Good morning and welcome to the finance and management meeting of today, October 28th.

The time is now 9 34 a.m.

and this meeting has come to order.

Can everyone hear me?

Thank you.

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

If you are here with us in chambers or here in room one and would like to submit a speaker's card, please fill one out and turn it to myself before the item is read into record.

Online speaker requests were due 24 hours prior to this meeting.

The meeting came to order at 9 34 a.m.

Speaker cards will no longer be accepted ten minutes after the meeting has begun, making that time nine forty-four a.m.

With that, we would now proceed to take roll.

Councilmember Brown.

Present.

Councilmember Unger.

Councilmember Wong.

Present.

Present.

Thank you.

We have four members present.

And before we begin, Councilmember Ramachandran, do you have any announcements for today?

Um yes, thank you everyone for bearing with this room change.

Um things a little differently.

Also, we're in a really difficult time financially now.

If folks might have read the news, we're facing millions of dollars of liability in a pretty big lawsuit over, you know, hundreds of millions in dollars worth.

So this is really a time that we have to come together and think about cost savings and how we're going to come together as a city and continue to make tough choices as we've been in the past.

And with that, I'm excited today to have on the agenda some interesting revenue generating items as we figure out how to push forward as a city.

So thank you.

Um, happy to go on.

Thank you, Chair.

Moving to our first item of the day, which is item number item one, the approval of the draft minutes from the committee meetings of July eighth and September the 30th.

Second, we have a we have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Councilmember Wong to accept the draft minutes from the committee meetings of July 8th, September the 30th.

As is on roll, Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Councilmember Wong.

Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes to accept the draft minutes from the committee meetings on July 8th and September the thirtieth, 2025, as is moving to item two.

At this time, there are no changes.

Okay, I will entertain a motion.

I'll move approval.

Second.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Brown to accept the termination of schedule outstanding committee items, also known as your pending lists as is on roll, Councilmember Brown.

Councilmember Unger.

Councilmember Juan.

And Chair Ramachandron.

Aye.

This motion passes with four ayes to accept determination of schedule outstanding committee items as is moving to your first item of the day, which is item three.

First action item, excuse me.

Uh receiver information report for a list of options to raise an additional ongoing 40 million to general purpose fund revenues via an ordinance to adopt or increase a tax effective July 1st, 2026 to provide ongoing resources for public safety and to maintain key equipment IT systems and 911 investments.

And you do have three speakers for this item.

Okay.

To the administer.

Thank you, Chairman Orangeon and Brad Johnson, budget administrator.

Before your responses to your questions that were raised at the prior committee meeting regarding options to raise the forty million dollars that is budgeted for our second year of our biennial budget.

Uh, we did our best to respond to all the questions that this body had had in its open conversation, plus some other questions that we had received via email and other at other times.

As you note, I would probably want to highlight for the benefit of the public and the members here the net effect of the proposed new parcel tax when combined with the uh projected change to our PFERS levy, which are on page two and three of the report.

Um I would note that those are probably the uh items uh most important for you to make sure you review and understand.

But I'm happy to respond to any questions that further questions you may have on the other uh responses that are provided here, and to have any further discussion as to how you'd like to proceed in terms of development of this ballot measure, potentially.

Okay, um to the administration.

Can you talk a little bit about the PFERS changes and go through that side of the report in the interest of the public?

Absolutely.

So the city currently levies a property tax override which funds its closed retirement benefit system, which we'll have a conversation on at another time later.

That property tax override uh will fade down over the course of the next several years as we reach the PFAR's full funding date at the end of 2026 uh fiscal year, which is the current fiscal year.

As that PERS tax override fades away, residents of Oakland will see savings on their tax bills.

Pers tax is an ad valorum tax, and so it's a little bit different than a parcel tax.

It's more akin to our bonds uh that are levied on property tax bill.

The analysis before you shows you the effect of the average homeowner of a parcel tax if structured like our current measure Q uh and measure N parcel taxes uh when combined with that reduction in the PFERS levy.

As I mentioned earlier, the PFERS tax is an ad valorum tax, so it's per dollar value of assessed value of the house versus a parcel tax, which is flat.

And so there is a little bit of difference in who is charged what under the two tax regimes, notably people that have held their uh properties for a long time may under California's proposition 13 have very low assessed valuations on their house.

So if you've held uh three-bedroom house in the city of Oakland since Prop 13 was passed in the late 80s, you probably have a very, very low AV on your tax, and you actually probably pay a very, very low property tax.

That same house were to sell today, it may sell for an AV that would be recessed to that could be up to 10 times that value, resulting in 10 times the amount of tax on an ad valorum basis for that same house.

The way that the switch over from a parcel tax to uh to a parcel tax from uh the advalorum tax would work is some of those lower valued properties would have increases in comparison.

But for all of the uh various mechanisms, you would likely see decreases for the vast majority of homes in the city of Oakland.

And so if you were to look at the tables for a 40 million dollar levy, uh we will likely see between 61 and 63 percent of homes receiving a reduction.

And we expect that to be further discounted when we take into a fact that our parcel taxes have certain low-income senior and very low-income uh provisions in them that will also not apply to certain low-income persons.

So uh the specifics again are there for the forty million dollar, fifty and sixty million dollar numbers just for your information and consideration.

And again, I will note those homes that will be potentially be paying more that would hit on the other side are likely properties that pay a lot less into this sort of municipal system of city uh school district and county funding as it is right now.

Council Member.

So it's not just that some of the P first tax will be rolling off, it's that some has already rolled off, right?

So is that uh 40%, 50% number?

Is that just take in what is going to roll off in the next year, or does it also take into account what rolled off last year?

This is taking into account only what will be rolling off.

If we were to take into account what has already rolled off, you could uh effectively, these numbers would double because we've brought down almost by half the levy already.

So we've all Oakland residents have already seen savings due to their P-verse taxes and when did that when did the last roll off happen?

We did it uh not this full year, fiscal year, but the prior fiscal year, so fiscal 2425.

So the property tax bills that would have been paid in December 2024 and March 2025.

And you know, I think just for myself to help conceptualize it.

I had asked for what the amount was on a million dollar home, just so people could then easily do the math on their own.

Do you have any?

Did we not?

Is that not here?

I can certainly give me a moment, I will give you a number on that.

We can move on while you're doing that.

Well, it's not it's not super complicated as it's uh 0.75% on a million dollar home.

I can do that math relatively quickly, but I'm happy to take other questions as I run run through this calculation.

I just think that would be a good number for us to sort of get out there in the world so people can sort of do the easy back of the envelope math for their own assessed value.

Happy take other questions in the meantime as I'm running through this calculation, sorry.

Apologies, I can't see all the council members that I give in time, so if you just raise your hand higher.

Thank you.

I do not like this room and I hope we go back to chambers.

About one and a half thousand dollars would be the average roll off is what we would be seeing health number.

So one and a half, so $1,500 was the previous roll-off or the coming roll?

That's the roll off that that's the total roll off.

So we for both for both.

So we had about a 0.15% total rate that we were levying, that rate will come down to near zero for a million dollar home.

That's about a thousand five hundred dollars that you'll see roll off over the course of the sunset of the P first tax override.

Okay.

So that that's a so fifteen hundred dollars over the course of two years ago to one year from now.

Yep.

Okay, thank you.

Council.

First of all, thank you so much, Bradley, for this very comprehensive report.

Um you explored a lot of the tax scenarios that we had put forward.

Um, one question on the progressive parcel tax.

So the example that you provided was based off of use instead of um, for example, property size, how challenging or um would it be to do um an analysis based off of size, or actually forget the analysis just to actually implement a progressive parcel tax based off of property size?

So we would have to be.

So there's a little bit of a legal question on that just to make sure we're not coming close to approximating an ad valorum tax.

That's often a thing that we'll get in that we could run into legal trouble with.

So we'd want to talk to OCA about that to make sure there's no case law that says that moving in that particular direction isn't uh skating too close to the line if as it were.

Um we could levy based on the size.

Are you interested in the parcel square footage?

Or are you interested in the size of the built area of the parcel?

They're actually different questions.

So you explain the difference.

Sure.

Uh if we were to walk across the street, the center across the way has lots of buildings that are in excess of 12 uh stories.

The gross square footage of the total buildings on that property is a lot higher than the flu the floor print of the area underneath it.

Uh-huh.

And so depending on how you levied it, you might get disparate impacts.

So one could imagine um, because you can't do it based on the value, a if you only did it on the parcels square footage, you might be taxing a built-up, you know, holding a hundred people parceling downtown the same as you would hold uh for you know two or three small units in the in East Oakland, which happen to sit on a larger set of land of land, right?

But not on not but don't have as much square footage.

And we would want to analyze that to make sure that we don't have in an inadvertently a negative progressive effect on the income.

Cause often what you may find is the parcels that are larger in terms of their squid footage may be at a lower value and owned by uh owners that are paying a lower value for them.

Um, we know we've gotten into issues with our vacancy tax of some of the square footage being unbuildable, so that's also sort of a question we would need to assess if we're looking we're looking to base it on the land area in addition to the legal question around that.

Okay, is there a difference in chal challenge of implementation?

Correct.

We would need to work with our uh current uh engineer assessor to make sure that we are properly doing that.

I don't think parcel area would be dramatically different.

It would require us to individually assess and bill every single property within the city that should be available in the county's record.

So it's not that it's undoable, it might require.

So both versions are the data is already available.

The square footage of the buildable area may be harder to get come by.

That would be a little bit more challenging potentially for us to do.

It changes require more assessment.

And I can't say that implementation wouldn't require staff resources.

We need to assess that.

And my other question is whether because for example, in the use, the the use-based progressive structure that you provided or the other one that you provided, which is like the high density un uh the high density housing.

Um, is there anything that restricts people from passing on that tax to like renters?

Not really, right?

And so it may it may actually flow down to renters inadvertently.

That's my conclusion.

I would imagine if the property is under a city rent control ordinance that that would be I believe that's prohibited, but I would want to look at some of our attorney and colleagues, and I'm not sure if we have that answer here.

I think it may be pre prevented for those that are covered under the city's rent enforcement ordinance.

Okay.

But if you are if the landlord is capable of raising your rent sort of at their own discretion, then obviously they could pass it on to you via one way via one means or another if you aren't protected by city rent control in one way or another.

So we would need to get back to you as to whether or not the city's rent control ordinances provide protection.

I think they may in terms of how they're formulated, but for everyone else on other properties, it probably would not.

Okay.

I will get back to you on which version of the progressive uh parcel tax structure we'd like analysis on.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Um, yes, I just also wanted to thank um Bradley and the finance team for um so comprehensively um answering so many of our questions.

Um, and so I definitely understand um kind of the note around the real estate transfer tax.

And then I guess maybe my question is about the UCT on the utility tax, and um, you know, just some of the changes that we've made around really aligning ourselves um with some of the environmental efforts and we are seeing that more buildings that are being built, especially apartment units um being built here in the city of Oakland are moving towards electric electrification.

Um, and so I know in the analysis it you know it basically shares that the you know it's not going to generate as much um the 40 million because we know our go the goal is the forty forty million deficit um but I guess I am curious in the future or what would it look like if in the future we were to kind of make this adjustment um is that something uh well I guess like what is the precedent of um actually having both of these items on the ballot right to um really show um you know just folks that we are really trying to support overall electrification.

Uh so I would say that uh the concern you would have about putting them both on a June ballot would be a political one about you know the saliency of passage of both of them I would note that your utility user tax or utility consumption tax similar names for the same tax is a general tax and should the council decide to put a general tax on the November election ballot coming up in uh November of 2026 it would be a 50% margin tax provided it stayed at a as a general tax so ch similarly to when measure T our our uh more progressive business tax rate structure was changed and modernized a modernization of our UCT could be done at the same time but it in order to do that it needs to be kept as a general tax which means it's not earmarked and it needs to be held at a general election of the local entity for it which for us is November of 2026.

I see okay um thank you and I guess I'm just really bringing it up because we see that um a handful of other local cities have have made that that change um so even if it's not um in the immediate future it I think it would be something that we should have on our radar.

Understood appreciated okay colleagues we if there's no other comments now we'll move to help the comment want to call your name please approach the podium state your name for the record and you do have two minutes procedure we will start with in-person speakers and then we will go to Zoom starting with Missisada Kevin Daly Dolly excuse me and Derek Barnes.

You may approach the podium to your right my left thank you.

Thank you.

Sorry Kevin Dally I'm a co-chair of the policy and legislative committee of the bicyclist and pedestrian advisory commission.

And I talked about parking policy in the past uh but I want to bring back something last night we had a discussion of parking policy and how it affects traffic safety.

And there is one thing that I want to make clear first of all parking policy needs to emphasize safety of pedestrians, cyclists, etc.

And proper ticketing will reduce double parking parking the bike lanes, parking in the daylighting zones, etc.

So if the parking department is better funded, I think for a while it will make more money of course there's a risk everyone will suddenly start following the law and then we will make less money off of ticketing.

I think that's net gain though overall but but make sure we always look at how it affects safety of traffic safety when you look at the parking policy still raise rates when appropriate.

Thanks.

Shame on you for what you did on Moafama and I'm repeatedly talk about it.

Now you're going through all of this dialogue, and I know and you know you're gonna put a partial tax on the bottom on the ballot.

So why don't you just stop all of this and say that's what we're gonna do.

But when you do that, nobody's uh asking the question, what kind of impact is this gonna have on homeowners?

It's gonna have a big impact.

One example is property values decline as of September twenty twenty five in a report that was done on home values, uh, particularly related to zone 94612 zip code, where the property went down 30 percent from early 2020.

Homeowners in Oakland face significant financial burdens due to high cost of living property related to fees that is imposed on them, steep maintenance of their property, local regulations that are costing them more money.

Oakland's mean medium effective property tax rates five times higher than the national rate.

Unlike many other cities, Oakland holds homeowners responsible for maintaining the public sidewalks and sew sewers that are lateral to their property.

We've got a whole list of stuff that the that you guys are imposing on the on homeowners.

I'm not a homeowner, so it's not bothering me.

Local crime rates, maintenance of property is causing property value to decrease.

The whole statewide homeowners insurance average 737 per year.

The average rate for Oakland homeowners that have to pay home uh home insurance is 1,600 annually as of early 2025.

And I got some more stuff.

Y'all not talking about the burdens you're putting on homeowners, and you're going to them again.

We're now moving to our Zoom speakers.

If you signed up, please raise your hand so you're easily identified.

And we have Derek Barnes.

And that concludes your public speakers for item three.

Okay, colleagues, any other comments?

If not, I'll entertain.

So moved to, does this need to go to the full council, or we're just uh receive it here?

Receive it here.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Brown to receive and file this in the Finance and Management Committee on the role.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

I councilmember Wong.

I and Chair Ramachandran.

Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes to receive and file this in the finance management committee.

Moving to item four.

Receive an informational report from the city administrator in response to the city auditors' recommendations and this is substantiated whistleblower investigation regarding city of Oakland uses unauthorized formulas for calculating over time that defer from LFL SA guidelines, and you do have two speakers for this item.

Okay, from the administration, I believe this is an oral report.

Um, so we will hear the court.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh thank you through the chair and members of the council.

Uh, in response to the uh city auditor's investigative report, uh dated February 20, 2025, concerning the uh city's formulas for calculating overtime pay for employees in the Department of Transportation and Public Works.

There are several key questions that have been answered, and we'd like to provide a brief update.

Um the auditor based his findings on what is required under the Fair Labor and Standards Act or FELSA, it's commonly known by, which is considered to be the floor or the baseline for calculating overtime compensation.

Uh it is not uncommon that organizations are able to calculate overtime that is more generous than what the FELSA requires as a baseline.

Uh, based on our records, the city has applied a more generous overtime calculation for at least 17 years.

And although we have not been able to locate documentation of this practice, uh, based on the length of time, we have effectively established a binding past practice.

We would need to collectively bargain a different calculation method, uh, should that be uh the pleasure of the council and the council's uh direction.

We certainly appreciate the auditors' diligence in investigating this matter, but we do not believe we have deviated from the method of calculation for almost two decades and requests um after you know hearing this item that this item be uh received and filed.

Thank you.

Um, so myself and Councilmember Ungarn brought this item to get some clarity basically on the auditor's report that we were paying unauthorized amounts of overtime that was not per any written formula.

Um I understand that you're saying this is a floor, but so that this can be authorized and in writing, do you have plans to change the official overtime calculation to reflect what these staff members have been getting paid?

Uh through the chair.

Uh so I think that's something that that's the direction and pleasure of the council.

We also have our uh representatives from the Department of Human Resources here to you know assist me with answering questions also.

Um, so I want to give uh Director Howe an opportunity on the front end to answer that question, but we certainly jump in and go deeper.

Thank you.

Uh good morning, uh members of the finance and management committee, Mary Howe, Director of Human Resources, uh Chair Ramashandran, I'm sorry.

Was your question about memorializing the current practice or changing the practice?

Memorializing the current practice, which is above the FLSA guidelines but still allowable.

Uh certainly we can look into methods of doing that.

Um one way would be to uh I guess include it into the collective bargaining agreements, or the other way would be to have some sort of established um process memo where we would memorialize this practice.

And so we would discuss that with our partners in the finance department to determine the best method to pursue.

Thank you.

And through the parliamentarian, is that something that council us can provide direction on or is an administrative process that doesn't require our direction?

Um Malia McPherson from the city attorney's office.

If the question is about the item in front of you today, it's just an informational report.

Um if there's an interest in scheduling a future council action, could be a scheduling item.

Um, and I think what the city administration is saying is that there's already plans to, you know, work with the council on future council action.

If not necessary.

But it could be a scheduling item if you want, have more direction.

Thank you.

If we simply wanted an update, could we continue this item in committee for a few months down the road to hear any update on what changes have been memorialized?

Uh that is one of the options.

If you'd like more information, uh defer to the city administration on how to handle this item.

So if it wants to be a scheduling for a new item for three months or a continuing item uh versus just continuing this item indefinitely.

Uh through the chair, uh, council member to uh council member Ramashandran and members of the committee.

So we can certainly offer up in writing what the path forward actually would be after we consult with our partners in finance and HR to identify what the path forward recommended path forward would be.

Happy to put that in a memo to the entire council so that we can preserve the time at committees for you know other business given that we've talked through this, but also want to offer just time with Auditor Houston so that um his office does know how we're moving forward as well, because we want to make sure that we do this in in partnership across the board.

Thank you.

I'm open, of course, to the feedback of colleagues, but my preference would be to um hold this item in committee and um I appreciate the offer to send a memo, but having because this was something that was very very made very public by the city auditor to keep it in the public eye.

Um I understand that this might take some time, so I'm happy to have it scheduled down the road, so like perhaps the last meeting in December or something by the committee meeting by December, if that's enough time.

Uh through the chair, if um if it's the pleasure of this body, if we can certainly revisit that closer to the end of January to give us enough time given the fact that we have a number of pressing items in front of us that we're working through and with the auditor's office.

I think that would be uh more than a reasonable amount of time that I would respectfully request that additional month.

Thank you.

I have two more quick questions.

Um, so um, I'm happy to have this be continued at end of January so we can receive some kind of substantive update.

Um, my second question is other departments.

Um, it's quite possible that this extends to departments outside of public works and what was studied by this very narrowly scoped auditors report.

Um, what is the plan to look at other departments?

Or if a formula is changed, would it be citywide for all departments receiving this kind of FLSA over time?

Uh, through this year, we certainly want to um really identify a broad scope to make sure it does, it is just not limited to to the department of public works and transportation and to your question.

Yes, there would be consideration across the spectrum to make sure that we're equib equitably applying um whatever policy that we have, but also want to defer to Director Howe to give some additional context and insight.

Uh certainly, thank you.

Um, so Chair Ramashandran, the formula is not just exclusive to departments, it's probably it's likely based on bargaining units, and so if uh so I would venture to say, and um we can certainly have our colleagues in payroll, central payroll take a closer look, but it would apply citywide.

Thank you.

And final question is the auditor available?

I'd love his feedback on this.

Or someone from his office.

This came from his office.

Uh through the chair.

Um, he did let our office know that he wasn't available today, but happy to coordinate time um with his office so that we can all kind of get on the same page and discuss.

Thank you, colleagues.

So just to put a bow on this, my my understanding is that there are different ways to calculate FLSA.

We are calculating one that is somewhat more generous than the minimum FLSA wage, which is which isn't there's nothing illegal or inappropriate about that.

It's just something that that we have been doing.

We've been doing it for close to 20 years, and any changes to that because of that past practice should be undertaken through the negotiation process, which is, you know, eight months away from a new contract.

Is that correct?

Uh through the chair, that is correct.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you so much for the update.

Um, my question is um and and correct me if I'm wrong, and maybe I missed it.

I guess I'm just curious has there been a report that has uplifted um based on different bargaining units.

What is the calculation for the various departments for overtime?

Has that been generated?

Council members and FNC committee.

Yeah, I'm just saying I'm the payroll administrator.

So there is a calculation that we can email and share with you that's been long standing for about 17 years.

For non-sworn, there's a seven-day calculation, two seven-day calculations.

And um for sworn, we have a look back period for police goes back 28 days, so not the pay period.

We put back 28 days to calculate their FLSA, and then for sworn fire, we have a 27-day look back for them, and then also special um over 204 hours pensionability.

Um, but that formula has been set in there in Oracle to calculate based on what people enter on their time sheet.

I see.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, um, I know we have to hear public comments.

Um, from council members will move to public comments.

Thank you, Chair Ramachandran.

Moving to our public comments.

Want to call your name, please approach the podium.

If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so you're easily identified.

We will take in-person speakers before Zoom speakers, Miss Asada and Kevin Dolly.

I suspect you don't know how to get that money back.

1.7 million dollars went to 526 employees.

You supposed to be in a process of informing those employees they were overpaid and directing them with a specific amount of money that they have to return to the city.

You haven't spoken about that.

You also have that you in May hired a consultant company to advise you on the issue and how to fix it.

They should be in the room.

You're calling for the auditor to be here.

Why didn't you call for the vendor to be here to say since May, what progress have you made in fixing the system?

Do your job.

Then you have the IFPTE, local 21 has found in May of 2025 that the city had not civilize 38 sworn office positions and departments like Internal Affairs, IT, a move that would reduce overtime costs of $13 million.

Now I read that.

Why haven't you brought that up today?

Because you're too busy going after people like Omar Pharma, degrading them and causing them to have a picture of they don't know how to do their work.

Do your work.

If you would have followed what was in the report today.

If I called your name, you're still wishing to speak.

Kevin Dolly.

Thank you.

That concludes your public speakers for item four.

Thank you.

And I will make a motion to hold us in committee until um January to the January 27th.

Oh question.

So I think uh one of my colleagues has suggested that we do an analysis across the departments.

Can we also begin with the departments that have the highest number of overtime because that would reap the most benefits for the city?

Thank you.

It's a question.

Yeah.

Uh through the chair of the county.

Sorry.

Through the chair of the council, yes, we can certainly consider that.

But obviously, you know, with the experts in the room, we need to figure out how do we scope that project out.

Okay.

Okay.

Um, so I'll restate my motion to hold this um in committee until the January 27th Finance and Management Committee meeting to be able to get an update, um, written or oral on uh I take that back.

Uh a written update on the status of implementing um any written changes to the um overtime policy.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Chair Ramachandra, seconded by councilmember Brown to continue this item to the January 27, 2026 Finance and Management Committee on role.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye, Councilmember Unger, I Councilmember Wong.

And Chair Rama Chandran.

This motion passes what four ayes to continue this item to the January 27, 2026 Finance and Management Committee.

Moving to item five.

Adopt a resolution approving the side letter to amend to clarify Article 2871 of the November 1st, 2020, June 30th, 2026 memorandum of out understanding between the City of Oakland and the International Association of Firefires, Local 55 to be effective November 1st, 2020, and you do have two speakers for this item.

Good morning, Finance and Management Committee, Chair Rama Chandra.

My name's Crystal Remy Adams.

I am a principal employee relations analyst in the Department of Human Resources.

I am here today to present to the Fire Staff Premium Pay Side Letter signed by both the International Association of Firefighters, IAFF, Local 55, and the City.

I'd like to start off by thanking IAFF President Seth Oyer for working with Central Payroll, our office, and with CalPers to reach this agreement.

This side letter agreement amends Article 2.8.7.1 of the IAFF MOU renamed as fire staff premium to clarify the purpose and criteria for eligibility of the premium and ensures the premium complies with the public employees' retirement law, requirements for reportable compensation.

There will not be any additional costs as a result of this side letter, and this premium will only apply to those employees who are provide uh who are performing administrative duties versus suppression duties.

The side letter will be effective as of November 1st, 2020 to ensure that represented employees who have already received this premium based on existing contract language will have the compensation considered as reportable compensation to CalPers.

The revisions to the MOU reflected in this side letter are for compliance with the public employees' retirement law and do not increase the universe of employees who are eligible for this assignment, as that will be based on the operational needs of the fire department.

We recommend that you adopt the resolution that approves the fire staff premium pay side letter between the city and the international association of firefighters, local 55.

I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you, colleagues.

Okay, uh public comment.

Moving to our public speakers want to call your name, please approach the podium, state your name for the recording of two minutes.

Ms.

Asada and Kevin Dolly.

So this says that you didn't do something right.

So you got to correct it.

So how did it happen that the language in the MOU originally created did not comply with the public employees' retirement law requirements for reportable compare uh not gonna go into what it was about, but that's the bottom line.

Something wasn't done right, and now you got to redo it because it wasn't done right.

Oh, I want to remind you, nobody's gonna lose their job.

Because a lot of this happens.

We gotta go back and fix things because it wasn't done right, and we just skirt over it, it's no problem.

But with an Omar Farmer who didn't do absolutely nothing wrong, all of you sat there and said it wasn't appropriate him for him to be reassigned to the police commission.

So you now you gotta screw up with a document not being done correctly, and you gotta fix it, and you're gonna act like, oh, this is not important.

Yes, it is important, particularly if you're gonna hold black men like Omar Farmer accountable for something he did not do.

So every screw up, I'm gonna emphasize it.

You're gonna act like it's no big deal.

It is a big deal.

Your city attorney's office is supposed to review every document that goes that is brought to this city for us to uh have some kind of input about.

That didn't happen.

The city administrator, you have a responsibility to review every document to make sure it's done correctly.

That didn't happen, and you approve this council, and you didn't see it.

You got a nerve to hold all formal responsible, and all day long I'll be recognizing stuff.

I read every document.

Do you read them?

I conclude your public speakers for item five.

I just want to flag that this change was a result of CalPERS changing their reporting requirements and that every public safety agency in the state is having to make a similar change at their council in order to comport with the new CalPERS language.

Yeah, I say that you too.

Uh, and just to confirm that um it says in this report that there's no fiscal impact.

Can somebody clarify why that is?

Sure.

We already provide a staff premium.

We are not updating that we are providing the staff premium or changing work.

We are updating the terms and conditions that are allow us to comply.

Okay.

With the new CalPER standards.

Okay.

So it's in this is an existing uh practice.

Okay.

Understood.

Thank you.

Council McBrown.

Uh move approval of this item.

Second.

Uh to the clerk and parliamentary.

Does this need to be forwarded to full counseling for the full council meeting on consent?

Yes.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Councilmember.

And I just want to double check in what time is the meeting.

Is that the nine?

This is for the regular scheduled 9 a.m.

on Tuesday.

It's a special meeting, is it?

9 a.m.

It would be more than 90.

9 a.m.

on November 4th.

Yes.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Council Member Wong to approve the recommendations of staff and for this item to the November the 4th.

Special city council meeting for 9 30 on consent.

On roll, Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Council Member Unger.

Councilmember Wong.

And Chair Woman Chandran.

I this motion passes with four eyes to approve the recommendations of staff and afford this item to the November 4th City Council agenda at 9 a.m.

Thank you.

Moving to item six.

Receiver information report regarding the annual equal access to services ordinance compliance report for fiscal year 24 through 25.

And you do have one speaker for this item.

Good morning, Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Andrea Mariana.

I'm the HR manager over organizational development and equal access.

And today we're going to present the annual language access report.

I'd like to start off by acknowledging the vital work of the Equal Access Program, the first of its kind in the country, serving almost half of the Oakland community who have limited English proficiency.

This program based on language equity is important and vital to one of the most linguistically diverse communities in the country.

Today to introduce the report and give you a summary is May Tam who runs the equal access program.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning, Chairperson and members of the committee.

My name is May Tem.

I am a program analyst for the Equal Access Program.

And today I'm going to present to you our annual compliance plan.

So this is an information report, and it serves as a city administrator's annual compliance plan on the implementation of equal access ordinance for the period of July 1st, 2024 to June 30th, 2025.

There's two sections of the report.

First, there's the agenda report which provides aggregates citywide data.

And then there's also attachment A.

So attachment A includes all the translation and interpretation record for the reporting period, census data on limited English speaking population, and also department compliance plan for each of the city department.

Page two, provide a very nice little snapshot on citywide compliance data.

City of Oakland is culturally and linguistically diverse.

Census data shows that 42% of Oakland residents speaks a non-English language at home.

The most common non-English language is Spanish, followed by Chinese.

About 2,500 city employees work at an office or city facility that regularly interacts with the public.

These positions we are referred to as public contact positions.

And 24% of our public-facing employees are bilingual in either Spanish or Chinese.

During the reporting year, 412 translated documents were produced, and 308 hours of live professional interpretations were provided.

A citywide language access survey was launched in the fall of 2024.

Data is presented on page 8 and page 9 of the report.

Surveys were disseminated in city public contact locations throughout the city's facilities.

A total of 795 responses were collected.

More than 45 languages were identified on this survey.

The most common spoken languages identified in the survey are English, Cantonese, Spanish, Mandarin, Vietnamese, French, and Korean.

By implementing a language access policy here in Oakland, everyone living, visiting, and doing business in Oakland is provided with fair and equitable opportunity to access city programs and services.

It helps advance citywide policies, priorities, and promo meaningful civic engagement.

The annual compliance report presented today serves as an information report to capture citywide language access services, and staff recommends the committee accepts this report.

I'm available, they answer questions, and staff from city departments are also available in the audience to respond to questions.

Thank you.

Thank you for your report.

I appreciate the many efforts over the years.

You know, some of this is of course mandated by law and settlements, and others is to show that.

Oakland cares about access to a very diverse population of the different language speakers.

You know, the so that these efforts are noted and appreciated.

Um colleagues, comments, questions.

Councilman Wong.

Hi, thank you so much for this um important report.

How do we hold departments?

Uh, what are the accountability uh mechanisms?

I will say later today in public safety.

We are receiving an informational report from the auditor that notes um fairly concerning inequities when it relates to 911 response time when someone doesn't speak English and how that adds significant really when that is minutes saves lives and it makes a difference and um how we can move this forward and hold departments accountable to this.

So we do have this annual process.

I would say this annual process is very valuable.

Every year we meet with each of the city department, we have a language access coordinator assigned to each of the departments, and we have meetings and we have compliance plan and we can have compliance report, and there are different checkboxes in the compliance report.

So if you go to attachment A in the department compliance report, they each have to check off the different check boxes, make sure trainings are provide resources are provided to staff, make sure phone lines are providing multilingual messages, make sure vital documents are translated into different languages and it's included on this report.

So this is a valuable process.

We do it every year.

It feels very fast.

You know, nine months down the road, we start the process up all over again.

So it feels very um very frequent, and we do have um ongoing communication with the departments.

And I understand there's the report from the auditor's office encouraging more translators and more bilingual staff, and that's definitely something that we have in communication with the uh fire um with the police department on in terms of the dispatch center.

And there are currently selective certification for um police communication dispatch going on, and we're encouraging the department to hire someone who's bilingual.

And uh furthermore, you've done a department-by-department analysis.

Is there um are there what what departments would you name as it's been critical that we actually increase language capacity because um it does a disservice in terms of our city services?

Now the cities, the city ordinance and AI administrative instructions provide a formula for calculation.

It's based on limited English speaking population data.

So the goal for Spanish-speaking bilingual employee is 10%, and the goal for bilingual Chinese and English bilingual employees is 4%.

So if you look at the table, if any area that shows 0%, that would be an area of concern.

Um it also depends on the number of public contact positions.

Some departments are huge, like public works department is very huge, but not everybody talked to the members of the public directly.

So we focus on public contact positions, people that are really working with the public and apply that percentage.

Um in some areas you see the um, for instance, the mayor's office when this report was produced, have zero Chinese bilingual employees available in the office, that could be one of the concerns, but at the same time, departments oftentimes have interns and volunteers who work in the office that could also provide the language capacity.

I think one that I find noteworthy is fire because they provide medical services and care.

So do you can you make comments on how that impacts especially the medical services when we don't have bilingual uh the bilingual capacity as uh you've recommended?

Yes, so we also have members represented by the fire department today.

I don't know if you want to hear from the fire department directly.

Um throughout the year, all the requisitions for recruitment will come through uh human resources management and comes by our office as well, and we would recommend um hiring bilingual staff.

Um, but I also understand sometimes waivers or um exemption may be applied.

Um I don't know if the fire department representative want to speak on other efforts, good morning, Michael Hunt, Oakland Fire Department.

So how just if there's somebody who has a medical emergency and fire shows up and they don't speak English, how does the department uh handle that considering communication with the person would be critical?

So they there is a the dispatch services uses the interpretation line as well as members in the field use it as well.

So if there is a situation where there's a medical incident that fire responds to, uh they can utilize the interpretation line to uh develop a translation to uh directly interact with the patient and family, okay.

So basically it's somebody's got a phone and they're interacting with the patient.

Okay, interesting.

Okay, thank you.

Other questions, comments?

Um I have one just because it came up in my previous work as a workers' rights attorney.

Um one of the languages that is more, we see one more in Oakland is mom, which is you know very notably different Spanish.

Are there staff members in the city that speak mom or do you rely on the language line?

Um I would say both.

Um, for equal access ordinance to focus is on threshold languages, that means still the English speaking population over 10,000 thresholding in terms of city of Oakland population.

So the focus for this report is on Spanish and Chinese because that is the focus of the ordinance.

Now we do have different contractors that we bring in to serve the city of Oakland.

Um all the contractors have language capacity to cover 100 languages, and MAM is one of the languages covered by our vendors.

So from time to time we have colleagues from OBRYD, we have colleagues from DHS wanting to arrange for interpretation of mom languages, and we'll work with our vendors to bring in one.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um we can move to public comment.

Want to call your name, please approach the podium.

Ms.ada.

Every year I come to this meeting and ask you the same thing.

You are the finance committee.

The questions you should be asking is mainly you can ask all these other questions, but mainly how much money we spend it.

How much more they say here, 24 hours a day over the phone interpretation?

How much that costs?

Staff.

How much does that cost?

Translation of written documents.

How much does that cost?

Verbal translation.

How much does that cost?

Maintaining telephone messages, how much does that cost?

Vietnamese uh Arab translation, uh, materials.

How much does that cost?

Contracted consultants.

How much does that cost?

Six hundred and one employees are eligible for premium pay.

How much does that cost?

Cost of surveys, cost of posters, cost of employee training programs, cost of the is there a cost related to the department access coordinator, or they do that for free.

Okay, the cost of administrative um uh bilingual text and uh verification of language skills.

How much does that cost?

Y'all looking down.

You are the finance committee.

What's the cost and what's the source of funding for all of this?

Every year, I've been coming here for years when y'all do these reports.

You never ask any questions about how much money they're spend in.

You also have them with uh forty-two percent, and they say they said he're only supposed to uh apply this uh skill or what they do to Spanish and Chinese, but they're doing it to all different groups, but they're leaving out groups too.

Why do you leave out those groups if we help in some groups that don't come under the 10,000 spectrum?

Ask the question.

How much money are you spending in this department?

You are being irresponsible if you are not looking at costs related to this issue because you are the finance committee.

Look down if you want to go back to the that concludes your public speakers for item six.

Thank you so much to our public speakers and colleagues, and I assure you the cost that we spend on these programs are a lot less on a lawsuit if we would be sued on these things.

Colleagues, is there a uh motion?

And uh to the parliamentarian and clerk, does this have to go to full counselor?

Can we file in committee?

I think it can be filed in committee, but if there's a past practice of having it go to full council, I defer to city administration.

Is there a motion?

Uh, so moved or to accept the report to full council or pilot.

Uh, yes.

On the November 4th meeting on consent, yeah.

I'll second it.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Wan, seconded by Chair Raman Chandran to receive and forward this item to the November the fourth city council agenda at 9 a.m.

on consent on roll, Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember Uger.

Aye.

Councilmember Wong.

Aye.

And Chair Ramachandran.

Aye.

This motion passes with four ayes to receive and forward this to the November 4th.

City Council agenda at 9 a.m.

on consent.

Moving to item seven.

Good morning, committee president.

Receive an informational report on the Oakland Police and Fire Retirement Systems Investment Portfolio as of June 30th, 2025.

And you do have one speaker for this item.

Good morning, committee chair and members of the Finance and Management Committee.

My name is Taylor Jenkins, and I am the investment and operation manager of the retirement division for the City of Oakland police and fire retirement system, more commonly known as PEFERS.

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the investment portfolio of PIFERS as of June 30, 2025.

This is a uh critical report because this is the report that feeds into our audit and our actuary and is used in the city's uh contribution calculation.

I would like to note that you know, due to our recent performance, our strong performance over the last few years, that the city's contribution from the PTO to PEFERS decreased 10 million this year.

To assist me in presenting the investment information, I have the PIFER's investment consultant, Davis Sandswich of Makita Investments.

Uh, just to give you a brief overview, PIFERS is a closed retirement system.

It was closed to new members in 1976.

After that point, City of Oakland employees became members of CalPERS.

Currently, all the members of PEFARS are retired.

And as of June 30, 2025, we had a membership of 597 members, and an investment portfolio valued at approximately 480 million.

Based on the most recent valuation, PFERS is 90% funded.

Uh, next PEFAR's investment consultant Davis Sandswich will discuss the PIFER's investment portfolio in more detail.

Good morning.

It's a pleasure to be back here again.

We give these reports on a quarterly basis, and I will say candidly that given the previous agenda items, we'll end on a good note.

The PFAS Hotel uh PEFER portfolio is a very healthy position.

As Taylor mentioned, we're now above 90% funded.

It has an assumed rate of return of 5%.

So we recently brought that down last year and consult with the actuary.

So we don't have to shoot for the stars with this portfolio.

And as of June 30th, we were in the middle of transitioning the portfolio out of risky growth equity assets and into more fixed income and bond like investments.

That has happened as of July and August.

So the next report you see, you'll see that 61% of these assets are now in bonds, which are much less risky and safer than equities.

The really good news about this portfolio is with the 5% return objective.

We more than doubled that for the fiscal year period ending 2026.

So we had a uh a 10.2% net return for that fiscal year period.

And even though we de-risk the portfolio, we gained an additional 5% in the previous three months.

So year to date through September, it's up 10% as well.

Um you do have the report in front of you, and I won't go through page by page on that to save you a bunch of time.

But the portfolio grew from 453 million dollars after you figured in expenses and benefits that are paid out.

The investments brought in 44.9 or 45 million dollars, ended at a market value of 480 million.

Um we're pretty happy with where the portfolio is and where it's going.

Um, and we certainly will be paying attention to this.

We do have a board meeting tomorrow, uh, over in hearing room two or one.

I'm I don't remember which room it is.

If folks would like to attend and ask questions, that meeting starts at 10 30.

Uh, but that concludes my report and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, colleagues and councilmore.

I just want to thank you all for good work on this, providing some relief to Oakland taxpayers and the Oakland budget.

Appreciate it.

Okay, if there are no other comments, we'll move to public comment.

I think you want to call your name, please approach the podium, Kevin Dolly.

That concludes your public's comments for item seven.

Thank you.

And do we re-receive and file this report, right?

Okay, I will entertain a motion to receive and file.

Second.

Oh, I'll I'll go ahead and make the motion to receive and file.

I thought you made the motion.

Sorry, I'll second it.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Chair Ramachandra, seconded by Councilmember Unger to receive and file this in the finance and management committee on roll.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Aye.

Councilmember Wong.

Aye.

And Chair Woman Chandra.

Aye.

The motion passes with four eyes to receive and file this in the finance and management committee.

As a reminder, item eight.

Regarding the audit recommendation follow report as of June 30th, 25 was withdrawn from this agenda by the October 23rd, 25 rules and legislation committee and rescheduled to the December 2nd 2025 city council agenda on non-consent.

An additional reminder, item nine regarding the professional services agreement with Marcias Ginny and O'Connell LLC was withdrawn from the agenda by the October 23rd, 2025 rules and legislation committee and rescheduled to the finance and management pending list, no date specific, moving to open forum.

Kevin Dolly, Ms.ada.

And please approach the podium, state your name for the record.

I'm not gonna spend a lot of time because uh you obviously don't care.

This grand jury report clearly states the reasons why you should not be selling bonds, and you know it.

You know it, Ryan, that we should not be selling bonds, and it's in the report for people like me to understand why, and you did it anyway.

You're putting us at risk by selling those bonds.

We we are already f financially uh unsolvent, we have a tremendous deficit, and to sell bonds like you've done is irresponsible.

Again, you've been ill responsible to hold me.

So I'm waiting to see how you're going to respond to the grand jury report related to this issue.

You can sell the bonds, but it's there's a tremendous risk factor, and you instructed it not to do it.

You told them to wait until until December to see how we would be as far as our ability to have uh a positive rating.

Okay, the meeting is adjourned.