

Seeing none.

Thank you.

There are no speakers for this item.

This item was moved by Council President Jenkins, seconded by Council Member Five to approve the recommendations of staff to be forwarded to the October 21st City Council agenda on consent.

On roll, Councilmember Brown is excused, Councilmember Fife.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes with three ayes, one excused Brown to be forwarded to the October 21st city council agenda on consent.

We do have three speakers for open forum.

Ms.

Asada Olabala, Rajny Mondal, and Ann Jenks.

And Rajni Mandel District 4.

I wanted to thank Chief Floyd Mitchell for doing everything he could to help make Oakland safe.

I've seen how the police commission used their power to block his efforts to change policies to better our city.

How the commission and the federal monitor blocked the pursuit policy for including commercial burglaries, how they want to block upgrading OPD equipment, and how he had to endure comments and questions from the commission that challenges decades of experience and judgment.

How commissioners who have no law enforcement experience tell the chief that they know better.

I don't blame the chief from leaving because he was run out and obstructed by anti-police activists who are off and on the dais.

I'm a physician, and if I had people with no medical expertise tell me I can't upgrade my aura equipment or that the medication I want is denied because they believe it doesn't work and question my judgment every step of the way, well, I would leave to where I was actually appreciated and respected.

So thank you, Chief Mitchell, for your honesty and leadership.

You will be missed.

Thank you.

Now you have a group of people who just came on the scene yesterday and they don't appreciate the what he's doing.

So you attack him.

His character, his integrity.

You should have seen the work he's done.

I've seen it.

These people haven't seen it.

Stop attacking this man.

Present with the other your political.

Thank you, Mr.

Sodder.

Anne Jenks, our jox.

President Jenkins, that was our last speaker.