Good afternoon, everyone.

Welcome to the concurrent meeting of the Oakland Redevelopment Successor Agency and the City Council.

Today is Tuesday, December second, 2025.

The time is now 334 p.m.

and this meeting shall come to order.

Before taking a roll, I will provide the speaker card instructions.

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

Online speaker requests are due 24 hours prior to the start of this meeting, which was yesterday, Monday, by 3 30 p.m.

The last opportunity to submit a speaker's card is one and a half hours after the start of this meeting.

This meeting came to order at 3 34 p.m.

Therefore, speaker cards are due by 5 04 p.m.

I will now proceed with taking roll of members present on roll.

And you don't have to un there you go.

Sorry, through the chair.

I will unmute everyone.

Councilmember Brown.

Present.

Councilmember 5.

Present.

Councilmember Guile.

Present.

Councilmember Houston.

Present.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Councilmember Unger.

Present.

Councilmember Wong.

Present.

And Council President Jenkins.

President Ramachandran excused.

Showing seven seven present.

One excuse Ramachandran.

Chair, do you have any announcements before we begin?

No announcements.

Moving to our next item.

Item three, we have no actions on special orders of the day.

Moving to item four modifications to the agenda and procedural items.

Yes, uh taking chairs privilege because of some recent recent things that have happened.

I'm going to motion to pull item 10, which is the encampment abatement policy.

It is my full intention that this policy will be coming back in January.

I'm sorry to everybody who came down here to give your public comment.

You still can give public comment on item number 10, but it is my intention if I have a second and a vote from the I hear a second.

And if I have a vote from the rest of the council, that we will not be hearing item number 10, the encampment abatement policy today.

Any supporters, any oppositions, please contact your council members.

Please contact your council members so that they can know your thoughts, how we can make this policy better.

Uh and with that, have a motion and a second.

Do I have any comments?

Councilmember Houston.

Can you give me a reason why it's um being pulled?

Council president.

Yeah, so I I think it's imperative that we as a city keep funding, and Cal ICH has some questions about sensitivity zones specifically within the city of Oakland.

We are a very urban city, so where people can go when they are unsheltered, uh is something that we're gonna have to work on, and we'll continue to work on this policy.

As you guys might remember, it took a year and a half to get the original encampment management policy done, and so it's gonna take some time to get this done.

And I know council member Houston has been working very hard on this.

Councilmember Houston.

Are you saying that our non-sensitive areas we need to add more to the non-sensitive locations?

Is that what they're saying?

Like in district one and four.

Is that what you're saying?

Is that what they're saying?

Because I want to know.

So I don't want to speak for Cal ICH.

Um, and so uh I'm sure that uh the uh you as the author will be meeting with Cal ICH to ensure that we have some policy that will ensure that we continue getting funding from the state.

So last comment.

Um we addressed all the items with Cal CH.

They move in the the poll, it looks like this just came up with yesterday, so the council did receive an email yesterday um citing some concerns from Cal ICH.

So we have people out here against it and people for it, and they came and spent their time to come out here, and now we're just gonna tell them they can't speak against it or for it.

I just want to know.

So people so it not getting outside of this the issue of the item.

People are still welcome to speak on the item.

All right, it will be item 10, the last item of the agenda.

Last question, next question, but statement.

I have something I sent to um K topp.

Just five slides that I like to just share with the public and show them some of the the progress that we've had made and and uh constituent um so it happened with a constituent out there.

So one second, there's something from the um parliamentarian through the chair to the body.

Right now, under item four, the body is talking about the order of the agenda and items on the agenda and whether or not to defer and withdraw an item on the agenda.

If you want to get into the substance of the item that will have to be taken up when the clerk calls that item in the non-consent portion of the agenda.

Thank you.

Okay.

So any other modifications to the agenda.

So there's a motion and a second on item 10.

Through the chair, there are no other modifications from the body and/or departments.

Moving to item five.

Thank you.

We will take a vote to um withdraw item 10.

There was a motion made by Council President Jenkins.

Seconded by Councilmember 5 to withdraw item 10 from this agenda on roll.

Council members.

Brown, aye.

Aye.

Guile.

Aye.

Houston?

No.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with seven ayes, one no Houston.

To withdraw.

Okay, that was modifications to the agenda.

Moving to the consent calendar, starting with item 5.1.

Approval of the draft minutes from the meetings of October 21st, 2025, and November 4th, 2025.

Item 5.2, a declaration of a local emergency due to AIDS epidemic.

Item 5.3, declaration of a medical cannabis health emergency.

Item 5.4 declaration of a local emergency on homelessness.

Action on this item will result in final passage.

Item 5.6, a resolution regarding the reappointment to the city planning commission.

Item 5.7, a resolution regarding Ernesto Sarmiento versus Alameda Contra Casa Transit District, City of Oakland, County of Alameda and Dose 1 to 20.

Item 5.8, a resolution accepting and appropriating 279,000 from EBCF for Mayor's Office staff positions.

Item 5.9, a resolution regarding the appointment for the mayor's commission on persons with disabilities.

Item 510, a resolution regarding the appointment of Denise Schmidt Shada Rager, and Tanya Love to the Bicyclist Pedestrian Advisory Commission.

Item 511, a resolution regarding appointments to the budget advisory commission.

Item 512, an ordinance regarding the vacant property tax ordinance amendments.

Action on this item will result in introduction.

Item 513.

A resolution regarding public works equipment services division, cooperative purchase agreements.

Item 514, an ordinance regarding Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 1020, speed limits, administrative updates.

Action on this item will result in introduction.

Item 516, a resolution regarding the East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation property sale loan forgiveness.

Item 517 with multiple pieces of legislation, a resolution, and an ordinance regarding the economic activation zones.

The ordinance, the action on the ordinance will result in introduction.

Item 520.

A resolution regarding the city of Oakland's annual contributions to the youth ventures joint powers authority.

521, multiple multiple pieces of legislation regarding the early childhood multiple state contracts, fiscal year 26 through 27.

Three free resolutions.

Item 522, an ordinance regarding Flex street programs, public street closures.

Action on this item will result in introduction.

Item 523, an informational report regarding the performance audit of Oakland's police emergency response times.

Does require an urgency finding as this item was added at the three-day regarding the 27th Street Complete Streets contract contract award?

And that concludes your consent calendar.

Is it is there somebody to give a urgency for S25?

Is there anyone from DOT to give an urgency finding for S25?

In the meantime, are there other departments that need modifications to the consent calendar?

Point of clarification was um 5.18 read into the consent calendar.

Apologies through the chair, I don't believe I did.

It's 518, a resolution regarding the fiscal year 25 through 27 budget amendment cultural affairs manager.

As well as 519 resolution regarding the senior companion program, foster grandparent program, renewal grant applications, fiscal year 25 through 26.

Seeing no modifications from staff.

Any modifications from the council members?

Seeing no modifications from the council members.

Let's go to public comment.

So 525 will be pulled.

There's no urgency finding.

So when we make the motion, it will be with withdrawing 525, and that'll come back to a subsequent rules.

Councilmember Fife.

I just wanted to give my brief comments uh around one of the agenda items, item 5.10.

I see that um one of the appointees from the mayor is in the chamber with us, and I wanted to highlight the um the wisdom of Tanya Love, who was going to be appointed to the uh bike and pedestrian advisory commission.

I think she's an amazing asset.

I am a little biased, as this is my former chief of staff, but her dedication to Oakland's community regarding transportation issues and the work that she's done over the years to ensure the health and safety of Oakland residents is going to be an amazing asset to this body.

I just wanted to say that publicly.

Thank you.

I'd have to concur with you.

Uh Tanya Love is an amazing asset.

It's good to have her back in some capacity with the city of Oakland if approved by council.

The President have a modification.

Good afternoon, City Council members, Council President Jenkins, uh President Kilgore here, Deputy Chief of Staff to Mayor Barbara Lee.

Um so we have a slight modification regarding file number two six zero two five two appointment.

Um I won't go through all the appointments on there, but um, I'm here to share.

There was a typo in the resolution language regarding the term length for the appointments of the appointees.

Their terms are supposed to be ending on December 31st, 2028, and not December 31st, 2029, as per the three-year term requirement.

Um we've consulted city attorney and request that uh we make that slight change.

Thank you.

Through the chair, can you state the name, the number of the agenda item, please?

Yes, it's uh two, or the file number, not the file ID through the chair, five point one zero, five ten.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So if there's any modifications to file or if there's an urgency finding for DOT, no urgency finding, so we will withdraw and schedule to the next city council meeting on consent.

Thank you, Chair.

Shall we go to public comment?

Yes, please.

Okay, okay, calling the names of those who signed up for public comment.

Once you hear your name, please approach the podium, or if you are in Zoom, please raise your hand in the zoom app.

Ralph Cannes, signed up for three items.

Sam Rogby signed up for one item, Alison Fam, signed up for one item, Bob Rahibi, Asada Olabala for multiple items, Bruce A.

Gerdon, Kevin Hester, Ann Harvey, Barbara Leslie, Becky Home, Blair Beekman for multiple items, Dan Cobb for one item, Josephine Guzman, Ray Kidd, Simon Lee, this card does not have a name from eBell DC, Sharon Lay, Kathy Adams, Stephanie Tran, Dr.

Jennifer Tran, Patricia Toscano, Armando, Sorzano, Nikki, Margaret Gordon, Sean Sullivan, Ben Eckyberg, I'm sorry for mispronounce your name, Stanley Coopin, Jean Hazard, multiple items, Tristan Burglor, sorry, or Tristan Elliott, Diana Collins, Brenda Johnson, Faye Brooks, Sean Brooks, Nikki Lowe or Lowy, James Vaughn Van, Ronnie Stratton, and Aaron Riven, as well as Morne Griffin or Griffith, Natalia Nira, Tanya Love, Vanessa Wong, and Zaid Mohammed.

No particular order.

Please approach the podium.

Please state your name for the record.

Good afternoon, Ralph Cannes.

For three items.

The vagan property tax amendments have a major, major loophole in them that need to be cleaned up.

The vacant property tax in general needs to be cleaned up.

There's a lot of problems with it.

But this particular loophole is the exemption for parcels that change ownership after assessment.

This is another giveaway to the house flippers are ripping off the city for millions of dollars.

And nobody, you know, is elected officials seems to give a damn.

The mayor's office drags their feet.

They don't answer my emails.

Most of you city council members have had something for me.

They don't do anything about it.

I have lists and lists and lists and show you where they don't pull permits.

So what this means, if they pull a permit, then they're exempted from the vacant property tax.

What this means is all they have to do is buy the house.

Try to flip it without pulling permits.

You just gave them another $6,000 profit.

That's absurd.

This whole thing is unbelievable, and nobody seems to care.

I'm trying to understand what's going on in this city because you say you aren't getting enough in, you know, enough revenue, and this is a big revenue item, and you're sitting on your hands.

I've been here how many months talking to you about this, and nobody seems to give a damn.

It's getting to be ridiculous, Mr.

Jenkins.

It's getting really ridiculous.

And I don't understand it.

When I'm sitting there handing you the list, and on top of that, people are getting sold homes that don't have final inspections.

There's being sold defective homes.

Homes that have had the structural walls removed and not have the proper engineering to fix them.

It's all documented.

This is a problem in the building department.

It's been going on for decades.

And it also is, it's like you don't care.

And all that money is leaving Oakland.

Almost every one of those house flippers are from out of town.

Like Point Green Home Solutions LLC out of Utah.

Flip 2440 Monticello without any permits.

They did a complete remodel on it with no permits.

The city would have made more on those permits than they did on the transfer tax.

You don't want to look at me, Mr.

Jenkins.

I know that because it's a pretty ugly truth, and you don't seem to give a damn.

I want to see something out of somebody here that proves you care about this city.

Thank you for your comments.

I'm here for two reasons today.

I am the current chairman of the National Association of Minority Contractors.

And it's a national organization.

I'm also here for one other reason that's related to it, and that is that agenda item 5.25 has uh one of the considerations would be your small business program, the development of it, which is extremely important and in line with what NAMAC is here to advocate on behalf of.

It's been done well.

And what I mean by that is that my headquarters is in San Francisco.

Um, but the relationship is that there's a contract before you that uh involves uh my mentor, uh the organization that thank you for your comments, almost 10 years ago.

Thank you.

Your your time was on the on the screen through the chair.

Your one minute has expired.

Thank you so much for your comments.

Yes, you sign up for one item, you got one minute.

Yes, thank you.

Okay, so uh my name's Kevin Hester with McGuire and Hester.

I'll complete what Bruce Giron was saying.

Um, McGuire and Hester and Bruce Giron and Giron Construction is a incredible example how a mentor protege um contract the agreement that we had with Bruce when we're doing work in San Francisco at at Hunter's Point.

This was in 2016, and and Bruce had um he was doing two to three million dollars worth of work.

Um, McGuire and Hester, we we connected with him.

We built the project, we we I would say we gave mentorship, taught him in regards to what the back office does, what estimating does, what operations do, and now ten years later, he's you know doing he said um maybe 10 times as much work as that.

I would say we have consistently had that.

We have had the same agreement with Cooper Engineering.

Thank you for your comments.

Speak fast.

Uh hello, council.

Thank you for listening to me.

Stanley Cooper with Cooper Construction Engineering.

Right out of Oakland.

Um excuse me, plus this time.

Order in the chamber, please.

Can you restart his time, please?

Good afternoon, Council.

My name is Stanley Cooper, owner and president of Cooper Construction and Engineering.

We're an engineering firm right here out here in Oakland.

I'm also a certified VSLBE.

To continue on, uh, what they was both gentlemen were saying, is that um on agenda 5.25.

I'm for McGuire and Hester to get this contract.

And the reasons are uh number one, um, I have a signed mentor protege of program through contracts and compliance already set in place, so uh they are considered the most responsible because they will help small businesses like myself grow right here in Oakland, and we all need that.

Oakland hires Oakland.

I put youth to work.

I have uh proteges, also have um apprentices currently on.

I'm doing West Oakland.

Um the grand jury already report on page 32 talks about the lack of use usage of these programs.

Thank you for your comments, sir.

All right, uh hi, I'm Bob Raheby, president of Regibit Construction Company, Oakland firm located at 21 Hagenburger Court.

We bid on this project.

We've heard a little bitter.

Uh McGuire Hester signed up for uh with uh Stanley Cooper on a Montreal Protege program.

Uh they don't meet the required goals.

If you take a look at page 15 of the L SLBE, uh January 6, 2025.

They need to uh Stanley Cooper needs to do 30% of the work.

They're listed for 15.2% of the work, so they don't even meet the program 10% better.

Secondly, I would question Maguire Hester's local uh business.

Uh if you drive by 9009 Railroad Avenue, there's hardly anybody there, they're alamed a firm.

It makes a difference.

If you're Oakland business, you just cannot have an off just a plain old office and have everybody else somewhere else.

Uh the program is designed for the chair, won't you say your name?

Then we can put that probably a time on the clock.

Sam Marheebe from Redwood Construction.

As a gentleman from Cooper Engineering stated, Oakland hires Oakland.

However, as Bob pointed out, unfortunately, McGuire and Hester uh does not actually have a full-fledged office in Oakland.

They have a big beautiful office in Alameda County in Alameda.

It's multiple stories, but they only have a yard here in Oakland.

On the other hand, retro construction has a headquarters stationed in Oakland.

To build on the point on the mentor protege program, the mentor protege was double counted mistakenly at 30% to meet the goal.

However, they are actually only 15% to double count a V SLBE as a mentor that is for a different category.

Mentor protege cannot be double counted.

So if they perform 15%, they only meet 15% of the goal.

However, if a V SLB on a separate category performs, that's double, but that is not counted.

Also, my name is Becky Hom.

I'm the Oakland political manager at the Asian Pacific Environmental Network.

I also live in District 5.

Uh I'm speaking on item um 5.24.

We have been engaged in the No Coal in Oakland coalition and campaign since the beginning.

People are still concerned about health and safety of coal, even with the lawsuit.

In the past, the coalition has worked in collaboration to figure out the best way to move forward.

Hope you uh all as mostly new council members will think of us as allies and resources to reinforce the will of Oaklanders.

Please look at all the options.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

I'm Sharon Lai with Ebalty.

I'm here to speak on item 5.16 and 5.17.

Uh I want to first thank the city council uh for your consideration and staff's work on the loan forgiveness item.

Uh, this approval will allow us to maintain long-term affordability for 58 units of housing here and to meet our shared interest in preventing displacement and real estate speculation.

Um ebalty remains committed to helping Oaklanders meet our affordable housing needs and continue to work on preventing uh evictions, protection of our units, as well as building affordable housing in our town.

And then I'm also here to voice support for the economic activation uh zone uh that's also before you.

Um, we think that it's a really great start in optimizing Oakland's economic revitalization efforts, and we obviously look forward to working with the city in future zones, including in areas like Chinatown to implement to amplify the city's investment with our community investment uh to move the needle together.

Thank you.

Armando, I'm speaking on the homelessness emergency and the commission appointments.

Political and media elites have bombarded us with propaganda justifying genocide to make us accept mass death as normal.

That includes silencing and dehumanizing the victimized population, which is portrayed as a dangerous foreign other that poses a threat to civilization.

This logic of genocide has seeped into our political culture.

We are infected with this collective mind virus that causes us to treat humans as undesirable and disposable and collectively punish them.

There is a homeless mortality crisis, hundreds are dying on the streets every year.

The unhoused mortality rate is five and a half times higher.

And your response is not to provide them with sanctuary and access to health care, it's to double down on punishment and stigma to portray them as a dangerous, undeserving criminals and collectively punish them.

The EAP will escalate the active harm of state violence.

Are you on the side of human rights or the side of the Trump administration and the real estate tech and finance oligarchs who buy elections and have a displacement and gentrification agenda?

And I'll cede the rest of my time to Miss Nikki.

Good afternoon, Council.

Through the chair to the public, just noting that on consent there's no seating time.

Thank you.

So there's no seating time.

No sitting time on consent.

Okay, well, um, I don't have a speech prepared, but um I'd like to let you all know that you have a responsibility to the entire city of Oakland.

We have elected you, and therefore you have a responsibility to care for everyone in the city of Oakland, regardless of what their income is and what their housing status is.

The EAP is criminal, and criminalizing people who are poor is just demonic in every aspect of the word.

That's all I have to say.

Hi, my name is Nikki, and I'm homeless in West Oakland.

Since I only have a minute, I'm gonna simply say this.

I said a statement five years ago, I must share it with you.

Every one of you, Alameda County officials, are you looking out for the homeless issues?

Or is the homeless the issue, sir?

Because as I see it, we're all humans.

We all have a place, and we all need to be conscious of how we're dealing with each other.

So I'll remind you guys all, the 14th amendment, you guys are breaking our rights.

I have to leave because I have a notice to get the hell out of my spot.

Fifth and Mandela.

Thank you very much.

I'm Kathy Adams, Oakland City Council, president of the Oakland African-American Chamber of Commerce, and we support Councilmember at large, Rowena Brown and the City of Oakland, economic activation zones, entertainment zones, also this is good for Oakland, goods for business, and something that will make the vibrancy of our businesses thrive and bring more people downtown.

So we at some point can just have a celebration.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Jennifer Tran, president of the Oakland Vietnamese Chamber of Commerce, President of District 2.

And on behalf of the Oakland Vietnamese Chamber of Commerce and as well as the ethnic chambers of commerce, we're here to support item 517, specifically at large Councilmember Rowena Brown.

Our chamber has been working with Councilmember Arwena Brown's office for nearly eight months now to think about how is it that we can regenerate commerce in the city of Oakland in a way that includes multiple community members, starting with Laney College, Mills College, as well as our small businesses.

And it's extremely important during this time for us to remember what happens to small businesses, immigrants, and historically marginalized communities during the pandemic.

We were left behind.

This is an opportunity for us to bridge the gap for this technological opportunity in a way that is inclusive, that builds opportunities, but also centers our communities.

So we do not want Oakland to be left behind at this critical moment.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Stephanie Tran, president of the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce, speaking on 5.17.

I'm here to express our support for the economic entertainment zone and responsible AI.

This is an important step toward revitalizing our commercial corridors and supporting our businesses and expanding equitable access to innovation.

So thank you to Councilmember Brown for working with our community to make sure that this happens and is implemented.

For more than 30 years, the Oakland Chinatown Chamber has produced cultural festivals and community events that support hundreds of artists and performers every year.

This celebration helps to define uh Oakland's cultural identity, and this entertainment zone will help to further strengthen our ability to bring people together, drive much needed foot traffic to our small business.

And at the same time, uh Council Member Brown knows this that we're disappointed that Chinatown wasn't included in the initial pilot zone, but we recognize the importance of launching these pilots so that it can be implemented citywide.

So we encourage the council to adopt this and support the economics of the Council President Jenkins, members of members of the city council, and Barbara Leslie, president and CEO of the Oakland Metro Chamber.

I want to first thank and applaud Councilmember Brown's efforts to bring the town alive initiative forward.

Um it is a groundbreaking piece of legislation that will help activate our most in-need areas of Oakland as well as provide a roadmap for responsible and progressive AI as we deploy it throughout the city.

We appreciate that you are starting with four particular zones, learning from your experiences and then pivoting and moving forward as needed.

We appreciate that sensitivity.

Our support is grounded in many years of uh listening to small businesses as well as decades of polling data.

Uh, our recent poll from October says uh indicated that 90% of our voters support bringing small businesses to Oakland.

More than 80% want to attract technology businesses to Oakland, and nine in ten believe it's the city government has a responsibility to help local businesses.

Council President Jenkins, City Council members, my name is Sean Sullivan, a resident of District 3, a small business owner in District 3, right here in the heart and soul of Oakland, our downtown, which uh has been slow ever since the pandemic, and the needs of our small businesses are stark.

But we are Oaklanders, we are gritty and we are scrappy, and we have come together to try and activate our own streets.

And so we did that.

I was a convener, but there was lots of sweat equity put in and creativity put in by all the small businesses, the the Fox Theater, the OSA as well, for creating the uptown stroll.

And that we believe strongly is a blueprint for the activation zones that we that Council Member Brown uh has put forward before you today.

Uh, we have studied and been in contact with other cities that are implementing this in San Francisco and Santa Monica to see that this works.

And I want to thank Council Member Fife, Councilmember Brown, and our mayor, Barbara Lee for helping the uptown stroll lift it up, amplify it so that uh it comes ready to you uh uh good afternoon.

Uh President Jenkins, member of the city council.

Uh I'm Nikki Lowy, the director of social impact for Northeastern University Oakland on the historic home of Mills College.

I'm here today to express strong support for Councilmobile Brown's Town Alive Economic Activation Zones legislation and want to thank Councilmember Brown for championing act equitable access to technology through the creation of responsible AI activation zones.

Northeastern is proud to support her efforts and deeply honored to be designated as one of the city's AI activation zones alongside Laney College and the Unity Council.

Um our vision as a university deeply aligns with this legislation that every Oakland student and business owner should have access to AI education and training.

So I urge the council to support this transformative legislation.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Tristan Bagula.

I'd like to speak on item number 5.17 on responsible AI activation zones.

And I would like to speak as myself on section number 10 uh on EAP.

So one of Northeastern University's most advanced programs is it's computer science program.

And we have a concentration in AI that has been recently introduced that is focused uh on AI security and privacy.

So it's important, and that we uh and we that and we care that uh AI ethics is taken very responsibly and of utmost importance.

And in a time where AI is threatening job security, we need to make sure that the people affected by this are properly compensated for, and that we do more to make sure that AI doesn't go in the direction that hurts working class people.

Would I be able to?

Excuse me.

I went for two items.

My over to which items did you speak on?

Number 10.

Number 10, and we're not on item number 10 yet.

Good afternoon.

My name is Vanessa Wong, chair of the Cultural Affairs Commission, and you've heard from me a lot of times.

I just want to thank you, particularly those who are right up in the front of the fight for restoring the funding for the cultural affairs manager.

And I just want to point out, point you to the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce annual um Oakland East Bay Economic Indicators report that has a lot of great information about the creative economy and highlighted.

I don't see my time.

I don't oh, thank you.

Um, that highlighted Oakland's creative and nighttime economy to help build our city back up economically.

And just to take note that all of these folks, most of these folks are also talking about how cultural life in Oakland is what's going to bring this back.

So there are equity issues, there are economic issues, and I just want to remind everyone too that you voted to accept the downtown specific plan, which has an entire chapter on culture keeping and the folks in city government who are responsible for standing that work up for arts and culture preservation, promotion, abundant arts, art and events, and affordable arts space.

The folks who are in charge of implementing those policies are the city staff in cultural affairs division along with their colleagues.

So that position is.

We've seen firsthand that art brings people into neighborhoods.

It gives people reason to connect, to gather, to support small businesses, to shop, to dine, to be in community, and art also gives us a way to express ourselves and our roots and our identity in Oakland.

And I believe that this position will be strong infrastructure to support arts, our arts organizations and partners and bring in outside funding to support this ecosystem.

So I support this position and hope you do as well.

Without this leadership and investment, this ecosystem that sustains both culture and commerce is at risk.

Thank you so much.

Good evening, council members, council president, my council member Ken Houston, Councilmember Fife, my name is Tanya Love.

I'm speaking on item 5.10.

It is an honor to be nominated along with my colleagues to serve on the bike and pedestrian commission, and we would be truly grateful for your support.

Our goal in this role is simple but essential.

It is to improve the safety for everyone who moves through Oakland, whether they ride, drive, roll, or stroll.

Safe and transportation is important, not just to help people get from one place to another.

It strengthens our economy, it supports social connection.

And I lost my spot.

Sorry.

But it also helps improve our social connection throughout Oakland.

And I want to also highlight the importance and to thank all the volunteers who work together on a commission, whether they are volunteering to clean up our streets or doing anything they can to help support our city council and our city staff.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is James Bann, and I'm speaking for the homeless advocacy working group.

You have uh avoided a catastrophe in 2022.

The council made a mistake by putting into place the encampment management plan that was worked out in the back room by just one council member and turned out to be a huge mistake.

The same is likely to happen with this one if it is allowed to go forward.

The homosexuality working group has submitted to the council a complete plan that's well thought out, uh well uh reasoned, and one that has worked that you don't have to wait till January, you can form a stakeholder group involving the various interests in the city on the homelessness issues, and the uh this is a plan that has worked very well, many issues in the rent adjustment program.

And we think that this issue uh is one that's just right for such a stakeholder group, and we hope that you will move ahead with that recommendation.

Thank you.

Uh good afternoon.

I'm Maven Carter Griffin, also with the homeless advocates working group and steering committee.

Okay, um, my time hasn't started yet.

Uh I don't see it, so I okay.

Yeah, we have too many.

Um, I'm about equality, right?

I mean, we the people, and I just want to bring to your attention.

Currently, I'm going through the eighth sweep that I've I've been living through out here.

I there's I have something to tell you, and I'm not gonna be able to do it in one minute.

There's just no way I can bring information to you with 60 seconds, and there's a lot you need to know.

Um, you know, there is the Wood Street corridor, and today I overheard developers talking disparagingly about my community.

I do the same, but they're developing not for us, not in our community.

We had an idea for a campus, and the campus is to educate us on how to have businesses, how to be educated in doing and conducting things with uh publicity and and moving forward and to not be homeless anymore, right?

We're we're people experiencing a condition that's unhoused, and so if we just pay attention to that unhoused condition and respect the people, we can do everything that everyone else can do.

It's just that we don't have the space to do it in here and here.

I'm so shattered right now from everything that's happened to me.

There's cars whizzing by me at a hundred miles an hour at night.

There's people moving cones just because they're bored, and that's what my cats can cite the cones and people can see the cats, and the cats are killing rats.

I mean, there's no one else killing rats, but you know, I sound like a crazy person, and maybe I am starting to lose it because I've been out in these streets for a long time, but I've seen people die that were important to all of us, and um I've seen a lot of wasted time.

We need education as well as housing and a live-work-teach-learn environment, Wood Street and that entire area there.

If we just had it for 10 years and a collaborative effort with the rest of the public so that we're a part of the community, I see things about we belong, and I see this uh equality and resilience and all that.

There's nobody more resilient than our ragtag tired asses out there in these streets, and we're there because we want independence.

We're standing for independence.

There's no unhoused independence day.

We want to be treated equally.

We don't get information down there, we don't have a voice.

We have a good afternoon.

My name is Alison Fam, and I'm also up here to express my deep concern about how Oakland is treating our unhoused residents.

I work directly with people living on our streets with disabilities.

I call shelters regularly with survivors of domestic violence, and there is not space.

There is not space, and yet the city is continuing to ramp up these violence sweeps and towing more and more vehicles.

When people lose their vehicle, that's a the vehicle is a place where they can lock their items where they can stay slightly safer.

When they lose their vehicles, they end up in a tent.

We see them lose their identity documents, and it makes everything worse.

And you're not no one is getting any safer by sweeping our unhoused neighbors.

If Oakland truly wants to improve the safety and health of all residents, we need to stop taking away the little stability people have.

Thank you.

Hello, City Council.

Uh, my name is Ben Eichenberg.

I'm an attorney uh with San Francisco Bay Keeper here for agenda item 5.24.

Um Bay Keeper is also part of the No Cole in Oakland campaign.

I just want to thank the entire city council and the city of Oakland for its emphasis on the health and safety of its citizens over the years with respect to this project.

Um Bay Keeper stands with you.

Uh, there's still a lot that can be done.

Um, and I know that the city council will continue to focus on the health and safety of its citizens as this project uh moves forward.

Um Oakland's not alone.

Bay Keeper will continue to stand um, stand with Oakland and we'll uh lobby to other uh agencies as well, and um do everything we can to make sure this project is as safe for the Oakland citizens as possible.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Natalia Neida.

I'm a cultural worker and strategist and a resident of district one.

Um speaking on item 5.18 on the consent agenda.

Thank you for everybody who's supporting um Oakland's arts and culture workforce by supporting the cultural affairs manager position being in reinstated.

Um filling the cultural affairs manager role is directly tied to the livelihood of thousands of workers like myself who rely on this infrastructure that the position provides.

This is not a symbolic role, it is a critical run revenue generating and job sustaining position.

The last cultural affairs manager raised upwards of 8.3 million dollars from philanthropic and um uh public funding.

The role is the backbone of Oakland's ability to secure and distribute these funds, and without it, the ecosystem that employs arts workers like myself will continue to destabilize artwork is real work, and we cannot do it without afternoon, council.

Um my name's Aaron Reathan.

I'm a not so retired uh science teacher in Oakland.

Um, and I am one of the thousand signatories uh along with 90 organizations an open letter to the coal promoter, coal developer uh John Brooks, and you can find uh the long-standing open letter to him uh on the website of No Cole in Oakland, which is no coal and oakland.

Uh, I recommend that letter to you.

And I'm really just here today to reassure our allies among you on the council that we know that you've been uh doing uh everything in your power to thwart the insane idea of building an export terminal uh in Oakland.

Uh and don't worry, we're gonna prevail in our opposition.

And to those of you who have been misled to the point where you are in support of that uh that terminal, don't worry, we will defeat you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Sean Brooks.

Uh, item 5.12, vacant property tax.

Your staff report reads that this tax is um needed to deter vacant properties from becoming crime magnets.

I was here about a month or so ago.

As you know, there was an incident on 2400 box and 66th Avenue where there were squatters who came in, there was vacant property.

I inquired with the city multiple times.

Was this property on list?

Was it being monitored?

No answers from the city attorney's office, Councilmember Jenkins' office couldn't respond to this.

Also the mayor's office and also um uh the city um city administrator Johnson.

What I'm here for is saying that we went able to effectively through a neighborhood advocacy, we did have a partnership with OPA OPD, uh Alameda County County Sheriffs and so forth.

We were able to evict these folks after heinous crimes, prostitution, defecating, leaving a neutrino in the city.

There was uh drug dealing, multi-acts, a fatal shooting on October 21st, a tip of the mass slaughter.

What would help to prevent this is a no trespassing ordinance, and I've been advocating for that for the last four months or so.

Please, this council can you step forward to bring us a no trespassing ordinance, which would allow OPD to remove people who are squatting.

Thank you for your comments, sir.

Thank you for your comments.

Good afternoon president of the council.

I'll get it right this time.

My councilman Jenkins and also Ken Houston and the rest of uh the city council.

I'm here on uh item number five twelve and requesting that the enforcement of the vacant property tax ordinance be put into uh put into effect.

I also want to talk about October.

I was at the last city council meeting where we talked about we had squatters uh in our neighborhood.

It took four five months to get them out, thanks to the gentleman who orchestrated, and it's hard getting squatters out.

I have a heart for squatters, but not when they come and and cause crap in my neighborhood.

I've lived in Oakland all of my life.

I'm just asking, I don't have that many days left.

I just want quality of life.

I want peace.

I want protection.

I'm a taxpayer, and I support uh implementing or actually doing the problem.

Thank you.

Ma'am, what was your name through the chair?

Yes, Brenda Johnson.

Thank you so much.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Dina Collins.

My name is Dina Collins.

I live at 2400 66th Avenue.

I'm um with these other two people in regards to 5.12, the vacant property tax ordinance.

I'm wondering how it's being enforced, where the list exists, who makes sure it's enforced in addition to that, um, to help with squatters to rid them of neighborhoods after they cause so much anguish.

Is um the no trespass ordinance.

Um, I know a lot of local cities around here have that ordinance, and what it does is it gives the right to the police department to take people out of homes that they don't belong, that they're living there illegally.

Um, excuse me.

My family has very been very affected by this.

Um I have an 11-month-old child, and my wife and I don't feel safe walking in the neighborhood because on October 21st there was a shooting.

That house is five doors down from where we live.

It's next door across the street from where Brenda lives.

Thank you for your comments.

Hi, Peter Brown.

I'm commenting on the EAP.

Someone would assume these comments are simply opinions.

So let me be clear.

Uh item 10.

We are not yet on that item through the chair.

We will speak to that item once we get to item number 10.

Up for open comment and wasn't allowed to, so I have no idea when item 10 will come up.

We're on item number five, five through the chair.

So we still have a few before item 10 through the chair.

All right, okay, if you heard your name, please approach the podium for item five, the consent calendar.

If not, we will move to the Zoom.

Okay, thank you, Mrs.

Sada.

I want to start with item 5.23, the performance auditor report.

The report was phenomenal.

The report gave detailed information about the state of staffing for 9-11.

I think we're blessed to have this auditor.

All of his reports have been very outstanding.

The next item is 5.21 child care services.

Uh, you continue to ignore the fact that our head start program is in trouble.

We fired the director, brought her back.

We got a lawsuit by staff members and head start.

We have black people who are coming saying their children are being denied head start.

We have black people who are saying they're not being hired in head start.

You need to do something about that.

The next next item I'd like to address is the forgiveness uh of the loan on item 516.

That item should have been on non-consent.

You have never had an occasion where you have had property that is foreclosing, and you're gonna forgive the loan eight million dollars.

That needs to be discussed and detailed, and why you're doing it for this particular vendor.

Uh going back to the beginning of the agenda with the uh 5.4 emergency on homelessness.

You do not have an emergency of homelessness.

It is not an emergency, you're not dealing with it.

You have a culture manager that you're bringing in place.

You have never had a manager for homelessness.

You have never had a department of homelessness.

You have never dealt with the homeless situation like you deal with your sanctuary city status.

People who are coming from outside of this country get more attention than the people who live in this country who are homeless.

Lawsuit 5.7.

I'm very, very concerned.

I haven't brought it to your attention.

You have too many lawsuits related to the Department of Transportation.

This lawsuit is $550,000 because of street scene break.

You also, I'm concerned about the leadership in the Department of Transportation when a council member has to go to the ethics commission about that leader.

And how effective can they be under those circumstances?

5.8, you have two mayor appointments.

That should be more discussed.

Whether these positions, I know they're being paid for, but it also needs to be a necessity of what they're doing being valuable to the city.

Just because you're getting the money to pay them, that's not enough.

5.112 is a vacancy property tax.

That is not a property tax.

A property tax is based on the value of the property.

Every piece of property that is vacant, you uh charge them a fee or fine for the exact same, but it's not based on the value of the property.

Before I start, Mr.

President, can I get a clarification?

Because what I'm going to speak to, I think it's miswritten in the document.

So I need clarification before I speak on items.

Continue items.

Pardon?

Pause this time.

What do you say, Mr.

Hazard?

5.3.

What do you have?

You have indicated, adopt a resolution renewing the city council's declaration of local health emergency regarding cannabis.

I thought cannabis was legal.

Start his time, please.

Pardon me.

Please continue.

Say, why would you continue that?

And cannabis is legal.

Why are you declaring an emergency there?

And while at the same time, I've given you what you did in November 2025, 24, fit now health crisis.

Why don't you have fit doll on here?

Children are dying.

And they don't even get a chance.

But yet you're gonna have cannabis as a health emergency.

That doesn't make any sense at all.

Look at what you approved in November of 2024.

Also, see you continue to write things, and give to the public a bunch of crap.

For instance, those three emergency city council meetings.

November 4th, 2025, September 15, 2025, December 16, 2024, you can't have an emergency meeting.

Only one item, but yet you went and did a whole city council agenda.

Oh, that is nullified.

But yet the city attorney sits up there over in the corner, and he doesn't advise you accordingly.

Go look at what the agenda said.

Look at 208 of the charter.

Look at November 9, 2017 of the legal opinion.

You could only hold, stop smiling.

This ain't funny.

You pull a lot of crap on the public.

And so when we want clarification, you don't say a damn thing.

Go look at November 9th, 2017, the legal opinion regarding special city council meeting.

You can't do it.

Only one item.

Only one item.

You go through a whole agenda.

So everything on that, all those special city council meetings are nullified.

Every single last item.

November 4th, September 15th, December 16th.

Madam City Attorney, won't you opine on that?

Thank you, Mr.

Hazard.

Thank you for your comments.

Moving to our Zoom speakers.

Don Dan Cobb.

You may unmute and begin your comments.

Dan.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Good afternoon, Council members.

Dan Collb here.

I'm speaking in reference to item 5.24 having to do with the development of a bulk terminal at the former Army base for handling and exporting primarily coal.

Anyone who acknowledges the risks and impacts of climate change and the health risks of coal-related particulate air pollution can't in their right mind want to locally handle and ship and in effect facilitate the burning of so much coal, several million tons each year.

How can any business leader say they care about future generations and then want to do this?

The Trump administration has set aside $625 million for subsidies to prop up the fledgling and inherently dirty coal industry industry.

Without these funds, it's unclear if OBOT and the group of companies involved would have the economic desire to go forward.

If OBOT intends to develop their proposed bulk export terminal, then they should be expected to build the specialized state-of-the-art dome-shaped enclosed terminal that they had said they would build to help minimize emissions of coal.

Council member, you seem to be an expert on this.

Is there any more that you have to say?

Please continue, council member.

Okay.

Without these funds, it's unclear.

Obot and the group of companies involved would have the economic desire to go forward.

If OBOT intends to develop the proposed export terminal, they should be expected to build a specialized state-of-the-art dome-shaped terminal that they said they would build to help minimize emissions of coal dust particulate matter.

Dust that certainly would harm residents and port workers.

Several years back, when the city council called for a public hearing, a record was developed with thousands of pages of documents being submitted by all interested parties on either side of the debate.

OBOT and their partners submitted information about such a terminal design, indicating that they would build a specialized terminal to minimize potential coal dust health concerns.

They should be held to that standard.

I'm not privy to closed closed session discussions any longer, of course.

But if there is still a way within the law to stop coal as an export commodity in Oakland, such as compiling new and recently available environmental health information, then that pathway should be on the table and considered seriously.

Thank you so very much for all your good work.

Thank you for your comments.

Noting that Blair Beekman, Ray Kid, Simon Lee, all signed up for Zoom.

And Harvey, Josephine Guzman and Harvey.

Ann Harvey, you may unmute your com unmute yourself, excuse me, and begin your comments.

Hi, yeah, I'm Dr.

Ann Harvey.

I'm active with physicians for social responsibility Bay Area and NOCOL in Oakland.

And with regard to item 5.24 and potential future agreements with OBOT, I first want to say I am grateful for the city's actions to date, and I urge you to not give up on protecting public health.

Federal Judge Chabria, whose findings provided the basis also for Judge Weiss's decisions, ruled that the city had had insufficient evidence to ban coal.

He wanted a lot of information that was not available at the time.

But since then, UC Davis scientists have performed the measurements and analyses that he wanted based on Utah coal now transported to Richmond.

And their health impact assessment shows important effects on mortality, hospitalization for cardiovascular and respiratory disease, asthma exacerbation, work loss, and days of restricted activity.

Several of these.

Thank you for your comment.

S in Zoom, can you please say your name?

Please.

Hello.

Through the chair, what is your name?

Oh, my name is Simeen Lee.

Thank you.

You may begin your.

Um, I would like to comment on.

I I'm not sure if I missed the scheduling comment, um, but I would like to comment on that.

I just wanted to point out how the EAP has been scheduled incredibly erratically.

It's been incredibly difficult to get enough time to talk to local businesses and to unhoused folks to actually get enough time to get input on the EAP and community response.

I would like to see some clear scheduling, not this month to month strangeness and also some clear public declaration of what amendments council members are adding.

Um, this entire process has eroded public trust in the city council, not even to mention like beyond the just the legal breaches of the Brown Act by uh one of the creators of the EAP, Miss Brooks, and um Ken Houston, but uh yeah, just all of the ethical concerns over erratic scheduling, giving the public less than 72 hours of notice.

Um I also just want to comment on 5.4 that since the last city audit on the encampment.

Um, there has not been any significant change for our news council members.

The last city audit on the encampment showed that 12.6 million was spent uh in 2019 through 2020 with a massive majority unbudgeted.

There still is no clear accountability and budgeting.

Um, and the only change has been an exponential increase in closures and a decrease in cleanings.

I still can't find any measurable goals or outcomes of the sweeps, which should include health outcomes and should be led by public health outcomes.

Um, and we would be happy to help schedule um, yeah.

I I agree that we should be doing nothing, but all the proposals that have been uh submitted by the council members so far are only worsening the issue as members have said before.

There's a lot of victims of abuse who are being blamed and scapegoated for what is going on.

I uh yeah, I've heard several council members talk about so-called crime and human trafficking.

I hope that people are conflating this with people who are suffering from abuse and people who are recover in recovery um people who are, you know, yeah, who are being blamed by their neighbors.

Um, yeah, I I just don't see why the city is trying to take away vehicles and shelter when there simply is not enough.

Thanks.

Thank you for your comments.

I didn't have the opportunity to call these names that sign up for consent to Mika Riley, a real really white.

Sorry for mispronouncing of these names, Carmen Alvarez.

Sayyid Mohammed, I'll call you and Patricia Toscano.

And through the chair, please state your name before beginning your comments.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Tomika Ridley.

There we go.

My name is Tomika Ridley, and I'm here with my 10-year old son Jacob.

Um, we are here today to say thank you for approving your uh your agreement to reimburse Sabo grocers for the fresh 5X Virtual Card program.

I have been participant in the program for three years at my local corner store, Jalisco Market in District 7, which is on EDS Avenue, Cross Street is Nevada.

Fresh 5X has helped me have access to fresh produce, walking distance to my home.

I don't drive, and with my son, this is very convenient.

Positively affected, and I am so happy to show my son how to eat healthy for the rest of his in my life.

Um hello everyone.

Um did you call Miguel Barajas?

Through the chair.

What was the name?

Miguel Barajas.

He needs an interpreter.

And if there's none, I can help.

Through the chair, do you have a yellow slip?

Yeah.

To confirm if you can start show it to the clerk.

Thank you.

Yes, we have it as well.

Thank you to the chair.

He may begin.

We'll have one minute for him to speak, and then you can one minute to trend.

Yes, thank you.

Buenas tardes, my name is Miguel Barajas.

Estoy aquí como participante del programma de tarjetas virtuales, Fresh Five in the Tienda Jalisco Market in Nevada y Edes in the District 7.00 for the program Fresh Fly.

Fresh Far nos ayudado a me and my family del District 7 a commercial saludably.

Gracias.

Good afternoon.

My name is Miguel Barajas, and I am here as a participant of the program, the virtual card program Fresh Five X at the Jalisco Market on Nevada and Eats in District 7, Ken Houston's district.

Um I want to say thank you to all the council members for approving the reimbursement and the agreement that the lawyer made with the city of Oakland for $500,000 for this program.

Fresh 5X has helped me and has helped my family and has helped my neighborhood to eat healthier.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Through the chair to K Top, you may turn the mic back on through the chair.

Thank you.

Buenas tardes.

Thank you through the president and through the chair and everyone here.

Um thank you so much.

My name is Carmen Álvarez.

Um I am coming from Saba Grocers Initiative, and I just want to say thank you.

Um to um President Jenkins has been to our store.

Um also uh Council Member Five has been to one of our stores and they have seen the transformation that this stores and this program has done in those neighborhoods with community and families walking over to the stores, getting, you know, five dollars for every dollar that they spend on their EBT card to get more fresh fruits and vegetables for their families.

And so we just want to say thank you for your support for ensuring that we do have healthy access to healthy food in communities, especially in the flatlands.

We are very grateful for your support.

If you ever want to come and take a tour, please let us know.

We're happy to give you a tour.

Um, thank you so much.

Thank you.

To the chair, through the chair, all names have been called for consent.

Seeing the withdrawal of five point two five, which will be rescheduled to the next city council on uh consent and five point, what was it, 10 from the mayor's office?

So first off, just wanted to um show my deep support for item five.

Thank you to all the community members and partners who showed up to support the economic activation zones.

And I will second the motion already on the floor.

So there's a motion in a second.

Let's go to a vote.

So unfortunately, because of our rules of procedure, we're not able to start right now.

I'm pretty sure we'll be able to address it shortly, but we're not going to be able to start until 5 p.m.

And so the council will take a break until 5 p.m.

No need for do we need a motion?

No, no motion.

I see you guys have five.

Do the chairman get seven minutes on the virtual clock.

How does it be?

Oh, Good evening, everyone.

The time is now five oh one PM.

We shall resume this meeting.

Council members, please make your way back to the dais.

Just call them item.

Through the chair, this meeting has resumed at five.

Oh one p.m.

We do have a quorum at the dais.

Moving to our next item, item number six, consideration of the items with statutory public hearing requirements.

Item six point one.

I do need a motion to open up the public hearing.

So moved.

So moved.

Is there a second?

Brown.

Second.

Thank you.

At five oh two p.m.

There was a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Brown to open the public hearing for item six point one on roll council members Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guyo.

Resident.

There the chair is out of aye to open the public hearing.

Houston?

Aye.

Ramachandron.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight eyes to open the public hearing.

I will read item six point one into the record.

Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion adopt an ordinance as recommended by the City Planning Commission.

One amending title.

Amending title 17 of the Oakland Municipal Code, the planning code to A, adjust regulations for permitted and conditionally permitted activities and facilities for purposes of providing greater opportunities for ground floor activities and ease the permitting burden for commercial civic and low-impact industrial activities.

So everyone, we're at their packets in their agendas.

Please give the speaker two minutes.

A thorough review where through review, if necessary, special conditions of approval can be applied.

However, the CUP approval process is often lengthy and expensive and affords a high level of uncertainty.

This can inhibit the opening of small and neighborhood serving businesses, which results in less vibrant commercial districts and reduce tax revenues.

Additionally, it hampers implementation of parks improvements and maintenance by the city.

Mayor Lee Lee has established a permit reform initiative included as part of her 10-point plan for Oakland, from which the proposal was initiated.

The primary focus of these amendments is to reduce the number of activities subject to the conditional use permit procedure, thus allowing these uses to be permitted outright.

The zoning amendments in the Brady Valdez district adopted in May served as a pilot for this project, which now expands this to be citywide.

So these are the chapters that are going to be amended in this code package.

And let's see.

One of the key triggers for a CUP often is the square footage.

So therefore, this package is looking at expanding and allowing larger square footages for projects before a conditional use permit is required.

Also, artists in production is a new planning code, new activity in the planning code, which we're now looking at expanding to other areas of the city.

Also, medical service and animal care is something we're looking at, allowing without a conditional use permit, as long as there is this is requiring transparency in the ground floor and in Lake Merritt district.

We're also expanding to make similar changes we made in the downtown.

For open space zones, the the character, just to clarify for open space chapter of the planning code, it's unique that it only regulates physical changes that are proposed or implemented by the city.

Therefore, then the planning bureau reviews this is something that is actually coming from parks and rec staff.

And so just to be clear, this is something that's not initiated by the outside public.

And some of the changes we're looking at making was for the food service and concessions to be a conditional use permit, or it was a conditional use permit to be permitted by right in the region serving community neighborhood and special use and athletic fields.

So that is one of the changes that is being proposed.

Through the chair, would you like to allow more time for this presentation?

I'm I can I'm just about I can wrap it up, yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

So for residential industrial zones, there's limited changes in those as well.

Um, and I will just go to uh since we're out of time, I'll go to the staff recommendation.

So staff requests that the city council conduct a public hearing, and upon conclusion adopt an ordinance as recommended by the planning commission that amends Title 17 in the Oakland Municipal Code, the planning code to adjust regulations for permitted and conditionally permit activities and facilities for purposes of providing greater opportunities for ground floor activities and ease the permitting burden for commercial civic and low impact industrial activities and make related miscellaneous cleanup and admission administrative changes and making appropriate California Environmental Quality Act findings.

Thank you so much.

Council Member Wong, I believe you have an amendment.

Thank you.

Through the chair, um I would like to introduce an amendment.

This is to exhibit A.

Uh, in short, I absolutely support overall the um these updates from staff.

I think this is a really important initiative, so thank you for all your work on this.

Um, however, we did hear from uh certain parks advocates, especially from Lake Merritt and Joaquin Miller that the food service um provision, uh, this is one line out of many hundreds of lines in exhibit A, would have adverse impacts to the parks, especially since we don't have the staff to really uh we we're already challenged with the maintenance of our parks.

So the amendment that I am introducing.

Council member, um sorry to cut you off.

Is there something that you're gonna be displaying?

And does the public have a copy?

For the public, um, I do not have something to display for the public.

I have the sheet for every council member.

Okay.

Please continue.

Okay.

Um, in short, the amendment is reverting the food service and other concessions to its prior form before this proposal before the proposal before this body, um, where uh just to be clear, it's asterisks under this it's a column, it's a table.

So asterisks under RSP, RSP, CP, NP, as well as the S U and AF columns.

Um, and uh, yes, I did confer with uh Director Gilchrist on this amendment.

Uh we had both been hearing from the same set of advocates.

So, Director Gilkas.

Yes, thank you.

And uh Council President, it may please the council.

Um I would also note that essentially what this is doing, uh the uh the existing uh ordinance in the section of the council members referencing will not be changed.

So it's not as if we're introducing any new language at all.

It is going, it is essentially staying the way it is, that section.

Thank you.

Questions from the council members?

Okay, no.

And then sorry, one more comment for me.

I just also want to be clear that um I do think that it is important to seek to lower barriers for people to legally operate things like food trucks and booths and carts, but um it it needs this is important tools for economic mobility, but it needs to be in areas that don't have sensitive ecosystems so you know do you know underutilized parking lots, things like that.

Thank you, Council Member Ramanchander.

Thank you.

Um my team met with some of the same park organizations, and just want to echo support for the amendment as well as an understanding, yes, you want to make city processes as easy as possible for city staff and departments specifically to do this work, but for certain kinds of outside vendors, the existing process um some of those guardrails still apply.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Yes, make a motion.

Staff's recommendation.

With the amendment.

Yes.

So a motion to approve staff's recommendation with the amendment and close the public hearing after public comment.

Is there a second?

Second.

Let's go to public comment.

For item 6.1, the following speaker signed up.

Asada Alabala, Leanne Alameda, Kate Steele, and Kate Steele.

Is there an order?

Uh my name is Kate Steele.

Thank you very much to the planning department and to our uh council members for putting forward this amendment.

Um I represent uh the Lake Merit Community Alliance.

This is a uh a change that we urged because it's important that the MCUP, this higher level of um review, be um available when we are changing park uses and adding more commercial activities.

And why is that important?

Well, let's take Lake Merritt, it's also a wildlife preserve, and at the state level, they require very strict scrutiny before you introduce commercial activities into a park that includes a wildlife preserve.

We've done a survey of other California cities that include wildlife preserves or wildlife refuges within their parks.

They also use this M Cup procedure.

They don't do it under the lower standard of permitting.

So I'm really um very pleased that our council members worked with us to recognize what the hazards could be, and that you are returning proposing to return it to the process that uh exists, which will allow a robust public review if there's a if there's a project that's proposed, and it will include a meaningful environmental review to look at the impact of what adding commercial activities to a park that we have here, whether it be a region serving park or any other park, it maintains its park purpose and is not compromised by commercial activities.

So thank you very much for your work on this, and I urge you to pass the amendment.

Thank you.

So it's interesting that you found it necessary to deal with your police commission with its overstepping and making sure certain members of that commission did not have the opportunity to return.

But you have a park and rec advisory commission who oversteps their boundaries.

They are the people who approve anything that goes on in parks, festivals, events.

They determine who can sell and what products can be sold.

It never comes to anybody but them.

And it's been brought to your attention, but you continue to allow it.

They even developed the Lake Merit pilot program that put in place how the black vendors would be eliminated from Lake Merit.

It never came to council.

So don't jump on the police commission when you have this particular body taking all of these positions of authority and allowing it.

The other thing is it appears that you are looking at creating more space, but you already have space and you need to deal with that.

You have a lot of office space that is available in this city.

You have a lot of space that's available with these new development, the bottoms that's unoccupied.

You need to work on using the space you already have for these projects you're talking about, like arts production, and so forth.

Now, when it comes to things like you're mentioning daycare and preschool, I keep telling the school board they got 20 schools with less than 300 students, but they don't want to close schools, but that's space that can be used for what you're saying.

You want to have daycare preschools and other projects related to children.

You're the chair, thank you for your comments.

Is it does that conclude public comment?

All names have been called for item 6.1.

So there's a motion to accept status recommendation with the amendment that's on the floor.

Um, right?

Clarify the amendment.

So the chart that was given, I think it's um insider baseball.

And I I want to thank council member Wong for leading out on what our constituents were requesting.

Uh I just want it clarified what exactly is changing in this legislation.

So I suppose the best way to explain it is is actually maintaining the status quo for this exact uh the food service line.

So there is not a change.

It's a it's a reversion to what is the existing uh permitting process.

Is that helpful?

And perhaps Director Gilchrist, your department can clarify since you are the subject matter experts.

Oh, I appreciate that, and uh also have uh city attorney representative Michael Branson with us as well.

But in long the long and short of it is the intention is to bring the conditional uses back.

It's of a nature that we've discussed that where there were um uh uses that were not going to have to come before a minor conditional use or a major conditional use where they do now.

We're essentially allowing that to continue so that there will be another layer of oversight around the conditional uses for for um vendors and for food for food services and for concessions.

We were taking those out initially, and now we are having those we're essentially recommending or accepting the recommendation that that continue that we still have that level of review.

Through the chair.

Just to clarify, for the purpose of the minutes.

Are you changing something in the legislation?

If so, can you point to the legislation language so we can effectively capture what you're changing in the minutes, whether it's reverting back to the current version?

Is that the language?

We need clear language for the minutes?

All right, and this is why we have this gentleman here through the chair to the city clerk.

Thank you.

This is Michael Branson, Deputy City Attorney.

The changes on page 13 of exhibit A to section 17.11.060 to the table within that section under community assembly civic activities.

All changes proposed by staff in the row related to food services and other concessions would be removed from the packet.

And I will submit that change to the clerk's office before second reading.

Thank you.

And I believe we have one more public comment here that we missed.

Yes, through the chair, we do have Leanne Alameda on Zoom.

Apologies.

You may unmute your yourself and begin your comments, Leanne.

Thank you very much, Council President and Council members.

I'm Leanne Alameda, the chair of the Lake Merit Community Alliance.

I want to express my appreciation to the planning department for revisiting the proposed changes on food service and concessions and parks and restoring these back to the minor conditional use permit status.

This amendment is an important step in honoring our parks as places for recreation, nature, and environmental protection, especially in our region serving parks with fragile ecosystems such as Lake Merritt Wildlife Refuge and Joaquin Miller Park.

I also want to extend special thanks to Councilmember Wong's office for working closely with the community and with the planning department to bring forward this solution.

And believe that this is uh will allow residents to have a meaningful voice in decisions that affect how their parks are used and preserve the public process that's essential for sensitive park environments.

Thank you again for listening to community input and for supporting a thoughtful approach to managing our open spaces and urge the council to support this amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Are there the chair?

Are there further discussions?

No further discussions.

Call the oil.

Thank you.

There was a motion made by Councilmember Gaios, seconded by Councilmember Fife to approve as amended on introduction with the following amendment of page 13 of the exhibit A, section 17.11.060 under community assembly civic activities.

All changes proposed by staff in the role related to food services and other concessions would be removed from the packet.

On roll to approve on introduction, council members Brown, aye.

I will unmute you through the chair.

Councilmember Five.

Aye.

Guile Houston?

Aye.

Ramachandron.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

As well.

This was also to close the public hearing at 5 21 p.m.

The motion passes with eight ayes to approve on introduction as amended.

Final passage will occur on December 16th.

Madam Clerk to make an announcement because of the amount of speakers and because of a we might lose quorum.

The speaking time will be one minute.

Thank you.

Making that note.

Moving to item 6.2 for the public hearing.

We do need a motion to open the public hearing as well.

Okay, there is a motion made by Councilmember Gaio, seconded by Councilmember Fife at 5 22 p.m.

to open the public hearing.

On roll, I will unmute you.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guile?

Aye.

Houston.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight ayes to open the public hearing.

I will read the item and two record item 6.2.

Conduct a public hearing, and upon conclusion, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and execute a transient occupancy tax sharing agreement with Oakland Pro Soccer LLC doing business as Oakland Roots and Seoul and an amount not to exceed $300,000 to support the attraction of a World Cup team to the Oakland Roots and Seoul Soccer Club training facility during the 2026 FIFA World Cup Tournament.

Thank you.

Councilmember Ramachandra.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So excited to be a co-sponsor of this IDA along with Councilmember Gaio and of course EWD.

I just want to express my enthusiasm for the idea that Oakland might be very close to potentially hosting an entire country team during next year's FIFA World Cup.

And if that happens, we could have 30,000 hotel stays in Oakland.

We could have up to 80,000 visitors.

We could have a lot of economic investment into Oakland and have a totally different country be able to call Oakland home for an entire month and reap incredible economic benefits from that.

So I will pass it along to EWD to share the details of what this TOT arrangement is, but just want to express my support for this proposal and my deep, deep gratitude to the Oakland Roots for making this happen.

There are a lot of sites that have been contemplated as base camps, but the process of even getting ours certified as one was no small feat.

And I know there's a lot of financial work to do and fundraising among other things, but I'm confident that the Roots is are really taking the lead and helping us become this incredible site for next year.

Thank you.

Director is three minutes enough.

I was gonna I was gonna just do one.

Oh I heard one.

I'm gonna go with it.

So I did have a PowerPoint.

I will um we can pull it up.

Okay.

Thank you, Councilmember Ramachandran, Councilmember Gaio.

Um appreciate the support.

And this is this is really exciting.

World Cup is coming, summer of 2026.

Um it's coming to Canada, Mexico, and the United States states.

They're gonna be 16 host cities, and one of those sites is the Bay Area.

And um the games will be played at Levi Stadium in Santa Clara June 13th through July 1st.

But the Oakland Roots and Soul Soccer Club is club is competing to be a team-based camp.

What that means is that one of the World Cup teams would use the Roots and Soul facility as a practice venue for the duration of the tournament.

So the team would practice locally, stay in the area, and participate in local events, watch parties, etc.

And the main benefit to the host community and surrounding area is just as Councilmember Ramachandran said, um, it's the visitor activity and the associated economic impact generated by the team and the fans.

So the proposed resolution enables, enables the Roots and Soul to share up to a maximum of $300,000 from the incremental transient occupancy tax anticipated to be generated in the city.

Just by way of additional information, the city of Alameda had already approved a similar resolution.

So there are a number of cities in the Bay Area trying to support the Roots and Soul in this way.

This proposal does not impact the portion of the TOT that goes to support arts and culture.

It's just limited to the base 11%.

I think it's important to note that.

And when we see the increment that surge in transient occupancy tax revenue, then we will have net new revenue to share back with Roots and Seoul.

If we if that increment is less than $300, $300,000, we would only share back that increment.

If the increment is more than $300,000, we would share back $300,000 and then keep keep the rest.

And with that, I will turn it over to any questions if there are any.

Thank you.

Any questions from the council.

Councilmember President Protestant guy.

Thank you for your support of Oak for Oakland.

And certainly we appreciate your leadership and your commitment, your employment opportunities, economic development, and with it, I make a motion to support the recommendation.

Second.

So a motion to accept staff's recommendation and close the public hearing.

Let's go to the public speakers.

Alameda had a similar uh resolution.

What was that similar resolution that Alameda had?

Sharing back through the chair, sharing back up to a hundred and fifty thousand dollars of transient occupancy tax increment.

And did they do the chair did they decide why couldn't we decide to do something like this at the Coliseum to actually have it because this other events is going to be at the Coliseum to embrace the World Cup?

Um this is in partnership with Roots and Seoul, and they are incurring costs well beyond the $300,000 that we would be sharing to ensure their competitiveness here.

So they're competing on a world stage to be selected as a team based camp.

That's not the case with the Coliseum.

So, last question through the chair, where's the camp at?

What's the address of the camp?

Um former Harbor Bay, former Raiders training facility, Harbor Bay.

Okay, thank you.

Councilmember Brown.

Um, the through the chair to um uh director can it um just to confirm the facility will be utilized for um as like a training base, is that correct?

Not necessarily hosting a large game.

Correct.

The bit through the chair, the the big games will be played at Levi Stadium.

This is where the practices will be occurring during the during the full length of the tournament.

Excellent, thank you.

CNN comments, this one.

Um so just to confirm since I was reading the report and trying to understand especially the table, um, if we essentially do the sharing agreement, you expect, even though we can't predict the future, but that we would essentially recoup the funds for uh the TOT funds plus more.

Correct.

We're anticipating the increment of TO to TOT to exceed $300,000, especially give when we look at the supply of rooms and the room rates and the um using June 2025 as a baseline vacancy.

So the way that we're setting this up, we will not be worse off in June 2026 than we were in June 2025.

Okay, that's the analysis in the agenda report.

Okay, and it doesn't also capture the sales tax revenue that we would expect.

Correct.

This is not the sales tax or any of the other economic economic activity we will expect to see from the visitors who are here.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, can we go to the council member Houston?

Question.

Is that Harbor Bay location in Alameda or is that Oakland?

It's in the city of Alameda.

SL crazy.

All right, council council member Fife.

I think just from what I'm hearing from my colleagues, it needs to be uh if we could reiterate how um supporting this entity that's based in Alameda will have an economic benefit for the city of Oakland.

Absolutely.

So what we're looking at when we when we when this event comes, it's over the course of many weeks, right?

It's a it's a whole month of activity, and so teams and fans come and they need to stay in hotels.

The city of Alameda does not have the same hotel room supply that we do.

So the city of Alameda will benefit from increased hotel stays and increased TOT, so will the city of Berkeley, so will the city of Emoryville, maybe even San Francisco.

But we expect through the partnership with Bay Area Host Committee, Visit Oakland, Roots and Seoul, that there's going to be a real um a node of activity here in the city of Oakland.

And so we we have the rooms, we have the quality rooms that these fans are looking for, and the analysis shows that with you know 30,000 room nights over the course of the event.

There's no way the city of Alameda could could could capture all of that.

The city of Oakland will for sure benefit from those nights.

Thank you for that explanation.

Can you also bring back an uh report on whether our estimations actually led to the outcomes that we uh perceive?

Because I think that's important to you know make sure that we have the public trust and that the investments that we're making have a return that benefit the city.

I think it's important to follow up on those projections and to have an actual path with those institutions that you just listed, visit Oakland and others about how we are intentionally working to capture um those dollars coming into the city of Oakland through our relationships with the Marriott and the hotels that are still here that we have an actual roadmap to work with any the any of the entities that are going to be the host committee to bring those dollars to Oakland.

Yeah, I think that makes sense.

Thank you.

It does, and through the chair at the CED committee meeting, Councilmember Brown introduced um uh a request basically that we come back with that report by October of 2026, Councilmember Houston.

Yes, um, through the chair.

How are we advertising for the individuals that actually since this Harbor Bay is in Alameda near District 7, you have to go down and do little, and they have some major hotels down over there in Alameda Harbor Bay for sure, right?

So, how are we advertising for them to actually stay in the corridor of District 7 where our hotels are hurting since we're investing in Alameda?

Through the chair, I can attend in part, and I'll also just note that Lydia Tan from the Roots and Soul Soccer Club is here to speak on the item, and she can further respond to some of these questions.

Um, so the mayor and the Bay Area Host Committee and visit Oakland are in partnership working really hard to identify exactly as you're saying a path for advertising, advertising, making sure that there are packages available, um deals, there's a lot of marketing and promotion that goes into getting ready for an event like this, and visit Oakland.

This is what they are solely focused on right now is getting ready.

I won't say solely on their behalf, but they're this is a major project for them to be ready for this event and to make sure that Oakland hotels are ready, and that there's a whole package of visitor activities around this watch parties, deals in restaurants.

Um, you're gonna be start seeing the promotion for it.

Councilmember Under, do you mind if uh Robin Chantra goes before you?

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

Just to clarify, what has been certified as a base camp is the old Raiders training facility that Oakland, not the city of Alameda owned.

Oakland owned 50% along with Alameda County.

But this property is right next to the Oakland Airport, it's in that side of Alameda, uh, near Bay Farm Island, the Harbor Bay area that is technically Alameda, but the closest hotels to this facility are Oakland hotels, the one closest to the airport.

Obviously, we're still competing with people wanting to stay in Alameda or otherwise, but the closest hotels in the vicinity are Oakland, and it is obviously going to be a big effort to continue to market Oakland hotels and other things, but this until extremely recently was Oakland property, even though it was located in Alameda.

Councilmember Under.

Um, so just to be clear, in in response to some of our concerns about this, you essentially de-risked the proposal.

This is not us sending money and hoping we recoup it.

This is if there is a surplus in year-over-year receipts, then that's when the money will go out.

So it is it's been de-risked if I understand correctly.

That's correct.

Okay, Councilmember Houston.

I got a question um through the chair to the city attorney.

Um, do we still own a part of that property?

I defer to staff to answer that question.

I don't know.

I believe we don't, but we do not.

So there we go.

It's an Alameda.

This it's not a part of Oakland, it's not an Oakland property.

It is no longer an Oakland property.

There it goes.

The crazy man.

Through the chair, I'll just note that in trying to be competitive or in their in their bid to be selected as a team base camp.

There are a whole range of expenses associated with uh with this effort.

A lot of it is marketing promotions, they need to hire staff.

There is security that they are that Roots and Soul are required to provide 24-7.

Um so there are an there's there are a whole host of expenses estimated at $700,000 plus, but that is that are needed in order to compete in this way.

And so we are trying to help them because of the overwhelming economic impact that we are expecting to see from this event.

We are wanting to help defray that expense that they are really incurring on behalf of the Bay Area.

I got another, I got one more question.

Council Member Houston.

Yeah, I got one more question.

Harbor Bay, they have so a couple of major hotels right in Harbor Bay, and that's Alameda.

Alameda has 27 hotels.

27, right?

If I'm coming to visit there, I'm gonna stay, because with the stigma of District 7 and the stigma of Oakland, I want to know how we're going to benefit and get that.

We're putting 300,000.

We always give in money, giving money.

Do we have any equity in it?

Do we have any equity?

This is through the chair.

We gotta run Oakland like a business, not like uh uh uh like we're just some nonprofit fundraiser, whatever you want to call it.

So through the chair, I'm saying this it's an Alameda property.

You got 27 hotels in Alameda.

Well, I'm gonna come to Oakland if I'm in Alameda.

Through the chair, if I may, the designated hotel has been selected, and the selected the hotel was the Claremont Hotel, which and the TOT from the Claremont Hotel comes back to the city of Oakland.

We believe that there is there will be more demand for hotel room nights than the Claremont can accommodate, and so I think that there are gonna be there are gonna be other hotels in Oakland that benefit as well.

No, you're good.

All right, thank you.

Just to clarify, I think this is actually the exact kind of thing we want to be a business deal for Oakland.

If we are selected as a base site, we potentially get over 10 million dollars in benefits to the city through hotel stays, through economic activity, through people visiting restaurants, and let's say even some of this projected 80,000 people go to Alameda.

They're still gonna come to Oakland and spend money in Oakland and shop and dine and do things here.

There we have to think big picture, in my opinion, and if we are going to do things to help our city be a an attraction for large-scale sporting events, including being a base camp for FIFA, including hosting big events like major league cricket tournaments and international world cups and all these different things that could happen at the Coliseum as well as other sites, we do have to think big picture and do the things and support the efforts that's gonna bring us over $10 million plus of revenue, foot traffic, commerce, visitors.

So, yes, it's a cost that we will have to give if and when we do get selected as a base camp and people come here, but it is actually makes the most economic sense that we start thinking big picture.

We have to invest a little money to get a whole lot more.

Councilmember, I just want to reiterate that we are not sending money out unless we get a surplus back.

So it it is at best, at worst cost neutral.

Through the through the chair, we've established June 2025 TOT levels as our baseline.

Next June, when the team is here and all of the World Cup activity is happening and we're experiencing the demand for 30,000 um 30,000 hotel room nights, we expect our TOT to increase above our June 2025 baseline.

If our TOT increases more than $300,000, we will be sharing $300,000 back to Roots and Seoul, keeping the rest.

If that increment does not emerge in the way that we've anticipated, and we are worse off than we were in June 2025, I'm knocking on wood, they don't get anything at all.

If that increment is something less than $300,000, it will go to Roots and Soul.

Thank you.

Councilmember Houston.

And this is not mocking you to the chair, Councilmember Ramachana.

The bigger picture is this.

It's an Alameda, and you they identified as a hotel in West Oak, I mean in downtown Oakland instead of the corridor that's closer to the Coliseum where we're going to be having events.

The bigger picture is invest at 300,000 in the Coliseum and have events there.

If we're going to invest in Oak, we're investing in Alameda.

I'm telling you straight up.

When we do that, we invest in an Alameda.

I don't have a problem with Alameda, but I have my problem is we're going to what?

Pick a hotel down in what downtown Oakland instead of right there where the Coliseum is and where the facility is five minutes away instead of those hotels.

Those hotels should have been identified, and then I would have had a different opinion.

That's okay.

Lydia Tan, Asada Olabala, Barbara Leslie, Gene Hazard, and Josephine Guzman for item 6.2.

Please state your name for the record.

Hello, my name is Lydia Tan.

I'm with the Oakland Roots and Seoul.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you today.

And thank you to staff, Councilmember Mamashandra, and Councilmember Gaio for co-sponsoring this item.

As um Director Kannat had mentioned, we are projecting to incur actually more money than is being potentially uh committed with between the city of uh Alameda, City of Oakland and the County of Alameda.

And the reason we are still interested in participating in this park process is because of the economic impact we think will come to Oakland.

Uh we look back at the 2004 uh World Cup that happened.

Uh Brazil was in Los Gatos uh at their hotel, they practice at Santa Clara uh Santa Clara University, and it was Los Gatos that was activated.

It wasn't the practice facility because the practice facility tends to be private for most of the time.

There will be activation there.

We also be working.

Thank you for your comments.

So the tax you're talking about is deposited into the general fund, and it supports essential city services.

So what you're saying is all essential services have been taken care of, and we got this extra amount of money that we can spend $300,000.

Or we're saying we are gonna eliminate supporting the city of Oakland essential services in order to give the money for this.

The other part of this is that in order to go forward with this kind of initiative, there's certain things that have to be in place in the city of Oakland.

You have to have the amount of police officers available for this type of population to come into the city, and we don't have it.

You have to have a clean and safe city.

We don't have that, and we don't have the ability because you won't deal with the encampment policy to clean up the city.

Thank you for your comments.

Okay, they're dealing about two will make money by city.

Thank you for your comments, Ms.

Asada.

What are y'all smoking?

We don't have 30 or 40,000 uh rooms in Oakland.

Maxison bankruptcy, Hilton clothes, waterfront clothes, the one over here on uh Jefferson and bankruptcy, the uh courtyard, uh Wang is using to house uh Asians.

So what are you doing?

You're not even sharing the cost with Alameda.

Give me some of that what you're smoking.

Because this is a pipe dream, Ramachandra.

You're gonna say we have 30 to 40,000 rooms, and we got over and maxi is in bankruptcy.

Paramount hotel is Brooklyn and Oakland.

Come on!

And you're not even sharing the cost with Alameda, and Ms.

Olabala told you uh with the maintenance.

I don't know if we're all in that.

Thank you for your comments, Mr.

Hazard.

In Zoom, Rin, please let us know if you provided a public comment card under our different name, and if so, what name?

Ren in Zoom.

Uh hi.

No, I did not submit a public comment.

Thank you for your honesty.

You thank you.

We did not have a card for you.

Chair, that was our last speaker.

All names were called.

We have a motion and a second.

There was a motion made by Councilmember Guyo, seconded by Councilmember Ramachandrin to close the public hearing and approve the resolution.

Time is 547 to close the public hearing on roll to do so.

Council members, I will unmute you.

Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guile?

Aye.

Houston.

So this is to approve and close the public hearing.

No.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Thank you.

The motion passes with seven ayes.

One no Houston to close the public hearing and approve the resolution.

Moving to our next item.

Another public hearing.

We will need a motion in a second to open the public hearing.

Again.

Okay.

At 548, there was a motion made by Councilmember Guyle, seconded by Councilmember Brown to open the public hearing for item 6.3.

On roll to do so, Councilmembers.

Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guile?

Aye.

Houston.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight ayes to open the public hearing for item 6.3.

I will read the item into record.

Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, adopt the resolution.

One confirming the annual report of the Montclair Business Improvement District Advisory Board.

And two, levying the an annual assessment for the Montclair Business Improvement District for fiscal year 26 through 27, including a 5% increase in the annual assessments.

I'm sure all my colleagues were at their agenda.

Will two minutes be sufficient for you?

Yeah, I think so.

Okay, perfect.

My name's Jenny Wong, Economic and Workforce development.

Good afternoon, President Jenkins and members of the City Council regarding the item before you, the Montclair bid was formed in 2001, pursuant to the parking and business improvement area law of 1989.

And as such, the Montclair bid must annually receive approval from City Council to levy its assessment for the following fiscal year.

Accordingly, the council, the item before you is to hold a public hearing to hear all public comments and protests and to take final action as to the levying of the proposed Montclair bid fiscal year 2026 to 2027 assessment.

If at the close of the public hearing no majority protests exists as defined by the above legislation, then council may consider adopt adoption of the tax resolution, which would approve the proposed levy as well as confirm the annual report of the Montclair Bid Advisory Board attached as exhibit A to the resolution.

As of this reading, no majority protests exists that would prevent council from adopting the tax resolution to approve the Montclair bid fiscal year 2026 to 2027 levy.

If council so chooses, the Montclair bid is comprised of approximately 220 businesses located in the Montclair commercial neighborhood, and the bid anticipates generating approximately $121,000 of special assessment revenues in fiscal year 2026 to 2027, which will be used to pay for special benefit services outlined in the district's approved management plan.

On file in the office of the city clerk and annual report, which is attached as exhibit A to the proposed resolution.

The district's annual report requests no changes to the boundaries of the district or to the original method and basis of levying the assessment.

However, the Montclair Village Association Board of Directors is recommending a 5% increase to the fiscal year 2026-2027 assessment rate across all categories to enable the district to maintain the current level of services as costs of providing those services and inflation have increased.

Recommendations to increase the assessment up to 5% per year are allowable per the plan on file with the office of the city clerk.

This is the end of the presentation, and I can answer any questions you may have.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Ramchandra.

No, I'm I'm very supportive of this.

No comments, thank you.

Staff.

So that's a motion to approve and close the public hearing.

Yes, so moved.

Gaio second.

Public speakers.

Ms.

Asada Olabala.

The concern I have is that the city collects the assessment.

And that staffing, and we get one percent of whatever is collected as a fee for doing that.

But do we have to do that?

We have a staffing problem, and we have several of these uh business districts.

I think about seven of them, and we have a lot of time is devoted to this.

Do we have to collect these taxes?

Then what's the penalty if you don't pay the tax?

Are y'all gonna do like waste management, take responsibility for people not paying the tax and then put a lien on a property?

What's the consequence?

Uh what happens if uh you have a nonprofit administrator who who can collect a tax, or hire an agency to collect the tax.

But that what is the burden on the city?

If any, this is a non-burden uh we able to do this without becoming a problem.

Lastly, thank you for your comments.

Thank you, Ms.

Asada.

Last speaker.

This last speaker.

There's a motion a second.

Let's take the roll.

Item 6.3 was moved by Councilmember Ramachandran, seconded by Councilmember Gaio.

The time is 5 54 to close the public hearing and as well as adopt the resolution on roll to do so.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guile?

Aye.

Houston?

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

Motion passes with eight ayes to close the close the public hearing as well as adopt the resolution.

Moving to item 6.4.

We need a motion and a second.

Second.

At 5 55 pm.

There was a motion made by Councilmember Guile, seconded by Councilmember Fife to open the public hearing for item 6.4.

On roll, Council Members Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guile.

Houston.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight ayes to open the public hearing.

I will read the item into record.

Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion adopt a resolution, one confirming the annual report of the Rockridge Business Improvement District Advisory Board, and two, levying the annual assessment for the Rockridge Business Improvement District for fiscal years 2026 through 2027, including a 3% increase in the annual assessments.

Well, two minutes suffice.

Yeah.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay.

Regarding the item before you, the Rockridge bid was formed in 2000, pursuant to the parking and business improvement area law of 1989.

And as such, the Rockridge bid must annually receive approval from City Council to levy its assessment for the following fiscal year.

Accordingly, the item before you is to hold a public hearing to hear all public comments and protests and to take final action as to the levying of the proposed Rockridge bid fiscal year 2026 to 2027 assessment.

If at the close of the public hearing, no majority protests exists as defined by the above legislation, then council may consider adoption of the TAC resolution, which would approve the proposed levy as well as confirm the annual report of the Rockridge bid advisory board attached as exhibit A to the resolution.

As of this reading, no majority protests exists that would prevent council from adopting the TAC resolution to approve the Rockridge bid fiscal year 2026 to 2027 levy.

If council so chooses, the Rockridge bid is comprised of approximately 480 businesses located in the Rock Ridge commercial neighborhood, and the bid anticipates generating approximately 206,000 of special assessment revenues in fiscal year 2026 to 2027, which will be used to pay for special benefit services outlined in the district's approved management plan on file in the office of the city clerk.

An annual report which is attached as exhibit A to the proposed resolution, the district's annual report requests no changes to the boundaries of the district or to the original method and basis of levying the assessment.

However, the Rockridge Business Improvement District Advisory Board is recommending a 3% increase to the fiscal year 2026 and 2027 assessment rate across all categories to enable the district to maintain the current level of services as costs of providing those services and inflation have increased.

Thank you.

Councilmember Unger.

Mr.

District, you make the motion.

I would like to make a motion to approve staff's recommendation.

Close the public hearing.

Yes.

Alright.

Public speakers.

Ms.

Asada Olabala.

So what's different from the last uh proposal?

This proposal uh allows you to see when the billing period takes place, and that's January 1st, 2026 through December 2026.

That means the staff all year long is gonna be dealing with collecting assessments.

It also states that the assessment uh for the rock ridge is based on two variables: business gross receipts or business type.

Uh the last uh business district didn't have any way of determining how the assessment is based.

Um the funds are in place in a special trust established by the finance department.

We do a lot of work here.

Then you have a race and equity statement that don't make no sense, and I keep telling you people tell your staff if there is no race and equity statement.

Just say there is no race and equity statement.

So you can't say transparency and sustainable funds and management services is an equity statement.

It is.

Thank you for your comments.

No, ma'am, through the chair.

Thank you for your comments.

That was our only speaker for this item.

We do have a motion and a second motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Guyo.

The time is 6 p.m.

to close the public hearing and to adopt the resolution for item 6.4.

Through the chair, Councilmember Houston.

Thank you.

Uh to approve this item and close the public hearing.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Aye.

Guile.

Q Houston.

Aye.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong.

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight ayes to close the public hearing as well as adopt the resolution.

Moving to our non-consent calendar items, starting with item eight.

Adopt a resolution awarding a construction contract to Gallagher and Burke Inc.

for the Lakeside Drive Lake Merit Boulevard Complete Streets Project.

Project number 1005314, the lowest responsible and responsive bidder in accordance with project plans, specifications, state requirements, and with contractors bid in the amount of eight million eight hundred ten thousand seven hundred and fifteen dollars and adopting appropriate SQL findings.

Move to waive the staff presentation and move approval.

Excuse me.

Look at all the projects you have at Lake Merit.

The Lakeshore Avenue Specialty Bike Lanes Project, the Grand Avenue Complete Streets Paving Projects, the 19th Street, Bark and Lake Merit Urban Greenway Project, the Lakeside Drive and Lake Merit Boulevard Complete Streets Paving Project, the 14th Street Project, the Lake Merit Bark Project, including senior housing and marketing rate housing, the measure DD project for Lake Merritt, all of those for one area, one park, gets all of these projects.

Now name a project in your district.

Name a project in your district or your district that has to do with parks.

Thank you, Miss Asada.

Moving to our one Zoom speaker, Blair Beekman.

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

Hi, Blair Beekman.

I'm currently on the BART train.

Um, so my Zoom may cut out.

I'm really sorry if it does.

Thank you for this item.

Uh, it's been on your for a complete street.

Okay.

You know, they're gonna uh public safety, good practices and accountability and good open public policy.

So good luck that we are uh connecting all of those at this time.

Um yeah, this is a lot of money and how we work this out and how we talk about this in terms of the future of a block contract compared to a future of a different ALPR vendor.

I hope we can keep those concepts in mind.

Uh how we're developing that conversation and uh good luck how that thank you, Mr.

Beakman.

We got a motion in a second.

Do the chair, can you restate who made that motion?

Was that you, Council President?

Motion was made by Councilmember Council President Jenkins, seconded by council member guy to approve the resolution resolution for item eight on roll council members Brown.

Aye.

Five?

Aye.

Guile Houston?

Aye.

Ramachandran?

Aye.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Council President Jenkins.

Aye.

The motion passes with eight ayes to adopt item eight.

Moving to our next item.

Item nine, which is a resolution regarding the amendment and resetting the council's rules of procedure.

At the November 4th, 2025 City Council meeting, there is a motion made by Councilmember Ramachandron, seconded by Councilmember Unger to approve as amended with amendment to council the requiring majority vote to take an item off of consent to non-consent.

The motion tied with a vote of four ayes.

Brown Houston Ramachandra and Unger.

Two no, five and wonk, one accent guy, one excuse Jenkins.

In pursuant to rule 29 of resolution 9006 and CMS, council's rules of rules of procedure.

This item has been scheduled to the agenda to allow the mayor to cast the tie breaking vote.

Is there somebody here from the mayor's office to weigh in?

If not, can somebody go get president?

Councilmember Houston.

President, how are you?

Um is it anyway since we're waiting, can we speak on this?

Or that's a uh uh city attorney's um question.

Can we speak or can we say anything on this?

We have to wait for the mayor to tie break.

If the mayor doesn't tie break, we have other options.

Say that one more time, if the mayor chooses not to tie break, we have other options.

But council discussion is permitted.

Go ahead.

So it is permitted.

Okay.

So um bullet point five.

Require that moving an item off the consent calendar to the non-consent calendar to have a majority vote.

Normally we just do a motion and a second.

Makes no sense to me to do that.

Um item six.

We move and require that committee recommendations that are not anonymous uh must go to the non consent calendar.

What what why would we have to do that to move that to the non consent?

That makes no sense.

That's like blocking public opinion.

That's what I guess.

So let's see what precedence is.

So President Gilboard, Deputy Chief Staff to Mayor Barbara Lee.

So regarding uh file number two six zero zero two eight, the proposed amendments to the council's rules of procedure.

Um, the mayor requested me to come down and share that she does not intend to vote on the pending motion.

Um the mayor, sorry, I'm out of breath, I just ran down.

The mayor prefers to defer to city council on their own rules of procedure.

And therefore we'll be not will not be weighing in today.

But thank you all for the thank you so much, President.

So I'll entertain a motion to suspend council rules of procedure so that we can hear this item now as opposed to the next agenda because the next agenda might be impacted.

That's a motion.

Motion and second, Wamachandran and Jenkins.

This is to suspend council rules of procedure, rule six.

Is that rules 16?

Correct.

Rule Mrs.

Adam, one second, Mrs.

Idle.

She's not weighing in.

The mayor decided not to break the motion.

That means that the motion failed.

So parliamentarian, please.

Yes.

Rule 16 of your council rules of procedure allow the council to suspend one or more of their rules of procedure on a temporary ad hoc basis for a single meeting only if the council passes a motion by an affirmative vote of six council members and including a finding or findings of necessity, provided the temporary suspension otherwise complies with applicable law, including Charter Brown Act and Sunshine Ordinance.

So this motion is to suspend council rules of procedure so that we can hear this item now as opposed to the 16th, because the 16th will be impacted.

There's a motion and the second on the floor, and to clarify, council president.

That item will automatically be continued to the next regular meeting, which is tonight, solely for the purpose of allowing the mayor to cast a vote.

And I believe you your recommendation is to suspend that portion of the rule that says solely for the purpose of casting the vote so that the council can continue to discuss the item.

Yes, then agendized.

You're out of order, Mr.

You are about order.

That's your first warning.

That's your first warning.

This is your second warning.

Please, please remove Mr.

Hazard.

Please remove Mr.

Hazard from the chambers.

Yeah, we can talk about it.

No, Mr.

Officer.

Please remove him.

Yes.

So we could further discuss the item.

Okay, there was a motion by made by Council President Jenkins seconded by Council Member Rama Chandran.

Through the chair to the parliamentarian, is there any other language that I should be relaying in this motion to consider to further discussion for this item?

Pursuant to rule 16, which allows the council to suspend its rules.

Thank you.

On roll to suspend a portion of rule twenty nine so we can further discuss this item on roll, council members.

Brown, aye.

Five?

No.

Guile?

No.

Houston?

No.

Rama Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Jenkins.

Aye.

That motion fails.

I'll restate my motion.

I will motion.

So it needs six votes.

So I'll restate my motion.

So this is just so that we could talk about it.

To be able to talk about it, we need six votes.

So I motion to suspend council rules of procedure.

So this is so that we can speak on the so this is so that we can take a vote on it.

So if council member Houston, there are certain sections that you want removed, we have to take this step first.

This is first step.

This is not approved.

Through the chair.

And this is just to talk about it.

So this is to talk about it, and then we will remove those sections as you ask for talk about it.

Through the chair, for clarity, this vote is to basically and essentially reconsider this item or no to possibly vote on this item later.

This is the permission to talk about this further and to possibly vote again on this item.

Yeah, if I can I'll I can try to clarify.

So your rule 29 and your council rules of procedure speaks to tie-breaking votes by the mayor.

At the last meeting, there was a motion that resulted in a tie.

The mayor's office um and and and therefore under the rules it was automatically continued to this meeting.

Um the mayor's office um appeared and declined to break the tie.

The council is permitted to discuss the item, but if you wanted to move forward and continue deliberations and make um new motions, you would need to just temporarily temporarily suspend the portion of your Rule 29 that says that it can only be continued as to meeting solely for the mayor to break the tie.

So in other words, you're suspending that one piece of of rule 29 so that you can continue deliberations on the item and consider other motions if otherwise the council of course can um schedule this you know in another manner.

There's a motion and a second.

Okay, one more time through the chair.

There was a motion made by Council President Jenkins, seconded by council member Ramachandran to suspend a portion of Rule 29 as stated by our parliamentarian to further discuss this item on roll to do so.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five.

No.

Guile?

No.

Houston.

No.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Sorry.

Wong.

Aye.

And Jenkins.

Aye.

Okay.

Through the chair, I believe this motion fails because it does not have a total of six affirmative ayes.

Correct.

Your rule 16 requires the vote of six six affirmative votes to suspend your rules.

We'll go to the next item.

Through the chair, we did have public commenters on this item, even though we did hear these these um this item at the previous meeting.

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

Asada Olabala, Raf Kant, Ralph Cannes, Emily Willer, Jennifer Finley, Prescott Chair, Simon Lee, Nicole Dean or Dan, sorry for mispronounce your name.

Gene Hazard, Armando Sodorzano, Matthew Richard, in no particular order.

If you still wish to speak on this item.

And please state your name for the record before you begin.

From excuse me, through the chair, you said your name was what, ma'am?

My name's Nicole Dean, and I have time seated to me from Matt Boyd.

Matt is Matt present.

Okay.

Thank you, Matt.

So we have a total of two minutes.

Thank you.

My name is Nicole Dean.

I'm the organizing director at Care for Community Action.

We are a pro-democracy civic engagement group, and our mission is to dramatically increase the participation of Oakland residents in the democratic process.

We are strongly opposed to this proposed change because starting the non-consent calendar before 5 p.m.

would make it even harder than it already is for working people to participate in the public comment process.

Please don't do this.

Democracy in this country is on its deathbed, and Oakland has an important role to play nationally in making democracy real.

These changes will kill too many opportunities for working people to participate in the process.

If you do this, you're gonna be hearing from cons from consultants, not constituents.

You're gonna be hearing from people who do not live here, who do not have a base, and cannot tell you what your constituents actually want.

And you're not gonna hear from Norma and Jesus and Fred and Sharina and so many other people whose best shot at power over the issues that make or break their lives is through accessing the democratic process.

I totally get that you don't want to be here till midnight.

I don't want to be here till midnight either.

But blocking public participation will backfire.

People will have even less trust in and respect for government than we already do.

Please think about what that could mean and vote against this anti-democratic change.

Thank you.

Armando.

So you're trying to make these meetings even less accessible to working class people, and I'm not surprised at all.

The council has shown disdain for public participative participation and the values of transparency and accountability, such as when President Jenkins scheduled a special EAP meeting during a council meeting, yet failed to publicly announce it and failed to provide an agenda or amendments with sufficient notice to the public.

And don't accuse me as you did before of spreading conspiracy theories when you're the one conspiring to ramp through a policy that violates human rights with minimum notice and transparency and violated the Brown Act to do so.

You should be working to make meetings more inclusive and accessible, not less so.

If you're in chamber, please approach the podium, Ms.

Asada, Jean Hazard.

One is that you should require all rule 24 items to be placed on the non-consent agenda, not consent.

All amendments that are brought before council should be shared with the public in a written form before public comment.

And that happened tonight.

That you had an amendment and the public had no idea.

The Brown Act should be respected when it says reasonable opportunity to have public comment.

And we're not having that with one minute to speak on items.

Any item that involves a certain amount of money should be identified on the agenda item where that money is coming from.

You also should have funds that uh identified on each item on the agenda.

The uh you should have a limited number of items.

Thank you, Ms.

Asada.

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

If not, we'll move to our Zoom speakers.

Okay.

Starting with Simon S.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Simon Lee.

I want to yield my time to Delphine.

Thanks.

Through the chair to Simon.

I don't have a card through the chair for a Delphine.

I have not do not through the chair.

I will move to Jennifer.

I believe that she signed up for Zoom comments.

Okay.

Through the chair, thank you.

However, we do not have a card for Delphine.

Jennifer Finley.

Trying to have the rules of procedure suspended in order to vote on rules of procedure that were already voted down in committee.

And then having the vote a second time, hoping to flip enough votes with enough, I don't know, intense eye contact and insinuation that there's a plan.

You could be discussing this without actually voting to have deliberations that allow a vote.

If you want a discussion, council, you could just have that conversation.

I don't support doing it this evening.

The community hasn't been notified of anything other than uh breaking a tie, but absolutely with everything else that's happened because council was rescheduling the meetings with committee meetings being moved, special meetings repeatedly, time to comment being cut in half, having the committee meeting so impacted that we can't comment fully at the items there either.

This is ridiculous.

Thank you for your comments.

Jennifer, noting that the outstanding names that I did call for this item that signed up proactively for this item were Gene Hazard, Prescott Chair, and Ralph Cairns.

The remaining hands if they've submitted a name.

Through the chair, did you submit a card under a different name?

And through the chair.

Okay.

And Delphine, did you by any chance submit a card by a different name as well?

We know that you submitted a e-comment.

Um I tried to submit an e-comment, but I was like one minute late.

Um, and I also uh pressed the button for uh sign up to speak on that same web page.

So I would like to speak if I could.

Thank you through the chair.

You were successfully able to submit a e-comment.

We we do have that e-comment, but we do not have a speak up request for you through the chair.

Through the chair through the chair to the chair.

How would you like to proceed?

Shall we go to the next item?

Um, to the parliamentarian, can we make a motion to schedule it to post continue the item to the next regularly scheduled council meeting?

Yes, the council can um vote on the scheduling motion to schedule this item to the next council meeting or or any other meeting.

Okay, then I will make that motion to the December 16th council meeting on consent.

So not non-consent.

Non-consent second.

There was a motion made by Councilmember Ramachandron, seconded by Council President Jenkins to schedule item nine regarding the amend and resetting the council's rules of procedure to the next city council meeting of December 16th, 2025 on non-consent on roll to do so.

Council members Brown.

Aye five.

I'm confused.

I thought we said that agenda was impacted.

Am I?

It's impacted, but we didn't solve it here.

So I just want to be clear because this whole process is convoluted, and I do believe as the public has stated at the last meeting, and this, this is anti-democratic.

I this item needs to come back after it's vetted and actually discussed with the parties who are bringing it forward.

Um it failed multiple times again tonight.

I I'll I'll just vote.

No.

Guile.

No.

Houston.

Ramachandran.

Aye.

Unger?

Aye.

Wong?

I'm and council president Jenkins.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

With five ayes, Brown, Ramachandran, Unger, Wong, and Jenkins, to schedule this item to the 1216 agenda on non-consent.

And there were three no's, five Gaio, and Houston.

Thank you.

We have one last final action item.

Item 10, which under modification to the agenda was withdrawn.

I don't know through the parliamentarian if there needs to be another motion to withdraw this item, or if item four was sufficient.

Correct.

The council already voted to withdraw this item, but as was stated earlier, the public is allowed to speak.

Okay, through the chair, we have about a hundred and thirty-one speakers that signed up for this item.

And if you still wish to speak on this item, I will call your name.

Because there are a robust a robust amount of people who signed up.

I will call in in batches of 25 so that we can still conduct and have and maintain order in the chamber.

So if you did not hear your name in the first batch or the second, please be patient.

You will hear your name if you signed up for this item.

Okay.

Once you hear your name, please approach the podium and or uh raise your hand in the zoom app.

Lowering all hands in the zoom.

Thank you for your patience.

Laura can slider, Luz Hernandez, Roche, Jozel, David Boatright, Jasmine Hertz, Avery Arbo, Arba.

Sorry if I mispronounced your name.

Adriana Martinez, Alberto Para, Michael Wharton, Greg Slaughter, Jonah Hole or How?

Sorry for mispronounce your name.

Zeta Mays, Miss Shelley, Charlotte, Armando Sorzano, Michelle Williams, Lauren Matt, Zach Lou, Athena Wheaton, Ash Wag Wagnus, Amy Martin, Robert Robarn, Kathy Eberhart.

That is the first batch.

I will continue with the next batches after we hear from this.

And taking chairs privileged, can our partners from BART come and speak first?

Victor Flores.

Thank you.

Is my time starting?

Thank you.

Council members, good evening.

My name is Victor Flores.

I have the honors of representing downtown West Oakland, East Oak and parts of East Oakland as well as North Oakland.

Thank you all so much for the work in meeting with us to get our insights on the impacts for our critical infrastructure.

As you all know, we are the backbone of the region's transportation network.

But one of the issues that we face is making sure that we can keep our infrastructure safe, not only for our riders, but also our community members.

We do run high voltage electricity along our trackway and any fire impacts due to the cloud, not what I'll be quick too, so.

I'll wrap up.

We just want to make sure that we're working in partnership with the City of Oakland.

So we're looking forward to continue those discussions to make sure that we can fine-tune the language and continue to be good neighbors and partners with the City of Oakland and our community members here.

We appreciate that the city is doing a lot of work to move forward in the right direction, which helps us also recover as we come back from the COVID pandemic.

So thank you all so much and look forward to continue that conversation.

Thank you.

Can I ask you a chair?

Can can you elaborate?

Sir, can you elaborate on something real quick, please for me?

So does he get extra time?

You're out of order.

Are you are you saying that we need more low sensitivity zones or more high sensitivity zones when you when you mention what you mentioned?

When we're looking at the language, we want to make sure that we're when we talk look at the sensitive infrastructure, that we're being very specific about the rail infrastructure, so that we in the future don't get deprioritized as you're looking as you're weighing out where to invest your resources.

So you're saying more high sensitivity zones then for I'm not saying more high sensitivity zones.

I'm I think what I'm saying is more uh clear language.

Okay.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

Patricia Brooks and Councilmember Houston say that when the city displaces and dispossesses people, the health and safety consequences become the county's responsibility.

It's immoral and irresponsible to neglect our collective duty of care to the most vulnerable.

You need to stop passing the buck to the county and do your part by identifying land for county-funded housing interventions, activate vacant lots for supported governed wellness communities where people can heal and make progress towards housing.

Identifying land 90 days after enforcement begins is totally ass backwards.

If you give people a place to go, you won't need all this draconian enforcement, which will divert resources from essential city services towards a policy that doesn't actually solve homelessness.

The police can already investigate crimes and tow vehicles without notice.

They don't need new authority.

AC Health will not let you make referrals to hundreds of new county funded beds if you do reckless and chaotic sweeps.

You must adopt humane standards to access those resources that you need to resolve encampments, uh my name is Richie Jozo, uh, live in District 3.

Uh, I think it's telling that the uh Cal ICH has concerns about the EAP.

I also have concerns about the EAP.

This policy is inhumane.

Point blank period.

Not only is it inhumane, but it will not solve homelessness.

Homelessness cannot be solved by arresting people.

Uh the mayor has created a new office for homelessness, yet the council members have not worked with this office, and I want to know why, and I think the public also knows what wants to know why.

I would like that address now.

Now possible.

That's it.

Thank you.

I don't even know.

I know we just say anything you want to say.

Hello, my name is Charlotte.

I'm a resident in District 2.

I want to talk about some of the shifty rhetoric that is being used to push the EAP.

I'm talking about all the vague fear-mongering about crime, suggesting that people in encampments somehow have carte blanche to engage in human trafficking and drug dealing and whatever else.

In September, you had an OPD spokesman right there, and when you asked if there was anything preventing OPD from enforcing criminal law, criminal now, not the vehicle code, he told you point blank that there is nothing.

I'm talking about saying we need to make open ADA compliant and just leaving out that most in-house people aren't disabled, and their wheelchairs, walkers, and meds regularly get swept up in sweeps.

I'm talking about insisting that this is not a moral lapse, and then wondering out loud, well, if they're not even from here, do we even have a responsibility?

Yes, you do.

Shut up.

I'm talking about the grandstanding about how conditions in encampments are so bad.

We can't let people live like this.

When we know that behind closed doors, the authors are giddy about the load grants passed took off your hands, just dying to pass the buck to the county.

If you're thinking about voting for this because you want to seem proactive and don't want to vote for the status quo, just know.

Zach Lou.

Speaking as an Oakland resident that is very concerned about the proposed encampment abatement policy that would further criminalize and dehumanize our most vulnerable residents.

Um I know this will likely come back next year, and especially concerning is the provision to enable the mass confiscation and towing of vehicles that people live in, threatening to take away the very things they would need to find stable housing.

And this is a very dark time with rising authoritarianism, the gutting of our social safety net, and ice kidnapping people off the streets.

And instead of Oakland being a beacon of light, the proposed EAP is directly out of a right-wing playbook.

I mean, this literally aligns with the Trump executive order issued earlier this year.

So I urge you to reject this proposal and instead support real solutions with the same urgency urgency as was shown with this effort that would only worsen the homelessness crisis.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Ash Wagner, and I work in District 3.

I work for the Center for Independent Living, an organization that was founded by and for people with disabilities.

And it's no coincidence that the people, most of the people that would be affected by the encampment management policy are disabled.

It's no coincidence that most of the people who'd be affected are black and brown, and it's no coincidence that most of the people who'd be affected by this policy are elders.

We have seen the systematic exclusion and dispossession in Oakland again and again.

Wanting to prevent death, injury, and exposure to weather.

But all I see in this policy is more death, more harm, and more people left without shelter.

This policy will not make anyone safer.

Housing will make people safer.

We have beautiful examples of homeless people's solutions to homelessness with home.

Hello, uh, my name is Avery Arva.

I'm formerly homeless.

I'm an organizer with ACE, and I'm a tenant union member and organizer.

Um I'm here today to speak on this item uh and encourage you to vote no.

Um I know it's not up for a vote today, but uh when it comes back uh in January, I I want you to uh consider the fact that uh the policy as it was proposed uh tonight uh would would have hurt our most vulnerable uh neighbors, uh clearing camps, uh is causes of public height health crisis within our communities.

It uh prevents people from forming stability and getting out of uh this situation, and it doesn't solve the issue, as many people have said before.

Criminalizing and arresting people uh kicks the can down the road and doesn't solve anything.

Uh what we need is homes, not criminalization.

Ready for me?

Hi, uh my name is Riley.

I'm speaking against the proposed encampment abatement policy, against the current encampment management policy and for housing first solutions.

The idea that some groups of people must be removed from society in order to prove in order to improve society for others is a definition of fascism.

In Oakland, we have a fascist approach to people experiencing homelessness.

I empathize with people who are frightened and uncomfortable with homelessness in their communities.

I also don't want to have to walk through encampments on my way home.

But remember that the people who are the most affected by homelessness are not the people living next to encampments, it's the people living in encampments.

These people are not the cause of homelessness.

Homelessness is caused by public policy that allows for rampant housing speculation that puts real estate profits over communities, and by our lack of social safety nets.

In a country, in a country where the middle class, the poor, did you hear your name through the chair?

If you heard your name, please approach the podium.

If not, yes.

Well, if you're the group of 25.

I'm sorry, yeah.

Yeah, it I'm in the group of 25 that was called.

Okay.

Um, hi, uh, I'm Michelle Williams, uh, district one resident.

I'm a public health professional and a developer of permanent supportive housing.

Uh it's gonna take decades to resolve the humanitarian crisis of housing affordability and homelessness that this city has helped create.

And if you think that you can evict and displace thousands of Oaklanders and have them magically end up in permanent housing that does not exist, you are diluting yourselves.

The evidence is clear the EAP will bring needless death and suffering to thousands of Oakland's people while bleeding the city budgets dry so that the EAP's creators and proponents can personally profit from the destruction.

I urge you not to entertain this criminal and cowardly betrayal of the EAP's author's sacred duty to serve Oakland's people.

I urge you to vote no wholesale on the encampment abatement policy and any of the tinkering around the edges amendments that may come about.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

We'll move to the next back.

Um through the chair to the zoom.

We will proceed with Zoom once we've heard all in chamber speakers.

Calling our next batch.

Irene Farnsworth, Zach Stern, Damon Johnson, Jasmine Sozie, JT T.

O'Dora.

We have a Damon Johnson, a duplicate card for Damon.

Ryan from grassroots, Julia Feinberg, Jessica Lehman, Brittany Henderson Wilson, Latif McLeod, Paolo Arango, John Lindsay Poland, Jesse Newen, Aza Azabie, Kari Maliki, Tosh Newen, Edward Martin, Batman, Meesh Cabal, Carter Griffin, Mom, Carter Griffin.

Oh, I'm sorry, Miss Maven.

And Alison Pam, in no particular order.

Please state your name for the record.

Hello, everybody.

My name is Damon Suja Johnson.

I'm the executive director of Black Man Speak.

And I'm looking with my family's been in Oakland since 1942.

My grandfather, Dr.

Otis Steelwell built the Oakland acorns, built to Charles Bolden Alley in 1948.

Oakland gave him 150,000 of black men to do business here.

And now this I'm a peer specialist and a trainer.

The one thing in the peer movement we say, because everybody here is a peer is not uh what's wrong with you, but what happened to you.

And to make a move, and I'm also a returning family member.

I was incarcerated 34 years.

I just returned home about six years ago.

I'm in shock.

Uh because we look at a law today, we make a rule or policy.

What does it look like in 10 years, 20 years?

Affirmative action.

We have laws, proposition uh 27, uh care court proposition one.

It seems like it's a reinstitutionalization of poor people.

Uh, we don't have enough housing.

Thank you for your comments, Mr.

Johnson.

Good evening.

Uh I go by Batman of San Jose.

I am an advocate for the unhoused homeless community throughout the Bay Area.

And I'm disappointed but not surprised with this policy, and I want to bring you a word of warning.

I've been to almost every single meeting in the Bay Area regarding a policy such as this, and every single one of these ordinances that have passed.

People have died.

People I know personally have died.

People have taken their own lives, people have lost their lives due to exposure to the elements.

And it's appalling.

It's disgusting, it's revolting that there's such a policy.

And I want you to pay attention to me, uh, Houston.

I would like you to pay attention to me when I'm talking, that this policy is coming to conversation.

You need to turn this policy away before more people die because it will happen, and it is going to, it is happening now.

Stop.

Thank you for your comments.

Hello, let's see.

Hi, I'm Zach Stern with uh I reside in District One.

Um the original EAP presentation prominently cited the Supreme Court grants grants pass ruling, which said it's legal to criminalize people for being unhoused, for not even being able to afford housing.

This was a moral failure for the ruling itself, and for us to embrace it here locally.

Is Oakland better than this?

We need to listen to unhoused people and support them with programs and housing that they ask for.

If we're trying to protect our marginalized communities from fascism on a national level, we can't create new tools to do their work here locally.

Please, when this comes back again, it keeps coming back.

Let's please vote against it and end it for one final time.

Thank you.

Hi, I hope I don't start crying.

Um I'm Maven Carter Griffin, Woodspee People's Collective.

I'm also on the steering committee for the homeless activist working group last year on Wood Street while I was living in the easement and promoting our different type of community.

I was displaced, made more homeless.

They took my trailer and smashed it up and distributed my belongings into a dumpster for everybody to go through, and I was left with nothing, and I've been living without any shelter at all except for what I could make out of foam cardboard stuff.

And I did my best, but you know, I was under six inches of water this very last rain.

My cats are all sneezing and about to succumb to bad health, and and I had pneumonia at Christmas and almost died.

What I want to propose to you guys is that these policies didn't include us.

We didn't sit at the table and help or have word about what we go through to help form better policy.

What we need to consider in adapting encampment policies, we need to have some unhoused people that are together enough to be able to present ideas and curative answers from our perspective and come together, unity in community.

And what thank you for your comments.

We as Oakland must stand against this act of dehumanization if we want to support and look out for all of our communities.

Child care accessible to all, but especially for our homeless.

Our homeless residents are also Oakland.

And as such, we must show our Oakland strength by giving them strength.

If we want to raise Oakland up, we must start from the ground up.

If we want Oakland to be prosperous, we must all be prosperous.

Oakland's homeless populace deserves the same peace and respect as our house do.

You want to be Oakland strong?

Then give your strength to everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

If you heard your name and still wish to speak in the first two batches, please approach the podium.

If not, I will call the next batch of names.

Please approach the podium, or raise your hand in the Zoom app, reminding the public that we will get to the Zoom speakers once we have commenced with all of our in chamber speakers.

Nicole Dean or DN, Nikki, Stephanie, Tiny or Tinny Garcia, Leah J.

Harper, Linda Warwick, Warwick, Alley Cat, Larry, Satia or Satya, Jazz, C.

Deliberi.

Sorry for mass mispronounce your name.

Sarah Malish Nate Peterson, Matt Boyd, Camille, Sakrish, Kriston, Carmen Jovel, Megan Cordon, Gordon, sorry, Elliot Tristan, Aaron, Nuan Neff, Peyton Yin, Peter Brown.

You may line up if you heard your name.

Henry Simmons or Simons, James Van, Taylor H.

Bridget Nicoletti, Michael, Hayes.

Please state your name for the record.

Hi, my name is Nate Peterson.

I'm a district two resident, and I'm an organizer with Care for Community Action.

With Care for Community Action, I've been knocking on doors, where we've been speaking with Oakland residents about the in EAP for months.

And over that time, I've personally spoken with dozens of people.

Those residents are not at all interested in policy that doesn't provide solutions and that wastes city resources.

From talking to residents.

What they do want to see are solutions like programs to provide permanent supportive housing, designated sites for parking for RVs and other vehicles, designated safe camping locations, and at all of these sites, providing services like trash pickup, mental and physical health and addiction services and others.

People want to see vacant buildings and lots used for these sites.

To put it simply, people believe that other the people need a place to go, and that place should have services for people, and we should be providing services.

I have a few people seeding time to me.

Um, should I state their names?

Sierra Warwick, Linda Warwick, Kelsey Hubbard, and Samine Lee.

They're on Zoom.

Through the chair, what is your name?

My name is Satya.

Cynthia?

Satya.

Satya, do you have your yellow confirmations?

Uh sheet through the chair.

Okay, and one last time.

Who was seeding your time through the chair?

Sierra Warwick, Linda Warwick, Kelsey Hubbard, and Simeen Lee.

One moment through the chair.

Seeing through the chair.

You said Kelsey, Linda.

Are they time?

Through the chair to Linda Warwick.

Do you cede your time?

I do.

Thank you.

Through the chair to Kelsey Hubbard.

Do you cede your time?

Thank you.

And you said Sierra through the chair.

Yes, I do.

Okay, thank you.

And then through the chair to the parliamentarian, if I'm not mistaken, think believe the max to see time is a total of four minutes or five minutes.

I'm not mistaken.

Uh five minutes.

Five minutes.

Okay, you have four people that seated their time.

And the last name, I'm sorry, to the chair, we had Sierra Linda Kelsey and Simeen Lee.

Simi.

With the S that's through the chair.

Yes.

Ms.

Simi, can you raise your hand if you're still in Zoom?

Okay, we can start with the four minutes through the chair, and if Simi raises their hand.

I have if Simeon's not there, I have one other person who could cede their time.

Um Tanya Ortega.

Okay, I've located Simi with the S.

Sime, you may unmute.

Do you seed your time?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

You begin your five minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Satya.

I'm here speaking against the EAP today in the hopes that this governing body, like myself, would like to see the city of Oakland institute real accountability and repair for the ongoing harm caused by decades of segregation and gentrification in Oakland, both of which created the conditions of homelessness and poverty on this land.

The City of Oakland established segregated housing in 1943.

They split black and white workers between West Oakland and the Lower Bottoms and East Oakland by the estuary.

Continuing the long cycle of displacement and gentrification enforced by racial capitalism.

The City of Oakland describes her neighbors as unhoused on their website.

Let me be clear, it is the city that unhoused them.

It is the city of Oakland who allows our neighbors to die on the streets while the capitalists and developers hoard buildings and empty apartments.

I know that you're all here to propose amendments to the EAP or in January, a policy that would allow for more violent display, violent and racist displacement and theft from the poor.

Many of us are here to tell you that this needs to go back to the drawing board.

Over half of Oakland's unhoused population lives in vehicles, most of them inoperable, simply as a way to have reasonable shelter from the elements.

Regardless of the proposed amendments, the very framework of this policy is one that further dispossesses people and degrades their living conditions instead of improving them.

That is unacceptable.

The people who have spoken in this chamber to refuse this deathly policy are organized and mobilized, and there are many of us.

Every level of government is currently moving to cut basic services from the defunding of Medicare and Section 8 housing to the closure of several city-run shelters and safe parking sites just this year.

As we brace for another wave of newly unhoused working class families onto this onto the streets, the city of Oakland will see those abandoned by the federal and local governments to homelessness and starvation organized with one another to survive.

And this is only the beginning.

We don't just want amendments.

We don't want to pretend that equity considerations are even applicable to a policy that is fundamentally built to accelerate racist gentrification, police violence against the poor, and death on our streets.

We want for the people in this city to be fed and housed.

We want we want accountability for what has been done to people here over the years.

We want the city of Oakland to set an example, to refuse to legitimize the national war on the poor, and to sit down with the organizations that have been proposing holistic solutions for years, if not decades, only to be turned away repeatedly in favor of billionaires and developers who offer no long-term economic or social repair to the people, but who I guess have the money to fund your reelection campaigns.

One additional thing that I want to add with the rest of my time is that I've heard a lot of narrative and rhetoric around the idea that uh certain people don't want to build uh safe parking or interim housing sites or even permanent supportive housing in district six or seven because of equity concerns, stating that uh it's unfair, and that uh the specific argument being used is uh why are there so many people on the streets specifically in these districts?

The answer is that the people on the streets in those districts are from those districts and they've been displaced from their homes onto the streets.

Additionally, the best economic investment that you can make in a community is lifting up people who have been excluded from economic participation in society into a position where they are able to participate, and the first step to that is creating a place to stay where they are welcomed in their hometown and in their neighborhoods.

Thank you.

Um, I'm Aaron Noan.

I'm a senior staff attorney at Disability Rights Education Defense Fund and also resident of District 2.

Uh, Drediff has been a leader in civil and human rights for people with disabilities for the last 45 years.

And we're really struck that in this encampment abatement policy, not once does it take into consideration the needs of people with disabilities, despite the fact that they're disproportionately represented among the unhoused population.

Instead of providing accessible shelters and accommodations for people with disabilities, this new policy will undoubtedly make life harder for people with disabilities.

In terms of our Vs, these are a crucial lifeline for people with disabilities who cannot access accessible shelter and housing and have nowhere else to go.

Yet this policy removes the protections that currently exist for our Vs.

This inevitably means that RVs and vehicles that serve as a last resort for a home will be towed and destroyed.

Criminalization is not the answer.

It's housing and compassion.

Hi, yes, my name is Ellie Kent, and I am a I am to right now living in my RV.

I'm running from the city of Oakland with my RV so that I cannot so they don't destroy it.

Um I am from Oakland.

I'm born and raised in Oakland, and we don't even know that we can speak at these meetings and things like this.

You guys don't reach out to us, you guys don't listen to us, and you think we are criminals.

I work currently working two jobs and lost my housing, not section eight, regular housing.

So the rent is so high we can't afford it.

So now we end up in this RV, and sometimes they break down and you guys promise us safe RV parking, and guess what?

You guys don't.

Then you come back with that machine and eat it up and then we don't have anything, take everything from us.

So I just wish you guys would not think that we are criminals because we are not.

We just want somewhere to live comfortably and be able to live our life with our families too.

My name is Jazz, and I go out every day and almost every night to support unhoused loved ones here in Occupy Twee Chin, so-called Oakland, who are being displaced actively by the city every day with taxpayers' money with state funds, with federal funds, millions of dollars going to people being at put at risk to have all of their shelter and belongings taken away from them every day of the work week.

And this doesn't make any sense.

The fact that this is already being treated as if this policy has passed by the cops and by the encampment management teams that are going out and taking people's belongings without notice, are towing RVs while people are not at home without putting an orange tag OPD is doing this already, even though this has not passed through council, and the fact that all this money is being wasted on this when homefulness and Wood Street exists and are housing people and are helping people move.

Like I'd like to start off by saying I agree with Councilmember Jenkins.

We shouldn't be delaying this conversation.

We should actually make sure it's off the table for good.

But to me, council member, it sounds like you have one of two goals: either to force the home the unhoused out of their hometown or maybe put them on the streets to be arrested to have them jailed on our tax money and have them work tirelessly for less than minimum wage.

Unhoused people, our kids, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles.

If you want to tear the community away from you, council members, passing the EAP is exactly the way to do it.

You know, the turn is actually pretty great here.

What do we think?

Yes or no?

Yes or no?

Now I'd like to relay some info from Professor Peter Brown at Laney College.

Eight out of ten Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.

Homelessness nationwide grew 35% in two years, and that rate is accelerating.

Cities like New York have turned to democratic socialism because they know.

Hello, my name is Matt Boyd.

I'm an organizer with Care for Community Action.

Since this was proposed, we've been talking to a lot of people in West Oakland.

Um personally, I haven't talked to anybody who thinks the current situation is okay because it's not, but I haven't talked to anybody who really thinks this proposal is going to actually fix anything either, and that's housed to end that unhoused people.

Uh people understand that if you move people around or tow their cars, they don't just stop existing.

Someone who's moved from one place might be in front of their house tomorrow.

When they look around their front porch, they see land that's just going unused and weeds are growing on it, sometimes even owned by the state.

And you know, when they hear, well, why not safe parking spots at the very least?

Why not build confortable housing on it?

Those are the ideas they respond to.

My name is Michael Hawes, homeless since uh 5 December 2012, and have had a lot of experiences, including having my vehicle towed uh 3 June of this year.

Part of the reason I'm here is to give six month notice to the city that damage to my vehicles uh compensable.

Um back when uh I was in Noel Gallows district, we worked together on Saturdays picking up garbage in Union Point Park and uh just to try and resolve the situation of the homeless.

But over the course of all these years, nobody's actually said what can we do to help you?

This, Mr.

Houston, uh is really not a valid agreement.

Uh encampment to exclude vehicles.

Um this is following trying to follow the grants pass ruling, uh federal ruling, which allowed for clearances under state property, but it allows the police to tow their vehicle.

Uh Nicole Dean.

Uh make some noise if you think public land should be used for public good.

The encampment management policy didn't fail because it wasn't punitive enough.

It failed because it's unenforceable in practice, and the EAP is no different.

How is it realistic to expect that OPD, Public Works, and Oak Dot, departments that already struggle to meet their current responsibilities, are going to successfully implement a very labor-intensive directive without any additional resources.

How is it the realistic solution to push thousands of people out of vehicles and onto the sidewalk?

That's gonna improve sanitation issues?

Your constituents don't think so.

Instead of wasting money playing musical chairs with people's lives, we could stand up real solution sites on publicly owned parcels.

We could work with the city and the county to offer safe, structured, designated spaces for unhoused people to live in.

Allow unhoused and housed neighbors to work together to keep away the kinds of people who take advantage of encampments to commit crime.

And again, we will get to our Zoom users once we are done with our in-chamber speakers, Delphine Brody, Al Ujimori, I believe these are all on Zoom.

Alex Pinegist Pinickish.

Sorry if I mispronounce your name.

Uh Angelina Cornejo, and Harvey, Armando Solorenzo, Solarzano, sorry, Becky Home, Hom, Blair Beekman, Brock DeLap, Lappe, Chuck Brown, Damian Scott, David Motors Back, Dolores Tahata, Emily Willer, Aaron Gravely, Iman Khalil, Jeff Levin, Jennifer Finley, Jessica Lemon or Lehman, Josephine Guzman, Juan Canhan, Ken Norriso, Ledette Awoke, Lily Robles.

If you heard your name, you may approach the podium without further delay.

Hi, my name is Alex Pinnegas, and I'm a district four homeowner here with Justice Cities and the Housing and Dignity Project.

When this item was being considered by the public safety committee, we requested five analyses to be done.

A racial equity impact analysis by the Department of Race and Equity, which ensures city policies do not result in racial inequities, a budget analysis because during a budget crisis, the city cannot afford costly ineffective sweeps.

A legal analysis by the city attorney on whether this policy violates the Mariae settlements or any other laws, a Berkeley Human Rights Center analysis to determine whether this proposal violates human rights laws and a health impacts analysis from the county public health department.

Today's agenda doesn't include any of these analyses.

Why is the full council deliberating this proposal when the committee has not done its due diligence to understand its impacts?

The city's policy around homelessness is failing and needs to improve, but this policy will make things worse.

Vote no on the policy.

Thank you for your comments.

Hello, Becky Hamm with the Asian Pacific Environmental Network.

I'm here today to oppose the EAP.

One of the reasons stated for this policy is that the current encampment management policy is not working.

Why is the answer then another policy that will make it harder for people to become stable in the long run?

It will likely make the problem worse by removing people from their shelters and encampment without being able to provide housing for most people, putting people in more precarious positions, which can exacerbate physical and mental health problems, even causing death.

So really should be.

Let's see, the shift in policy instead of waiting for more shelter, permanent supporting housing, and more to exist.

Vote no on the encampment abatement plan.

Work with the houseless community to come up.

Hi, I'm Juan, a D4 resident, member of the tenants union and a democratic socialist.

I'd like to thank the council for pushing this back.

I've stayed to emphasize that the most effective thing the council has done on homelessness was the eviction moratorium.

No possible, there's no solution to the homelessness crisis that doesn't involve preventing people being made homeless in the first place.

Anything that's being proposed at the moment is just a non-starter.

If it is an emergency, we should treat it as such and bring the moratorium back until we can find places for all of our unhoused neighbors to stay.

Voters keep approving funds for affordable housing, measure KK, measure Q, measure U, Measure W.

Do we need to run out of letters before you'll listen to us and actually stop building the 3,000 beds and homes instead of focusing on punishing people?

The only council member I've seen take this seriously is Councilmember Fife, who was trying to get the army barracks used for temporary housing.

Um but it looks like the city administration would rather.

Thank you for your comments.

Okay, Blair Beekman, Missisada Olabala, Chris, I don't know, this is Jez Chris McKay.

Sorry for mispronounce your name, Brock Wilson, DeLap, Kevin Hester, Michael, Paiatok, Puman, Pullman, sorry for Miss Pronounce your name, Wong.

Alex Pingis, Patricia, Toscano, William Durr, Erica Gordon, Willow Brackman, Bracken, Erica Bracken, Liz, uh Liz Imba, Yazid, Chris Taha or Tohof, Barley Astano Falls.

Sorry, mispronounce your name, Miss Celia, Cunningham, Lagna, stop the sweeps, and Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Boss.

Okay.

Uh these people in here are talking about taking homelessness seriously.

If you take homelessness seriously, you would be in every meeting like me talking about homelessness.

Don't pop up on one meeting and talk about what has to be happening with homelessness and call yourself being serious.

I can speak about homelessness.

I've said it before, I lost everything in 2005.

I've been homeless ever since.

But I've been blessed because I have a family that has given me homes to live in.

And correct.

We can't continue to have people living on sidewalks with all the illegal.

Hi, hello.

My name is Puimon Wong, a D2 homeowner, a former federal official at USAID and USCPA for over two decades.

As an international humanitarian urban planner, I manage large-scale encampments in war and disaster zones globally.

Join us in ending the uh hello, council.

My name is Barley Anastas.

I'm a resident of District 2.

Uh, I'm also a member of ACE, that's the Association of Californians for Community Empowerment.

I encourage you to vote against this policy.

This will not solve the issue of homelessness in our community.

It will only temporarily disappear the issue, only for it to reappear in the future.

It also risked losing county funding for homeless services.

This is a sad weak attempt at fixing homelessness in our community.

We can do better than this.

The best way to tackle this issue is by providing people with housing.

We have an opportunity to provide an example of how to deal with this issue to the rest of the country, and I think you all have heard exactly how everybody here feels about this today.

Thank you.

There's actually Layla.

Oh, it's over here.

Sorry.

Sorry.

It's under Layla's Stop the Sweeps.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Okay.

Um just give me a second to compose.

Okay.

Um.

This walker right here.

Hope lift it up.

It's a little bit heavy.

This walker was um, I even helped save it at a sweep.

Actually, I want you guys to know Ivan Satterfield, who's doing a lot of these crooked sweeps or in charge of them, is humiliating people.

And he's cruel to people, and it's wrong.

And if it wasn't for one of his workers that actually cared, he asked if we wanted to save this.

This walker could be used by people right now, you know, and this would be uh clogging up our landfill for no reason.

This is not a solution.

You know, you know humiliating people is what's causing a lot of deaths, literally.

Evictions, whether it's unhoused or housed people, is literally killing people.

Look up Darlene Cheney and her brother Derek in Atlanta.

They are assuming the city of Atlanta because of the crushing of Cornelius Taylor, their brother.

And lawsuits are gonna happen if you guys don't stop this, and they should still happen, even if you don't, you have to stop.

Thank you for your comments.

Hi, we're beakman.

I was signed up on Zoom, but I made it to the meeting, so I figured it'd be better to speak here in person.

Hi.

Um I've been uh I work with tech accountability for the past 10 years here in uh the Bay Area and in San Diego also, uh, open public policies and such.

Um I've been really impressed with public speakers tonight uh talking about the importance of how we need to invite everyone to the table and to make Oakland strong.

It's it has to be a full community effort.

Um there's a rhythm and pattern over the years that sometimes you invite the homeless community to the process and sometimes you don't.

I hope this can be a time to really start asking um how to invite the the the house lists themselves.

Um deaths always happen with these sort of items, and that was also stated tonight, and that really moved me.

Uh, good luck how we can be working on this.

Check out Mountain View, by the way.

I think they tried to do a nice job.

They may be a bit disorganized, but they really tried.

Um, good luck in those sort of efforts.

My name is Mike Pyatak, and I'm requesting an additional minute.

One of the other speakers, Patricia Tascano is the chair.

What was your name?

Patricia Tuscano.

Patricia.

And then through the chair, your name.

Michael Payatok.

Michael, through the chair, thank you.

I live in District 2, have been there for almost 50 years now.

I'm a homeowner.

I'm not unhoused.

And I'm an architect who got designed a lot of affordable housing.

And even founded a business, so I'm a business owner in a sense, downtown Oakland.

But I have friends on both sides of this debate, and but I come to you today, firmly on the side of those who grew up here, who went to school here, who worked here for many years, but who now find themselves in an economic hole, unable to participate in this most expensive housing market in the country.

When I came to Oakland in 77, 45% of the residents were African American.

It's now only 20%.

And more than 50% of the unhoused are African American.

This proposed ordinance will only exacerbate the problem, sweeping people from their fragile communities with no alternative shelters.

There's only one shelter bed for every five unhoused people in Oakland.

Traumatized people removed from their self-created communities, will now be roaming the streets as itinerants in the wintertime.

Some will die, some will become emotionally unstable, and some will probably commit petty crimes just to survive.

Requesting the staff to make available all those city owned land that can be transformed quickly into shelters, either the sanctioned tent communities or RV communities or cabin communities.

But you're asking that study to be done in 90 days, it could be done in 30 days, with the help of volunteer architects, and I'm a member of an organization called Housing and Dignity that has a number of professionals and is guided by thoughtful leaders.

Thank you for your comments, good evening.

Is this working?

All right.

All right, good evening.

Uh my name is Lassimba Yazid.

I've been a citizen of this lovely city for about 18 years, grew up in Berkeley.

Uh both of my kids were born in my apartment in district two.

I'm here to stay, but what I'm hearing and seeing proposed this evening is an atrocity to any of you.

The fact that you're entertaining this as an option for our citizens.

I would humbly ask you to remember that you are servants of all of the people of Oakland.

And I know many of you are getting paid over a hundred thousand dollars to sit in your seats and make these decisions, and I ask you to make those decisions thinking as if you are one of those homeless people.

Okay.

I'm a member of Ace, that's Alliance of Californians for community empowerment.

I am an after-school teacher.

I teach uh soccer, poetry, and community service.

Thank you for your comments.

My name is William Dewar.

Good.

Um, not to be disrespectful, miss, but this is my first time at a city council meeting ever.

But I care and I'm confused.

Um, your jobs are to serve your community, not to move people out of the community.

Where do you expect people to go when you're directing funds at displacement rather than solutions?

All of these people come here today, many of us with expertise regarding the matter of encampment sweeps.

I'm an urban studies student at UC Berkeley, doing my senior capstone project on homelessness, and I can tell you that encampment sweeps are not the solution.

Beyond that, there's multiple unhoused people that have spoken today, giving you their direct experience.

I leave you with a question.

Is it is doing what's easy the right thing to do?

Thank you for your comments.

Okay.

There next batch, Noelle Forrest, Jack Peterson, Jacqueline Peters, Therese Maitros, Mistros, Maestros, sorry, Roche Z, Z, Z.

Peggy, you can name.

So sorry for mispronounce your name.

Carol Wyatt, Enzo, Nikki, Andrew Rice, Shaney Turner, Shaney Turner, Ray Can.

Exeodol XD Son, so sorry, Peggy Peters, Parish Scott.

Please state your name for the record.

Hi, my name is Yel Diesen.

I oppose the EAP.

You need to start over.

I know council isn't thinking about this problem creatively enough because the phrase safe parking is mentioned in the EAP exactly once.

It is to create a report to find safe parking.

This needs to happen before you pass the EAP.

If the Department of Transportation cannot tell us today where to park your vehicles after a sweep and transport them there, then it is not the AP is not ready.

The Department of Transportation OPD are not ready to enforce the EOEAP.

Right now, this work is being done by community members, volunteers who are scouting out locations and transporting belongings.

OPD is doing none of this work.

If the community has to step in, then the system is failing.

These bandit amendments is like trying to put a cherry on top of rotten food and then telling us that it is palatable.

You have to stop start over, and the community is more than willing to tell you how to do it.

Thank you for your comments.

We'll now move to our Zoom speakers.

Lorcan, can you please state the name of the call of the name that you provided for your card for speakers?

For you speaker comments.

Sorry, through the chair.

Laura Khan.

Lorcan Slider.

That's the name that you provided.

Yeah.

Okay.

You may begin your comments.

Thanks.

This is Loric and Flighter.

I'm a resident of District 4 and a housing and racial justice organizer in Oakland.

You removed the encampment abatement policy from the agenda tonight, but then allowed Ken Houston to ask pointed questions of a BART representative on public comment time.

That's corruption.

The EAP did not pass the public safety committee because hundreds of people came out to oppose it then, too.

And we will come out to oppose it no matter when you schedule it.

You cannot fix the EAP.

All you can do if you are serious about changing conditions in Oakland is to implement strategies from the people with experience living on Oakland streets and developing community systems of support.

These are the people who have positive solutions to the housing crisis that could actually improve all of our conditions.

Sweeps kill.

Repeated evictions make people more unsheltered, exacerbate chronic health conditions, and remove people from their social support.

Policies like our current encampment management policy and the EAP target the people in our city who are already the most systemic systemically oppressed.

The vast majority of the comments.

Your comments.

Hello.

There's no way to fix this.

This cruel and wasteful policy criminalizes homelessness by subjecting unhoused Oaklanders to arrest if they return to the site of a swept encampment.

It would, as as has been pointed out, legalize the city towing people's homes, people's RVs, which OPD is already doing to it's shame, and this is unconscionable.

Furthermore, the EAP will increase homelessness in Oakland.

Um, because it authorizes OPD um to displace people uh both by towing their vehicles and and destroying their homes um with no notice.

Uh this is this is cruel and egregious.

Um it also threatens Oakland's access to needed county resources.

Uh, thank you for your comments.

Jasmine Sozy, you may begin.

Um, good evening, council members.

My name is Jasmine Sozy.

I'm a district one resident and also a representative of the real people's organizing collective, a collective of small businesses and worker co-ops here in Oakland, fighting for a people-centered economy.

I'm also the board president of the Bay Area Community Land Trust, and I'm standing in the strongest opposition of the encampment abatement policy.

From a small business perspective and neighborhood perspective, this policy fails on every level.

Criminalizing our unhoused neighbors and bringing more police into our corridors does not does not help our neighborhoods, our unhoused neighbors, or small businesses.

It does not reduce encampments, it does not reduce trash, it doesn't make our anyone safer.

It simply forces people and their belongings from block to block.

That's not a solution.

It's displacement on repeat.

Oakland already spends $1,500 an hour on sweeps.

In this budget crisis, we cannot afford to pour more money into an approach that fails on every level in every study.

Criminalization doesn't work, housing and care do.

Please reject this policy and give real transformative strategies a chance to succeed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Let's see if McLeod.

Let's see if you're on unmuted.

You may begin.

Hello.

I am Dr.

Latief McLeod.

He and him pronouns.

I have been an Oakland resident for the last 21 years.

I am speaking in front of you today with the plea for you to vote no on this policy.

This will just punish and criminalize the most vulnerable in our society who have the misfortune to not have homes.

As was said before, most people without homes are also people of color and people with disabilities who face racist and ableist policies daily.

This policy is reminiscent of the ugly laws which criminalize people with disabilities in the 19th century.

San Francisco passed such ordinance in 1867.

We should not repeat history.

We do not need further criminalization, but more affordable homes.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Also noting, I don't believe I said the names of Courtney Simone Staten and Zoe or Zoe Nicolette Ceneres or Cenevos, if you're in chamber.

Okay.

Jesse in Zoom, may you say your name please state your last name so I can identify a card for you?

Noen.

Thank you.

You may begin.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Jesse Nguyen.

I am a Vietnamese food business owner of 10 years.

I work in District 5, representing the real people's organizing collective.

We are small businesses and co-ops fighting for an economy where all of us thrive.

Since 2022, we have organized with over 300 businesses in the town to help win a progressive business tax for the city of Oakland with 1.5 million of funding for community safety investors and 400k and small business grants.

From the hundreds of conversations we've had with small businesses, we know safety and cleanliness are a top priority.

But Council Member Houston is pushing forward a dangerous proposal that he insists small businesses want.

It would criminalize homelessness and harm the physical and emotional health of unhoused people.

This policy is not a solution and definitely not what our small businesses want with our tax dollars.

We know when all residents are housed and cared for, our small businesses thrive.

We urge you to vote no on the encampment abatement policy, protect measure W, and support solutions rooted in dignity and care of our people.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Asa?

B?

Hi, um Kari Malki will be yielding their time to me.

So requesting an additional minute.

Okay.

Yes, this is one key.

I yield my time to Asa.

Thank you.

We'll have two minutes on the clock.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Asa B.

D6 resident and organizer of Restore Oakland.

Perhaps it'd be wise of me to simply echo the powerful words of my community, which expose this proposal's ludicrous display of local leadership.

But I must directly address you, Councilmember Houston, and I do hope I have your undivided attention at this moment.

As you're the central culprit who'd be responsible for the ruthless ongoing destruction of our streets if your council doesn't harness its political will to do as you wish to the people and trash this EAP with a staunch vote no.

You claim yourself to be the quote unquote son of Oakland, but no true son of Oakland with integrity would shamefully fill your seat today.

A true son of Oakland would refuse to be fiscally obsequious to corporate PAC lobbyists like Philip Dreyfus, who invests in the recall efforts of progressive leaders, the coal industry's pollution of our air, and the disenfranchisement of queer neighbors like me at the ballot box in an effort to squash Prop Six, just to line his pockets at the expense of his own people.

A true son of Oakland would recognize the historical hangover of 20th century urban renewal and the ongoing nightmare of modern-day gentrification you extol, refusing to perpetuate the widespread removal and caging of his culturally rich black and brown neighbors under the guise of public safety, a white supremacist tale older than time.

A true son of Oakland would know that in this town, we don't sweep dignified people away like thankless waste, but house them like family because we keep each other safe.

I yield my time.

Okay, thank you.

Moving along.

Mish.

Cabal.

You may unmute yourself and begin your comments, Mish.

Hi, my name is Mish Cabal.

I would team city council to affirm the dignity of people experiencing houselessness by voting no on this encampment abatement policy.

People experiencing houselessness deserve dignity, community solutions and care and not to be swept like trash on the street.

I became houseless for the first time this past May, two weeks after my best friend and sole family died, Hodari Blue, and six months later, my closest grandma Area passed.

A community member earlier today reminded me that so many are just one incident away from becoming houseless.

In the last nine months, I had unstable work, had spent nights in my car, got my car towed, and I had to move from house to house.

I'm infinitely grateful for the friends and family that have given me soft places to land and supported me through, but I'm pained and enraged that there are countless beloveds who are denied access to life-saving resources, being criminalized for their situation, and are disposed of and displaced in cruel ways like the deadly sweeps.

From human to human and from my heart to yours, vote no on this policy that denies the dignity of thank you for your comments.

Moving to Jeff Levin, you may unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Jeff.

Thank you.

Good evening, Jeff Levin, Senior Policy Director with East Bay Housing Organizations.

We've already submitted written comments in opposition to this policy, and we agree with the many people who've spoken in opposition tonight.

Personally, as someone who has spent the last 40 years working to solve Oakland's affordable housing challenges, I am outraged and embarrassed by this proposal.

You act as if the problem is unhoused people rather than homelessness itself.

Oakland deserves better.

We don't think this proposal should be brought back, but if it is, there must be a more democratic process.

First, what's described on page six of the staff report as public outreach is completely inadequate.

Broad stakeholder participation is required, which must include unhoused people and the organizations that work directly with them.

Second, this must be scheduled at a regular meeting.

When you put this on the agenda for a special meeting, the public only gets three days to review the materials.

And finally, it must be scheduled at a time that allows for broad participation by the thank you, Jeff, for your comments.

Victoria's son, you may unmute yourself, Victoria and begin.

Hi, my name is Victoria's son, and I am an nonprofit immigration attorney at Tangia Legal Services.

I'm also a resident of Oakland District 2.

Um, I want to share a story of how this kind of policy can absolutely devastate an individual's life.

Um one of my clients, he became homeless due to um housing and affordability.

He ended up spending his life savings on a car, which would serve as transportation to his job and a place for him to sleep.

During a similar encampment as one proposed in this policy, his car was towed and impounded.

He lost his job as a result, and he couldn't have he couldn't find a new job because he had no car, he couldn't afford the impound fees, his green card and social security card were stolen, and now eight years later, he is still homeless because of that one encampment sweep.

It caused devastating effects, and we'll see this happen for thousands of our neighbors and fellow Oakland residents if you pass this policy.

Thank you for your comments.

Sanford Forte, Sanford, Forte.

You may begin.

Through the chair to Sanford, Forte.

Okay.

Sanford Forte, West Oakland neighbors.

A dysfunctional codependency exists between the city of Oakland and Alameda County's homeless service apparatus, including homeless advocates.

Some believe that Oakland can save every out and unhoused person, sixty-seven percent of whom are mentally ill or drug addicted, to settle anywhere they want or do whatever they want, including refusing or leaving treatment, returning thousands to the street, often to die.

Alameda County spends hundreds of millions of dollars on harm reduction services that do not work at scale.

Result, neighborhoods turned into dysfunctional drug and mental health treatment centers.

The AEP is needed therapy, an adult in the room, bringing serious controls to restore civil order in our public commons and streets, and insisting on mandatory humane long-term care for unhoused residents who are mentally ill or drug addicted.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Moving to Peter.

Peter, may you please state your last name so I can ensure that we have a card for you, Peter?

Peter Brown.

You may begin.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Peter Brown, District 5.

Uh, some will assume these comments are simply opinions, so let me be clear.

I'm a professor of manufacturing technology at Laney College.

My research for the past 25 years has been the interaction of technology, the economy, and society.

My sources are solid.

Today's economy is not the economy that supported affordable housing, health care, food, and education.

Manufacturers have used automation and now AI to eliminate workers from production and to reduce pay for most of those remaining.

By 2017, the U.S.

labor department said six out of 10 were living paycheck to paycheck.

Now it's eight out of ten.

Homelessness grew 35% in the last two years.

The working class is in action.

Zoran Momdani won the mayorship of New York City, one of the great centers of capitalism in the world.

Chicago and Seattle are going the same way.

If you vote for this EAP, you will vote against the actual community.

And it will print against a system that turns housing into Thank you for your comments.

Leah J.

Harper.

You may begin, Lee.

Thank you.

My name is Leger Harper.

I was a resident for 10 years on Wood Street, now homeful for the rest of my life at homefulness, and I'm here to urge you not to pass the encampment abatement policy because sweeps kill.

We're not advocating for people to remain outside.

We're advocating for people not to be further harmed, displaced, and dehumanized.

This policy doesn't solve homelessness.

It simply moves beings around out of sight as if erasing them were the same as helping them.

While the amendments may soften the language, the impact remains the same.

More sweeps, more trauma, and more public money spent pushing people from block to block instead of investing in real solutions.

Every dollar spent on clearing encampments is a dollar taken from systems that are already underfunded.

Oakland can't afford policies that make the crisis work.

We need investment in stability, housing, and human dignity, not another strategy designed to make people disappear.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Bridget Nicoletti, you are next.

Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.

My name is Bridget Nicoletti, and I'm an attorney at the Estate Community Law Center and District 1 resident.

Um, instead of spending more time and energy trying to amend and save the EAP, I want to put the council to partner with unhoused people and also to community-led organizations to come up with holistic and sustainable solutions to the city's affordable housing crisis.

You've heard about some of these solutions tonight, and I know people have a lot more to say.

With federal cuts to HUD funding and section eight likely on the way, Oakland should be organizing to save those tendencies and increase access to affordable housing.

Sweeps are not the solution.

They are cruel and they are a waste of money.

And the council should take this opportunity to think creatively and proactively.

I know there are many people, including our organization who'd like to partner with you.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Lily Robles, you are next.

Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.

My name is Lily Robles.

I'm a housing advocate with the East Bay Community Law Center, speaking in strong opposition to the EAP.

This evening we've seen Oaklanders come out in force to protect unhoused community members' safety and dignity, even though there won't even be an EAP vote today.

The consensus is clear, Oakland does not want the EAP.

This proposal will only criminalize black, brown, and disabled community members.

The city would waste millions of dollars destroying unhoused Oaklanders' shelters in essential possessions.

It proposes no solutions for the underlying causes of homelessness and will leave unhoused Oaklanders with nowhere to go.

Community members with lived experiences have the answers to our homelessness crisis and must be heard instead of being shut out of the process.

For years they have demanded that the city open up public land and RV parking, ensure existing shelters are meeting residents' needs, and provide sanitation services to encampments.

Instead of meeting unhoused Oaklanders' needs, this policy punishes them.

When the EAP comes back, it must not be adopted.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Talia, and I'm with Love Injustice in the Streets.

Since 2016, I have been involved with supporting unhoused community members in Oakland.

During this time, I have witnessed hundreds of sweeps, and I've seen firsthand the extreme harm that sweeps cause.

From losing medications, important documents, ID phones, clothing, and other critical belongings, to causing severe stress, bringing on seizures and panic attacks, and exacerbating other serious health conditions.

Sweeps only make life harder for unhoused people, which makes accessing housing more difficult.

The proposed encampment abatement policy is dangerous and wasteful.

Targeting vehicle dwellers and impounding people's only shelter is cruel and ineffective at solving homelessness.

In the midst of a budget crisis, when the city is defunding shelters, this policy would spend millions of public funds with zero housing solutions.

Housed and unhoused residents want real solutions, not more costly and ineffective sweeps.

I urge you to vote no on the EAP.

Thank you for your comments.

Can you confirm your last name, please?

My last name is Wynne.

Thank you.

Please begin your comments.

Hi, I'm Tash Wynn.

I'm a homeowner in D6 and an executive director of Restore Oakland and D5.

We support small businesses and staying afloat, and we help people coming home from jail and prison get access to life affirming resources.

I have two questions for you guys.

Who profits from obscuring the true causes of homelessness?

Whose financial interests are served by shifting blame from those driving the crisis to those forced to suffer through it.

We know that homelessness is a predictable policy outcome when we have skyrocketing rents, poverty wages, and gutted social supports.

And for many, it's big business.

This proposal does nothing to support our small businesses and neighborhoods, so please do not guise this as something that the small business community wants or needs, as we know that it's robbing resources from essential services.

So until we confront who benefits from the system, nothing will change.

Ray Key, you are next.

Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Thank you.

My name is Ray Kidd.

I'm a 50-plus year resident of West Oakland.

The proposed abatement policy amplifies the flaws in the encampment management policy by failing to identify any areas that could accommodate potentially or potentially accommodate homeless people.

In fact, it adds more restrictions to both the high sensitivity sensitivity areas and the low sensitivity areas, and then additional restrictions under the public safety section.

So it becomes impossible to conceive or identify any location, homeless people subject to the mass evictions arising from the EAP, will have access to.

I can't in good conscience support any policy that would treat people this way.

This policy will not abate homelessness, but will push homeless people from one spot to another and only cause increased misery.

We can do better than that.

Thank you for your attention.

Thank you for your comments.

Angelina Cornejo, you are next.

Please unmute yourself and being your comments.

And before she begins, if you are in the chambers or on Zoom and you turned in a card and you wish to speak, please approach the podium or raise your hand in Zoom.

At this time, all names have been called.

As written procedurally, and it's just plain wrong ethically, and that's not going to change in January.

In particular, the mayor has created a new Office of Homelessness Solutions to implement a five-point strategy to addressing homelessness.

Point number two calls for deploying additional outreach workers to connect people on the streets of services, treatment, and documents needed for housing.

Towing and citing RVs and vehicles are so-called reasonable efforts to make shelter offers.

This policy outlines is the exact opposite of the point number two in the mayor's plan.

The Office of Homelessness has been engaging stakeholders for months now, developing best practices and strategies and at solving root causes of homelessness specific to Oakland.

Yet some council members think they know better than experts and are attempting to pass the ordinance that does nothing besides tow and essentially take people's less shelter from them.

The solution to homelessness is home.

It's really that simple.

Community enforcement actions without the guarantee of real referral.

Hi, I'm Ann Harvey, a retired safety net family doctor, 30 year D1 resident, and strong opposition.

I'm very concerned that the proposed policy would significantly worsen our city's unsheltered crisis.

It would further harm thousands of Oaklanders who, due to systemic failures, are already extremely vulnerable with five times the mortality rate of the house.

The EAP basically attempts to define vehicle dwellings out of existence and would likely result in many impoundments of vehicles and their contents.

I've been having trouble sleeping, trying to imagine myself in that situation, suddenly losing the vehicle I depend on for transportation and to keep me and some essential belongings dry and relatively safe.

Rather than impound unregistered or non-operational vehicles, the city should help arrange for emergency funds for registration fees and repairs and provide safe and sanitary parking sites.

The proposed resolution, Nakia Edders Eidens, I'm sorry, you're next.

Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Hello everyone, I am here.

Um listening, I'm sorry.

My name wasn't called.

I apologize.

I yield my time to Parish Scott.

I'm sorry, to whom?

Parish Scott.

I don't believe we have a card for that person.

Okay.

Parish.

Parish Scott, are you on Zoom?

I do not see you.

Zay, you are next.

Please unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Hello, friends, and to all that are in the chamber.

I'm so grateful for our shared discussion today.

I had something in my mind before I started speaking, but spirit really leads me to just be aware of how I'm feeling in my body.

Heart is racing, I'm tired, it's the end of the day.

Anxious about this issue, as many are.

And I think that can teach me something about the people that we're talking about because they feel the same way.

And when I feel this way, how can someone connect with me?

How can I hear what someone is saying?

How can I tell someone what I need?

Though I have degrees and all the learning, I think sometimes the body gives me better information than when I say too much in my head in an analytical point of view.

So I'm hoping that we will have ongoing cultural humility to learn the actual lives conditions of those about whom we are speaking.

I'm from Youth Spirit Artworks.

Blessings to all Jessica Lehman, you are next.

After Jessica, we'll have Angela Lloyd.

Hello, council members.

My name is Jessica Lehman.

I'm a disabled person in Oakland, resident and homeowner of District One.

I use a power wheelchair, and I'm an organizer with the grassroots disability organizing project.

The proposed EAP is an anti-disability and anti-older person act, and you must oppose.

Over 60% of unhoused people in Oakland are disabled, and more than a quarter are older.

More than 72% are black or brown, and 80% have lived in the county for more than 10 years.

The UCSF Benningoff Housing and Homelessness Initiative found that many seniors and disabled people became homeless due to one medical emergency.

And we know that people with disabilities are often not safe in shelters due to discriminatory treatment and inaccessible spaces and policies.

City officials have claimed they're removing tent encampments for sidewalk access.

This is not true.

Do not pit disabled people against each other.

We need housing and services.