Good morning and welcome to the rules and legislation committee of Thursday, December 4th.

Before I call roll, I will um give speaker card instructions.

If you're looking to speak on a any agenda item, please fill out a speaker's card and return that card to the clerk representative before the item is called for discussion.

Excuse me, city council staff order in the chambers.

Actually, that means you.

Additionally, if you were looking to submit an online speaker card, they were due twenty-four hours before the start of this meeting.

As per the council rules of procedure, speaker cards are due ten minutes after the start of this meeting.

This meeting was called to order at ten thirty-two.

So speaker cards are due at ten forty-two AM this morning.

On roll for this meeting, are Council Member Brown.

And Chair Jenkins.

Letters to you uh that hopefully um I it's really important.

I feel that you have we have to be practicing um that a lot of people are upset about the flock process and that it really seems that we have a chance to talk about it more openly, and that if this item eventually comes back in in January and goes straight to city council, I felt I feel it should be returned as an item that more as an information item and not as a full agenda item.

It seems a lot more discussion is needed.

I spoke to the concepts of of we can be having a review process in the next six months and and and consider a new contract uh uh vendor, and um we can make short, you know, three month contracts with flock until we work out a new vendor if if a new contract is absolutely needed with Flock.

And I think we need to seriously uh consider reducing the amounts of ALPRs we need overall, reducing the amounts can actually create the same amount of public safety for neighborhoods, and we have to be having that conversation as well.

Um, so there's a lot to be talking about.

I don't think things can just be uh quickly approved.

I hope we can have dialogue and discussion, and that brings community uh harmony and really good practices.

Thank you, Mr.

Beakmer for your comments.

Do we have a motion?

I believe there was a motion by Brown.

I just need a second.

Second on the motion for item two, the minutes for November 13th and 20th, moved by council member brown, second by council member Fife.

Starting with council member Brown, aye, council member five, aye, council member Ramachandran.

Aye, Chair Jenkins, aye.

Motion passes with a vote of four ayes.

Moving on, sorry, motion passes with a vote of four ayes.

Moving on to new scheduling starting with item 3.1, a resolution in support of the Bay Area Air District's timely implementation of rules nine through four and nine through six that establish zero emission building appliance standards with appropriate flexibility to ensure equity and business development on the December 9th community and economic development committee agenda, and just noting that this item would be going to committee next week, it does need an urgency.

Is there somebody from the district two office to offer the urgency finding a urgency finding?

Hi, yes.

Uh, this is Council Member Wong.

Um so for the first item, the reason that we have an urgency finding around this is uh these particular zero emission uh appliance rules.

Um we want to have a vote on this in time for the December 10th hearing that the um Bay Area uh air district is having.

So there's a urgency around getting out our stance as a city prior to that.

So the question would be if it's going to committee, it would have to go to so if it's going to committee on the ninth and the meetings on the 10th, full city council hasn't weighed in on it.

Just through the chair, sorry to introduce just noting the presence of council member wong, we do need to adjourn into a special meeting.

Okay, I'll entertain one second.

I'll entertain a motion.

Second, brown brown, then five, then brown.

On the motion, sorry, on the motion to adjourn to the special meeting moved by council member five with a go second by council member brown.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember Fife, aye.

Council Member Ramachandran.

And Chair Jenkins.

I motion passes with a vote of four ayes.

Council Member Brown.

Okay, so uh to the chair.

Um, so would then your recommendation be for this item to just go?

Oh, it'll miss it altogether.

Um, or is it it's not sufficient for it to just pass through committee?

No.

So not in time.

Okay.

Can we have it go to full council in some way?

The next full council is on the 16th.

Yeah, fair enough.

Councilmember Ram Chandra.

Thank you.

We're talking about a 1.5 million dollar contract that we don't have notice for what it is about.

I would be very reticent to bring that straight to full council, not being able to see it.

So if there's interest in bringing it in January, I'm open to that.

Councilmember Wong, I believe it will not meet the deadline.

That yeah, that would not meet the deadline.

So you're you're welcome to go and speak for your office.

All right, but full city council, it doesn't seem like we're going to have enough time because our meeting next meeting's not till the 16th.

Okay.

Yeah.

I think if it can get through CED, that would be meaningful.

But if it gets through CED, you can always go through CED, but if it gets through CD, you can't go there and say it has to support a full city council until full city council has weighed in on it.

Yeah, which I understand.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

So this will be going to CED on December 9th.

Going to item 3.2, adopt a resolution approving ongoing cooperative purchase agreements exceeding 250,000 for Oakland Public Works, Bureau of Maintenance and Internal Services, Commodities and Services Contracts.

And adopting appropriate CEQA findings on the December 16th City Council agenda on consent.

The rule 24 reason the proposed contracts increase is to provide parts and repairs for the aging city sewer lines and equipment.

We have Mr.

Batterspee.

I'll go ahead and provide sewer roach treatment to ensure city sewer is maintained as mandated by federal consent decree.

It is urgent for the city to have adequate contract amount at any time.

Yeah, we're rule 24 requesting this uh to consent.

It is a routine contract increase extension activity, but with the contract approval and purchasing delays we've been encountering lately, we weren't able to get this uh in front of you uh in time to make the regular schedule.

The urgency factor is we have certain seasons when we perform activities on the sewer system, including vector control.

Uh we have certain insects that tend to have a habitat inside the pipes.

Um Golden Bell is our only vendor for that particular proprietary product, and also CD and power is a uh generator repair specialist.

We need to have a contract capacity because they service the generators that ensure our sewer lift station and our storm drain lift stations uh remain operational.

This is critical during the storm season, and the last one pace supply.

We get construction materials and also safety equipment.

Um I'm available if there's any questions on this item.

Thank you.

Going to item 3.3.

Oh, going to item 3.3, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to weigh the city of Oakland's local small business enterprise program requirements, and request for proposals, competitive process and enter into a professional services agreement from January 1, 2026 to December, I'm sorry, January 1, 2026 to December 30th, 2020 31st, 2027, with Lin Marine to provide for the removal of abandoned derelict and sunken vessels in the Oakland Estuary for a total amount not to exceed 1,456,000 258 dollars, and this is asked to go before the December 16th City Council agenda on consent, the rule 24 reason the current estuary conditions will worsen heading into winter, which adds to the safety concern for people living on votes.

Additionally, under the Bayes plan implementation of the McEater Petries Act, a lot a liverboard vessel is unpermitted, filled and not allowed in the estuary, BCDC takes the position that if such a vessel is anchored in city waters and the city does not remove it, then the city violates this act.

This act gives BCDC authority to issue a cease and assist order against violation, and if the violation continues, BCDC can levy fines against violators up to six thousand dollars per day.

So I asked uh I tell council member wong we would I'd have questions with this.

It's uncommon for a council member to be the sponsor of a resolution authorizing a contract.

Can Councilmember Wong, you speak to it in who wrote the stat the report.

Yeah, this came to us from both the city administration, uh CAO as well as uh OPD, um, and so especially as the chair of public safety as well as uh you know the representative for district two.

Um you can note right now that we will accumulate fines six thousand dollars a day, and uh BCDC did uh infer that they would actually be increasing those fines um even more so and so there's urgency around this that we wanted to put in place.

Uh it's really important, especially given the winter conditions that we get this um by the 16th and not wait until after the break.

Okay, I'll have another question.

Council member.

Thank you.

I apologize.

My comment what that I said for 3.1 was actually 3.3.

I'm completely supportive of 3.1.

Um, the 1.5 million dollar contact contract concern that I have is so that it doesn't go straight on consent with no discussion and no notice because we don't have information about it today.

That 3.3 is the one where I feel strongly about it going to um committee first, or if it's going to full council on non-consent at a future meeting, but 3.1 I'm good with.

I got them right.

And so to the administration or somebody can help me understand contracts are not when we have contracts on the agenda, they do not come from council members.

So can someone help me understand who the report is coming from?

Yeah, it's just uncommon, I just need some type of understanding.

Yeah, can Tracy, can you comment on this?

Thank you.

The report was written by myself and uh city administrators' office.

So I would like to amend it to coming from OPD instead of council member Wong's office.

Okay, I we just want the job to get done, so we're fine with that.

Okay, so let's amend that.

Let's send it to committee public safety on the ninth.

Do you have an urgency finding to send it to the ninth?

It would be the same urgency finding that's stated if the uh my apologies can't be city administrative.

Maybe I'll have the city attorney upon it the rule 24 if if that language is um admissible for the item to be um noted as urgency finding.

I will um to the chair to the committee.

I'll read the um urgency requirements that are stated in sunshine.

It's for this body to make the finding, and then the finding would need to be made again before the um committee hears the item.

So the local body by a two-thirds uh vote of those members present um adopts the motion determining that upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, it was not reasonably possible to meet the additional notice requirements under the Sunshine Ordinance, and the need to take immediate action on the item is required to avoid a substantial adverse impact that would occur if the action were deferred to a subsequent special or regular meeting.

So that is your standard um for bypassing the noticing requirements in the sunshine ordinance.

That's right, and so the urgency finding remains the same.

Okay, thank you.

That's correct.

Thank you.

December 9th, public safety.

Noting on item 3.3, the firm will be changed to OPD.

And this will be going to the December 9th Public Safety Committee.

And the urgency vote will be required before the committee can dispense with the item.

Going to item 3.4 conduct a public uh conduct a public hearing and upon.

No.

Adopt the resolution confirming the report and notice of liens for delinquent real property transfer taxes with penalties interest in administrative and assessment charges and overruling any protests and objections related to the liens included in said report and authorizing the recordation of liens and directing the notice of lien and assessment charges to be turned over to the county tax collector for collection.

This is asked to go before the December 16th City Council agenda as a public hearing.

The rule 24, the resolution requires a public hearing, which must take place at a city council meeting.

Going to item 3.5.

Receive an information report from the city auditor on the audit recommendation follow-up report as of June 30th, 2025.

This is asked to go before the December 16th City Council agenda on non-consent.

The rule 24, the item was previously scheduled at rules committee on October 23rd to be added to the December 2nd City Council on non-consent.

Is the auditor here?

Good morning.

Um is there any urgency in this matter?

There's no need for urgency finding, but is there any urgency that it needs to go on December 16th?

Um this uh item was previously scheduled to the December 2nd City Council meeting.

Um and it was uh the city clerk's office made a bit of a mistake and didn't schedule it.

So we're we're hoping to that it's here that it's heard on this.

Does it need to be here heard before the end of the year?

Yes, please, it does need to be heard or the credit.

It does need to be heard.

Okay, yes, gotcha.

All right, thank you.

Going to item 3.6, adopt an emergency ordinance, repealing current Oakland Municipal Code, chapter 15.12 of the Oakland Fire Code, adopting and making local amendments to the 2025 edition of the California Model Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9, also referred to as the California Fire Code, recodifying said code as local municipal code chapter 15.12, the Oakland Fire Code and adopting sequel findings on the December 16th City Council agenda on non-consent, the rule 24 reason needs to be adopted by the end of the California year to allow our local amendments to be filled with the state, ensuring that the local rules will be enforceable starting in January next year, and just noting that the firm should say Oakland Fire Department.

Going to item 3.7.

No, it's not time for comments.

Anything from the administration on that item?

Uh candidates from the city administrators' office, yes.

Apologies, yes, as the clerk stated, this item is um to be it was inevitably listed as the mayor, it should be from Oakland Fire Department.

And if the um the committee is amendable, we are okay with the item going to consent rather than non-consent.

Is there any objections to it going to consent?

Council member Fife.

I would like uh more understanding.

I would like it to go on non-consent because I want to understand uh just the timeline of how we got to the end of the year without this being scheduled.

I would like to have some discussion on the item.

Noted, thank you.

Do you want to send it to public safety?

I would like to hear it in committee if possible, but I also understand that we're doing what we do, which is um making decisions at the 11th hour, and um I would prefer that these items go to committee before they come to council.

So if we have time to hear this and then bring it back to a full city council meeting before the end of the year I would prefer public safety.

So then it'd have to go to the December 9th public safety.

I have not spoken with the chair so let's to find out I don't know if the schedule is impacted.

I think there might be three or four items already on the schedule.

There's five.

So let's put it on public safety if the chair needs to call a special meeting to get started early we could do that.

I through the chair this Candace from the city administrator's office I'm not sure if the other committees earlier in that day are impacted so I don't know if moving the time up will be uh efficient but I do know that there are currently at this time five items scheduled there so this would be the sixth item scheduled to that meeting I do have OFD seven excuse me seventh item OFD staff available for further questions if you have it that would be helpful if we could ask questions now because um yeah I I just want to understand the timing.

Good morning Michael Hunt Oakland Fire Department happy to speak to any of these items through the chair um this is the emergency ordinance to adopt the fire code.

The key component of this this is time sensitive in a sense that the item needs to be adopted by the end of the calendar year to allow our local amendments to be filed with the state ensuring that the local rules will be enforceable starting in January of 2026.

So there's very minimal changes to the code that mostly should be non-controversial the main two items relate to the requirement of inspections of fire dampers in commercial buildings are basically gates inside the HVAC systems that need to be inspected by a uh professional every four years.

That is previously not something that was in the code we are going to be adding it.

The second piece is to require color coding of all fire department connections on the exterior of buildings so these are the only changes that we are bringing to uh council for full adoption in the with this item so again these are non-controversial items that we would like to again bypass committee uh by way of rule 24 and move straight to council for adoption on uh December 16th with your approval city administration uh hi again candice from city administrators office we also um wanted to make a suggestion and if it's amendable to OFD staff and uh the CED chair since this item is in regards to a building um and the CED committee only has three items on their schedule for that day if adding that to that to help spread out the love for that day um but again amendable to the OFD staff and uh chairfy for the rules committee as a whole of the decision of where it's going to go but we were recommending as an option going to CED just to help with the time frame and efficiency of all the meetings that day.

And the reason I'm asking is because I was reached out to as many of us were from members of the public to have more discussion on this item so I fully um understand that these um the issues that are changing from year to year from the fire department are minimal I just want the public to have an opportunity to weigh in on the conversation and share their concerns so if the CED chair is amenable to this moving to CED then it'll give us still time to get to the December 16th full city council meeting I would uh support that if if it's okay with the CED chair um yes that is fine December 9th CED great thank you.

Going to item 3.7, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to pay outstanding outstanding invoices to ABC Security Services for services rendered after the extended contract expiration date of June 30, 2025, and fiscal year 25 through 26 and the amount of $818,989.40 cents and extend the ABC contract for up to 15 months to September 30, 2026 on a month-to-month basis for an amount not to exceed $6,750,000 for a total not to exceed contract of $35,380,000.

And to the extent necessary, waiving the competitive request for proposals and qualifications progress, excuse me, process in the best interest of the city for such extension to allow continuity of services while staff conducts a new request for proposals for security services on the December 16th City Council agenda on non-consent, the Rule 24 reason, expiration of the contract with ABC Security Services on June 30, 2025.

Although ABC Security Services has consistently delivered vital security services, the organization has not been fully compensated for these contributions.

Going to item.

Mr.

Batters speak.

Thank you.

Richard Batters, the assistant director, Oakland Public Works.

We're requesting this item to go on non-consent.

And while there is uh contract capacity or funding available, we don't have a current contract, so we're unable to pay ABC security who's been providing the security.

This particular contract has been problematic.

Uh the original RFP was done in 2022, and we've been trying to award it uh since early 2023.

Most recently, I'd say in June, uh we were hoping to award the contract before the existing ABC contract expired, but we were unsuccessful.

Uh we're requesting an ex or a period of time, we've estimated 15 months is how long it will take to conduct a new RFP.

Um and we do expect our colleagues in purchasing to be administering security contract RFP this time, and we will provide additional detail as that process uh unfolds.

And I am available for questions.

Thank you.

Sorry, Councilmember Pfeiffe.

No worries.

Um, I because this is a scheduling body and we're just dealing with scheduling right now, uh, I'm not going to object to this moving forward, but I am going to express my extreme disappointment and confusion.

Again, waiting till last minute, which does a disservice to the city of Oakland, our contractors, and a host of other people.

This contract has been in limbo since I was elected, and I've been here for five years now.

So through the chair to our staff, um, I will definitely have some questions that I would like the city administrator to help me understand and help the public understand on the transparency of how these processes and RFPs go because we keep lapsing on paying our existing contractor, and this is not making sense.

It's not adding up what's going on with our security contract uh for the city of Oakland.

So I'm deeply concerned.

I'm really tired of waiting to the last minute and doing these emergency extensions of contracts, and I don't understand why it's taken so many years.

So I will definitely through the chair to the city administrator need some clarity for the public when this comes to the uh to be discussed on non-consent.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Just to echo those concerns, um, I'm a little perplexed that this is coming to us right before the final council meeting where it can be scheduled if we knew this ahead of time.

Um so I will have some questions as well for the department that I will ask prior to this meeting, but it is a little frustrating.

Yeah, through the chair.

Right up until recently.

So once the RFP was withdrawn, then we had to uh execute a mechanism to pay these past due invoices.

So that's that's the concern currently.

Thank you, Mr.

Battersby.

We got to keep this to scheduling.

Going to item 3.8, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator exact accepting and appropriating a summer suit, excuse me, a summer food service program grant from California Department of Education, the United States Department of Agricultural Agriculture in an amount up to 426,870, authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and enter into professional services agreement with Upton's Inc.

and Flows friendly school lunches for food services to support the 2026 SFSP, accepting and appropriating additional SFSP funding from any source that becomes available and authorizing the city administrator to amend the above PSAs to increase amounts within the 2026 SFSP term, waiving the competitive process, small local business enterprise program requirements on the January 13th, 2026 life enrichment committee agenda, going to item 3.9.

Adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate terms and enter into an advertising signs relocation agreement without front foster interstate LLC, a Delaware limited liability company with such agreement entering, I'm sorry, with such agreement including the following, allowing OFI to erect up to five new digital advertising signs at certain locations in the city of Oakland in exchange for OFI causing the removal of up to 11 of its of its existing advertising faces at various locations in the city by date certain with OFI and outfront waiving its rights to just compensation for the remove signs, requiring OFI to make payments in advance, but of up to $2,305,000 for fiscal year 2025 through 27 biannual budget and annual payments of up to $750,000 for each new digital advertising sign for a 31-year term with escalations and a 10-year removal option, in addition to providing other financial incentives to the city, including negotiated carbon offset fees and free advertising space and adopting appropriate California Environmental Quality Act findings on the February 10th, 2026 community and economic development committee agenda and the February 17th City Council agenda as a public hearing.

Councilmember Wong.

Yes.

Thank you.

Councilmember Ramatandra.

Thank you.

I have a question.

Have you posted the list of sites that are that are proposed publicly?

And if so, why not?

No, they have not been uh posted.

The goal is actually by being able to agendize this several months in advance that um that public posting can happen and we can have a good vigorous community discussion.

Okay, thank you through this chair.

So here's the problem.

When you when I brought forward a different billboard proposal, I made sure the sites were published when it came to rules for actual scheduling.

And part of this reason is to avoid misinformation and confusion when it comes to the public being scared about where a billboard might be proposed.

For example, there has been a document that has been circulating allegedly from your office that has reached community members.

My office has not circulated any document.

So all that out.

Council member, can we keep it on schedule?

Scheduling, yes.

And this is what happens when you don't notice locations and you give several months of leave way to sow confusion.

And here's why it's super important more than ever.

Lake Temiscall is undergoing an eighty million dollar effort to be saved to try to dredge the lake to try to ask the state and federal bodies for money.

It is a site where a billboard could threaten the presence of the bald eagle as a natural habitat.

Council member.

So to us, so as to not so confusion, can the sites be published at the same time as noticing, as was done with the previous billboard contract that came about?

So uh just a reminder.

Let's keep this to scheduling, if possible.

No, just keep it the scheduling.

Um, what's your scheduling question?

Until you publish the list of sites, so because there's lots of chatter going on and the possibility of eighty million dollars of state and federal opportunities being threatened by this billboard.

My preference for this process is to schedule the item and then uh we will publish that list will put be published.

This gives us the gifts.

This actually gives the public more advanced notice about this.

Would you would you commit in that process to removing the Lake Temiscal billboard?

Uh that schedule.

Yeah.

This is outside of the scope of schedule.

So we're getting outside of scheduling, uh, according to the parliamentary.

Councilmember Ramchandra, do you have a scheduling question?

I do.

I will restate my request.

In the interest of natural habitats for the bald eagle and other endangered species, and in the interest of a lake needing to decide how it's gonna generate $80 million to save itself from the parks district.

Will you consider rescheduling this item until all of the sites are published, as was done with the previous billboard legislation?

No, I'd like to keep this uh as intended, scheduled for the 10th.

Okay.

Well, to the chair, my preference is that we wait to schedule this item until we have notice of the proposed locations.

Can the CD chair will you?

Well, at this time we're strictly um doing scheduling on this, so um we can keep it scheduled for February the 10th, CED.

Is it February 10th or 17th?

Yes.

Uh thank you, Chair Jenkins.

I just want to say to through the chair to Councilmember Wong, I apologize to you for the way that you're being talked to today.

I and whether I agree with your item or not, that's not what we're here to discuss as the scheduling body.

So I want to uh articulate my support um for scheduling this particular item, and we can get into the substance of whether the the council disagrees or agrees once it goes through the process.

This is scheduled well in advance to supply the items that will be published once this moves through the process, and we should stick to the process.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Councilmember Ramachandra.

For clarity, the process in recent years related to billboards has been published the locations when you schedule it at rules.

That's what was on the last two times that billboards were brought here.

Thank you, Councilmember Ramachandra.

Um, with that, we'll go to public comment.

Thank you.

Let me call the names first, please.

Let me let me call the names first.

Give me a second.

Thank you.

As I call your name, please approach the podium in any order.

Um, please state your name before you begin so I can um identify you for the record.

If you are participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.

Amelia Marshall, George Spees, Ranjini Mandal, Kevin Daly, Blair Beekman.

I have you for three items.

Chris Powell, Naomi Schiff, in any order.

And again, if you are participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.

Starting with Ms.

Shift, I believe she has one card.

Thank you.

Hello.

I'm Naomi Schiff.

I'm the secretary of the Board of Directors of Oakland Heritage Alliance.

We are as interested in the natural surroundings in Oakland as we are in buildings.

I don't know if you can see this, but I brought a picture of what it looks like now when you come into Oakland on 13 or 24.

And you'll notice no billboards.

There aren't any billboards in these stretches of 13 and 24.

Lake Temiscal is a habitat.

I believe that you should be including East Bay Regional Parks District in the discussion in some way, and that that is really quite important.

We do not exist in isolation.

Our city hosts many parks that are run by East Bay Regional.

Please include them.

Thank you.

Good morning, everyone.

My name is Amelia Marshall.

I am a longtime resident of the Laurel District and 45-year resident of Oakland and uh board member of the Regional Parks Association.

I'm here speaking in opposition to the proposal to place enormous LED billboards throughout Oakland, particularly the site uh proposed for the PGE property above Lake Temescale.

It's ethically wrong for Oakland officials to take money for these unnecessary and environmentally damaging monstrosities.

They emit harmful light pollution, waste electricity, and have no social benefits.

They are made of plastic that will end up in the food chain.

The two proposed for the PGE property above Lake Temescal would loom up on the hill like skyscrapers, flashing messaging all day and all night, every day, every night.

And thanks to the East Bay Regional Park District and their dedicated stewardship of life habitat.

Thank you, ma'am.

Your time is up.

Rajni Mandel, District 4.

I'm a physician, and I'm well accustomed to pharmacy reps coming into the office with their perks and literature, saying about how their product is the best in an effort to change how and what I prescribe.

But I don't take things at face value.

I make my decisions based on facts and original sources, not from a biased party.

For item 3.9, the billboard contract without front foster.

There has already been information circulated around the community, both by email and online, with images and inflammatory statements prior to the proposal being made public.

This is a campaign to sway public opinion, and I wonder who is the actual source.

I make my decisions to save patients based on facts and data, not hearsay.

I would hope that you all who hold the city of Oakland in your hands would do the same.

I also recommend that the proposal and plans be discussed with the community prior to the February date in order to dispel rumors and hearsay.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is George Spees with Traffic Violence Rapid Response, and I'm speaking on item 3.6 about the fire code.

First of all, this is not actually an emergency.

Central code since the 1st of July, so there's been plenty of time.

Um Jaden Smith, the assistant fire marshal, appeared at BPAC recently and um noted that um two additional items that weren't mentioned by the representative here would potentially be included, and that includes uh section 503 and appendix D, both of which have items that bear on street design for emergency vehicle access.

And um those uh would set absolute requirements, but they are um they bear on street design for traffic safety, and it's important that this be heard through committee so that there's a clear understanding of what is being proposed and whether that's um amenable to our needs for um proper traffic engineering for traffic safety.

Kevin Dally, I'm a co-chair of the policy and legislative committee of the bicyclist and pedestrian advisory commission, also talking 3.6 the fire code for the last two for the last six months.

BPAC has been actively working with the fire marshal's office uh about the fire code.

I am shocked that they are coming in in December with suggesting that go to council without any text of the amendments yet.

They have promised us that the amendments would be available in November, but they're not available.

It's not an emergency.

We can amend the fire code at any point over the next three years.

We can amend the California Fire Code.

If we don't pass it by the end of the year, California fire code will take effect.

That's okay with me.

Fire California is a more progressive fire code than what Oakland is suggesting.

So let's take it, take it cautiously.

I I also recommend that the sections related to street width, which is section 503 and appendix D be sent to the public works and transportation committee, which has expertise in transportation, and also the chair has this special knowledge of the fire department.

BPAC has suggested amendments, they will be forwarded to whatever committees it goes to and whatever council it goes to.

So let's take it easy, take our time, and get the amendments published and let us discuss the items.

Thank you.

Hi, Beekman.

I wanted to speak to items 3.1, 3.5, 3.6, and 3.9.

Um about 3.

Um 9.

Uh, we've just spoken about, thank you for the clarifications from uh the previous public, the two previous public speakers.

Um there's a lot, or no, that's item 3.6 actually, the fire issue.

Um, yeah, fire code issues.

They're talking about uh really important things.

Um there's additional clarifications needed, then what was presented is can be discussed, but I think uh Council Person Five tried to mention uh it does need a little more community dialogue.

Good up good luck in those efforts for uh item 3.9.

The billboard uh issues, it's a trade-off.

Uh, you get five billboards and you remove uh old fashioned billboards.

Uh that are considered kind of blight.

It's kind of a regular practice going on in local communities and cities right now.

Um it's good in a way, uh, removing billboards, but you're replacing them with technology that's really questionable.

I come from the ideas of open public practices and that people shouldn't be surveilled.

And that's what you guys are gonna be doing with these new electronic billboards.

It's not that innovative, really.

Um, so good luck.

Thank you.

I think we need to be as clear as possible about the subject.

So good luck how we can talk about it.

Uh moving on to uh items 3.1 and 3.5.

3.1 is an item about um uh implementation of a zero emission building appliance standards.

I I don't know if this is in the construction of building materials themselves or the appliances within buildings.

Um being from San Diego, they have some serious concerns.

They have to be working on on these sort of uh air quality standards.

Um, I hope there can be some good exchanges between you and San Diego at this time, a good lessons learned how to uh in better air quality management.

It's an important subject.

Um good luck.

What we can really do to respect uh new developments in that, how how we can help that at this time.

And for item 3.5 is um 49 seconds.

Um audit report issues.

Um, these have been items that have been here in Oakland since 2014 to be considering and developing, and and you're working and growing uh and building.

Um, good luck in these efforts.

Um, things take time, you know, to build and grow, and um what you know the the breaks that we're having right now uh with as a along with the auditing items.

Good luck that uh community conversation can be of help.

Uh the auditing list uh offers a great discussion of how to talk about our community issues and uh if we're just having those conversations openly right now, that's really key uh in kind of a rebuilding time what we're doing in Oakland right now.

Uh so good luck in everyone's efforts.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Beaking.

Excuse me, Mr.

Beakman moving to our Zoom speaker who signed up for item 3.9.

This is our last speaker who turned in the speaker card.

Mr.

Powell, I have you for item 3.9.

You have one minute.

Please begin your comments.

Yeah, thank you.

My name is Chris Powell.

I'm here on behalf of OFI.

First, I'd like to point out that notice was provided on the identity of all locations, all the alternative and primary sites.

It's already been run in a newspaper, so it's not true that that was not posted.

Um, second, I think it's important to point out that Becker boards and competitors have been spreading misinformation about these sites.

The uh site um next to Lake Tamascal is actually a PGE substation.

It's already industrial.

This is this site's not going to be located you know near the lake in some trees where there's bald eagle habitat.

This isn't a highly industrial parcel that's covered with a PGE substation and high voltage equipment.

Um this proposal offers significant benefits to the city of Oakland, so we respectfully ask that you schedule this for CED.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Powell.

Mr.

Chair, that was the last speaker as all names were called, and all speakers spoke.

Okay.

So we have 3.1 going to CED 129.

We have 3.3 going to public safety December 9, sponsor change, urgency finding 3.6, December 9, CED, urgency finding.

And we have 3.9.

I believe Council Member Ramachandra, and you're registering a no vote on that.

A strong no vote.

All right.

With that, I'll take a motion.

And 3.1 has an urgency as well.

Move approval with amendments.

Thank you.

On item three, move by council member five, second by council member Brown with amendments, also noting Councilmember Ramachandran's no on item three point strong no on item 3.9.

Council Member Brown.

Aye.

Council member.

Sorry, Council Member Five.

Aye.

And Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

Motion passes with a vote of four ayes.

Going to item four, review of your draft agendas, pending lists of city council and committee meetings.

Attach you'll find your committee meeting, excuse me, committee meeting agendas for it for December 9th, rules and legislation for December 11th, and your pending lists for five for all committees, along with your draft agendas for December 16th, City Council, and rules for December 18th.

So just for public awareness, we are entertaining doing a special meeting on the 16th because of a really impacted agenda.

We haven't discussed it with the rest of the city council.

We will ensure any controversial items are towards the back of the agenda if we do do a special meeting.

To the administration.

Do you guys have anything on item number four?

Good morning again, Candice from the city Administrator's Office.

We do have staff present for a change to the December 9th agenda, finance and management.

Staff is present at the podium for that item.

Good morning.

The finance department requests that item number eight on the December 9th agenda be rescheduled till January 27th.

A more complete informational report regarding bond issuance efforts will be available for the 10-day publication for the January 27th FMC committee.

So item number nine, item number eight on December 9th, moving to January 27th, is that correct?

Correct.

Okay.

Chair Ramachandra.

Yeah, uh, thank you for the update.

That's fine with me.

Anything else from the administration?

Nothing at this time.

Thank you.

Seeing none, do we have any public comment?

Moving to the public speakers, as I call your name, please approach the podium in any order.

Please state your name for the record.

If you are participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.

George Spees.

Rajni Manda, Kevin Daly, and Blair Beekman in any order.

Hello, George Speeds once again with traffic violence rapid response.

Um recently learned that there's a move to move parking management and enforcement to the finance department from Oak Dot.

Um, and we oppose this um because parking management bears on transportation generally and isn't just a revenue generator, but is actually a way of managing curb access um and traffic safety, along with other considerations.

So the idea that um that Oak Dot would lose control over the parking management means that they're to having a tool taken out of their um out of their palette of of available tools to manage uh our streets, and that's just doesn't make sense.

So rather than thinking about it as just the collecting of parking fines and fees, we should really think about it as a tool to shape the street.

Um, and that's how it would be seen at Oak Dot and is seen at Oak Dot, but not would I don't believe would be seen that way at finance so um that should go on the parking the um uh transportation and public works committee docket, and I'd like you to have uh add that, please.

Thank you.

All right, this is Kevin Dowley.

I'm a uh part of the board of Transport Oakland, seconding George's comment Transport Oakland 10 years ago in 2015 was part of the push to create a department of transportation.

That process went through committee, it went through council.

Right now it appears that the city administrator is planning to partially dismantle Oak Dot and move parking policy to finance committee, or sorry, finance department, which has no expertise in the economics of parking.

In the last 20 years since parking policy was in the city administrators, sorry, in the finance department, there's been a lot of changes in parking policy.

Uh let's make sure that this decision goes to public works and transportation that they discuss whether parking policy should be moved.

There are already letters going out to the unions warning people that their jobs will be moved around.

And this has done been done without public comment, without city council comment.

It's council member Rama Chandran has said a few times today.

Let's get the council involved in things, give them enough warning that they can take action if they so choose.

Don't push something through at the last minute.

Thank you.

Hi, thank you.

I just wanted to quickly um offer an overall uh view, uh procedural uh view of uh your committee process that we're we're um, as it can be difficult, I think I tried to say previously to be addressing um items uh at this time because some of some of our agenda items to bring things to committee, I hope is not considered taboo or wrong.

Um it's a good place to be doing things.

I know a few years ago here in Oakland, you created a more streamlined process to bring things straight to council more often.

Um, maybe this is a time that things can be brought back to committee and that can be okay and and that we are in a process of uh really trying to, you know, re-establish what we're doing here in Oakland and working through the committee process, working as a full community process uh can be really important, and we may not be able to be as smooth, quick, and agile as you know previous council administration, but that can be okay, and that uh we can you know if we're if we're working on stuff, I just hope it this can be a time to offer this uh I hope we can be doing that together and really together and working on our issues.

So thank you.

Rajni Mundal District 4.

I'm happy to see that OPD's annual reports for surveillance technology will be on the December 9th Public Safety Committee meeting agenda.

I urge council to review these reports since there are questions about whether these technologies are effective and that there was no data.

The Flock annual report was included in the committee's prior agenda packet, so I'm hoping it's read and discussed next week because it includes all the data about its use and effectiveness.

This includes Crime Tracer, whose report clearly dispels many of the claims Mr.

Hofer has made in court.

I also urge council to revisit OPD's contract with Flock and the community camera proposal, as this was an urgent request made by OPD last May, and I believe it requires full council review.

I'm disappointed to see that the mayor's appointments to the police commission were moved from this agenda today.

These positions have been vacant for almost two years, and given the crucial role of the search for a new chief of police, it is imperative that we have those vacancies filled quickly with competent, experienced professionals.

The agenda item noted Mayor Lee's selection of former Alameda Superior Court Judge Avelio Grillo and former mayor Jean Quan.

Please expedite these appointments.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for your comments, Mr.

Chair.

That was the last speaker.

So noting item eight on finance, December 9th, we'll move to January 27th finance.

I'll entertain a motion.

So moved.

There's a motion by council member five, seconded by council member Brown to adopt item four as amended.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember five.

Aye.

And Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

Motion passes with a vote of four ayes.

Moving to item five.

Adopt a resolution calling and giving notice for the holding of a special municipal election on June 2nd, 2026.

For the purpose of submitting to the voters and measure to amend the city's business tax ordinance.

Open municipal code chapter 5.04 to provide business tax exemptions for certain small businesses and new businesses opening locations and commercial spaces and requesting consolidation of the special municipal election with the statewide district primary election to be held in the city of Oakland on June 2nd, 2026, and directing the city clerk to take any and all actions necessary under law to submit this measure to voters at the June 2nd, 2026 election and making appropriate sequel findings.

You do have two speakers on this item.

Colleagues, how much time will you need?

Less than five.

And 4 30.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh Zach Ungar, District 1, I believe we have a PowerPoint from K-TOP.

Um I'll I'll start.

Uh I am enormously excited to bring you uh our business tax relief program.

This is something that council member John uh Johnny Ramachandran and the Mayor's Office and I have been working on jointly since we put the budget together six months ago, and we are trying to provide some relief to our business community.

Let's see.

It's my first time at this dais.

Do I just advance it there?

Oh, look at that.

Fantastic.

Look, we all we all acknowledge that it is not easy to do business in Oakland right now.

There are a host of issues such as uh tariffs, crime, permitting that make it difficult to do to do business in Oakland.

So we are trying to provide some relief in two categories.

First of all, we realize that Oakland is a city of small businesses.

About 90% of our businesses gross less than a million dollars a year, and they have fewer than nine employees.

What we're doing here is announcing a one year gross receipts tax holiday for businesses grossing less than a million dollars a year in five specific categories.

We are trying to highlight businesses that are really ground level retail, brick and mortar businesses that activate neighborhoods and bring in foot traffic.

This will help us boost revenues in the long term and reduce those vacant storefronts that are a scourge for all of our neighborhoods.

This is inspired by San Francisco's successful first year free program, and we are excited by the small business program.

So again, the small business program is just for uh businesses in categories A, B, E, G, and that should say I there, which gross less than one million dollars.

This will be for the tax year beginning 2027, which is a little confusing.

It is the calendar year of 2026.

And of course, this only applies to businesses that are in good standing already.

Um those are the five categories of businesses to which this will apply.

Um the second part of this is to attract new businesses because we all know that we have had a structural deficit in Oakland, and uh the only way to get ourselves out of this in the long term is to grow our economy, and our business community is what we need to grow our economy.

So, what we're trying to do is incentivize new businesses to come to Oakland, understanding that they have a choice.

So this applies to all categories of business, not just the five that were the small businesses.

And unlike San Francisco's first year free program, we are not limiting it to specific parts of Oakland.

We want economic development all throughout Oakland.

So this applies to any business relocating to Oakland in calendar year 2027, which is confusingly to me always called tax year 2028, but it is calendar year 2027.

And these are businesses that do not already have existing business locations in Oakland, and they can realize a tax benefit of up to one million dollars.

So, because of our our tax structure, that means that a business grossing up to about 80 million dollars would not have to pay taxes, and uh I hope we can attract a lot of those businesses over 80 million dollars.

Um, see here.

Uh fortunately, there is no financial impact to this because we've been thinking about this for a long time and we budgeted for it in the budget cycle.

Uh, had we done this first year or this uh small business incentive program in 2023, it would have cost approximately 1.6 million dollars, but we budgeted three million dollars in order to give ourselves a large cushion for this.

The new business incentive program is an opportunity cost, not a hard cost, because the businesses that are not currently here are also not currently paying us business tax.

Uh so that is the um essential facts on this, and I want to thank Council Member Ramachandran, I want to thank the mayor's office, and I want to thank our our chamber of commerce, all of our chambers of commerce for being here for supporting this, for working with us, and we are excited to change the relationship between city hall and the business community.

We can grow our way out of our structural deficit by making sure that businesses come here, work here, employ people here, and fill up those vacant storefronts.

Thank you.

Very efficient.

You have council member Ramachan, you're in 10 seconds.

I like why.

Exactly what Councilmember Unger said about the many multiple flowing benefits of this proposal.

This is cost neutral.

We already budgeted the double, almost double the amount that we need for this program.

And when we have every vacant storefront filled in Oakland, when we're able to support every existing small business from becoming a vacant storefront, Oakland thrives.

We are a city that is built on the backs of the strength, the vitality, the diversity of our business community.

And I'm excited to really bring something that's innovative, something that other cities have started to do that's reaping results, and do something that sends a message that open Oakland truly is open for business.

And for those who say, well, that alone isn't going to bring business to Oakland.

No, there's a number of things that we know that various branches of this city, from the mayor's office to council to the administration that are doing to improve our business climate, but I strongly believe that providing incentives is a necessary step given all that's going on to give Oakland this not so friendly business reputation.

I'm really excited that we are all part of the course of changing that.

Councilmember Brown.

Excellent.

I just wanted to quickly say, you know, amazing job to you know Councilmember Unger and Councilmember Ramatanjan, as well as the mayor's office.

And I know that there were so many amazing partners that really helped bring the vision to life, and so um super grateful that we were able to think proactively during the budget cycle to set this this funding aside.

Um, upon reading the report, um, it it really um reflects all of the hard work and the intentionality around um you know uh being able to expand this incentive program to our businesses and even new businesses in uh 2027, and I think that it's an amazing handshake to the economic activation zones that will be launching in 2026.

Um, so just a lot of really good synergy, and so um congratulations, thank you.

Let's go to public comment moving to public comment.

As I call your name, please support the podium in any order.

Please state your name for beginning.

If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand so I can easily identify you.

Josephine Guzman, Stephanie Tran, and Barbara Leslie.

Good morning, Council members.

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

We want to express our strong support for the Oakland business tax incentive.

This will provide meaningful relief for current businesses to stay open, retain uh employees, and reinvest in our local economy.

Also easing the initial tax burden will also allow entrepreneurs to get a strong start in doing business in our city.

So we urge you to continue moving this forward.

And again, we thank Mayor Lee, Councilmember Ramachandran, and Councilmember Unger for continuing to prioritize practical policies that will strengthen our business community.

Thank you.

Josephine Gusman, I'll exceed my time to Barbara, Leslie.

Don't worry, I won't use all the time.

Barbara Leslie, I'm the president and CEO of the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce.

Uh, thank you for uh the opportunity to be here today.

First, I want to just thank the mayor uh and council member Ramashondron and Councilmember Unger for your leadership in bringing this piece of legislation forward.

We know how hard you worked on this, we know you set the stage during the budget process, allowing some of the funds to be set aside for this program.

All of that takes a lot of effort, and we really appreciate that effort.

I'm I'm just really excited to be here to be here today and be able to support this item.

Uh Oakland businesses need this.

Oakland voters want this, and this is an opportunity to really build, and as Councilmember Unger said in his statement, really build and grow the pie.

We talk a lot about growing the general fund and growing the pie so that we have ample resources to support every priority that this city has, and this is an opportunity to do so.

So we are uh very grateful for your leadership.

We are grateful for your vision, and we are looking very forward to supporting this uh as it uh moves through the council process as well.

Is in as well as in June of 26th.

Thank you so much.

Anybody else?

Kathy, you know, speaker.

Okay, I got all the chambers, almost all of them.

All right, is that a motion, Councilmember Ramachandra?

All right, Ramachandra Morale.

On the motion by Councilmember Ramachandra and seconded by council member Brown to approve scheduling of this item and sending it to December 16th.

I'm sorry.

Forwarding to December 16th.

Councilmember Brown, aye.

Councilmember Fife, aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran, and Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

Motion passes with a vote of four eyes.

And what is the body's preference to consent?

Non consent.

I should have asked a co-sponsor.

The people seem happy.

Okay.

Going to item six.

Adopt the resolution calling and giving notice for the holding of a special municipal election on June 2nd, 2026, for the purpose of submitting to the voters a measure that would amend city charter article section 2601 to among other things expand the eligibility for members of the police and fire retirement board and change the board meeting frequency from monthly to no less than quarterly.

Requesting consolidation of the special municipal election with a statewide direct primary election to be held in the city of Oakland on June 2nd, 2026, directing the city clerk to make to take any and all actions necessary under law to submit this measure to the voters at the June 2nd election and making appropriate sequel findings.

I have no speakers on this item.

Councilmember, how much time will you need?

Two minutes and 35 seconds.

All right, put 235 on there.

All right, I guess I am ballot measure guy.

Uh back at you for another round like a stomach virus.

Um if we could put that uh up on the screen, please.

Alright, PEFERS is a closed end uh pension fund for police and fire.

There are no firefighters actively or or police officers currently in it.

This is for uh police and fire hired prior to 1976.

It's a pension fund disability and death benefits.

Um I have on here that it is funded at 90 percent.

That is my error.

It is funded at over a hundred percent right now.

This is an incredibly healthy fund.

We just need to make a couple of um really minor changes to how the board administers itself.

This is not a financial uh issue, this is just a management issue because the um average age for folks on the board is uh and folks in the fund is 81 years old, so you know having them come to monthly meetings and it is is becoming increasingly difficult.

So we are trying to change the membership of the board to allow for uh elected members of the current police department or fire department.

So it doesn't just have to be retirees because it's gonna become increasingly difficult to get these folks to meetings.

Um we are expanding the eligibility for non-members, and we are changing the meeting frequently from frequency from monthly to no less than quarterly.

These members all serve without compensation, that is not going to change.

This is just a pretty simple cleanup, but because this is in our our municipal uh charter, we have to go to the voters for this, and that's it.

Did I did I come in under time?

You have 55 seconds, okay.

You got anything else?

Better than I thought I was.

Council Member Ramchandra.

Thank you.

Uh, this seems straightforward.

Um, I didn't realize we'd have to go to the voters for something like this, but uh, like many things we do, and I'll make the motion.

I I do think we have one uh very small revision to what was published in the agenda.

Second, Celia Warren, Office of the city attorney.

We are suggesting a non-substantive revision to the version of the draft that's in the packet for the council's consideration on page seven of the copy that I hopefully quietly uh distributed to all of the members of the body, and that I left um in front for the members of the public.

On as I said, page seven, you will uh note some highlighted language.

Uh, we'd like to strike the new sentence that was to be appointed and retired system members of the board shall serve without compensation.

You'll see that is in red and stricken.

Uh, we propose to revive the original charter language, which says the members of the board shall serve without compensation.

Uh the added language was a remnant of the PFARS board's iterations of um figuring out what this language should be, and it it can be stricken.

The intent is for the board to serve without compensation.

So the language was already there.

We prefer to go back to the original.

We recommend that be part of your motion.

Thank you.

So we have a motion and second as amended.

No speakers, no speakers.

On item six moved by council member Ramachandran, seconded by council member Brown.

Do your does your motion include the amendments?

Thank you.

Councilmember Brown, aye.

Councilmember Fife, aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

Motion passes with a vote of four ayes.

Going to item seven.

Adopt an ordinance.

I'm sorry, this will be forwarded to December 16th.

And is it the body's desire for this to be on consent?

Yes.

Uh to the motioners.

This is just Unger.

Oh, the.

Oh, five is in the chamber.

Councilmember Fife.

I don't know to the clerk of the attorneys.

Do we have to hear this on non-consent?

Or can we take it to consent?

Through the through the chair to the body.

Um there's no requirement that this be heard on non-consent.

I'll just note that the city charter does provide that ballot measures proposing charter charter amendments must be considered by the city council two times at two meetings.

So we can I'd say given that it's our practice to hear it on non-consent.

Why don't we do that?

That's what I was going to say.

Okay, non-consent.

We'll start with this one.

What is the practice been to the dean?

What is the practice been?

You got you have five years experience to the dean.

Do we hear both items or parliamentary?

Do we hear both items on non-consent?

Normally, you guys have submitted time.

So we can see we'll take it as we get it.

Okay, so this will go to non-consent on the 16th.

Going to item 7.

Yes.

To amend sections 3.12.045 to increase the contribution limits to officeholders' funds, match the temporary increase limits to candidates and candidate control committees, and to extend the sunset date and amend section 3.12.150 to clarify that officeholder expenditures may not be used for mailing within three months of any election for which the election elected officials running for office, noting that this item was added at the three-day um publication of this agenda.

It does need an urgency vote before it is heard.

Through the chair, I will entertain that motion and we can dispense with that vote.

So moved.

Second, so the urgency is important to get this um legislation through.

I made a commitment to my colleagues that I would come in and do cleanup language before the end of the year, and I intend to do that.

The urgency motion moved by Council President Jenkins, seconded by Councilmember Fife.

Councilmember Brown.

Aye.

Councilmember Fife.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

And Chair Jenkins.

Aye.

Motion passes with a vote of four ayes thank you can you give me two minutes please 45 seconds so I stated before this is um cleanup language to language that council member Ramachandran and I brought before you earlier this year um there was cleanup language that I needed to do cleanup language that council member fife requested and cleanup language that council member wong requested so first in fairness this extends the temporary higher contribution limits for candidates until December 31st 2029 so we don't have an odds versus even split um this is the unintended imbalance that gave the 2026 candidates more time than the higher limits under the higher limits than the 2028 candidates extended the dates makes the rules fair and consistent for both election cycles hopefully in the future someone will address uh the issues that we have with campaign finance democracy dollars and how we move forward with that second erases the contribution limits for office holders so that they match temporarily increase limits to campaign committees so this is they've always been aligned the alignment reduces confusion it keeps the cons the system consistent and ensures that elected officials can support community events constituent works without relying on democracy I mean democracy dollars where am I without relying on general fund dollars third this one was from council member won't the ordinance clarifies that officeholders funds cannot be used for any mailers within three months of an election if the official is on the ballot this prince prevents any appearance that the officeholder funds are being used for campaign purposes and it helps maintain public trust so overall these updates ensure that the campaign reform act remains fair modern and transparent they create consistent rules across election cycles and protect against potential misuse of officeholder funds and strengthens public confidence in Oakland's democratic process thank you seeing that there's no speakers oh council member fife um I'm gonna have to have you call me Dean Fife and the public should acknowledge that since I have been deemed the dean that I should also get the respect for being the upper classman um that said I I appreciate the fact that you made those amendments um based on the body and what some of my concerns were so um I wanted to offer you the opportunity to make the motion and I will second so moved second dean fife there was a motion by council president jenkins second by council excuse me council segment by dean fife to approve the item with the amendments 16th going to December 16th on consent on consent council member brown aye dean fife you're the real dean but aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran I'm sorry your mic I'm sorry councilmember Ramachandran aye and Chair Jenkins aye motion passes with a vote of four ayes that was your last discussion item moving to open forum as I call your name please approach the podium in any order please state your name for the record if you're on Zoom please raise your hand so I can easily identify you George Spees Rajani Mondal Kevin Daly and Blair Beekman.

This is Kevin Daly from Transport Oakland.

The electronic speaker card and e-comment for rules committee is broken.

It is not at all usable.

The entire the limit, if I want to sign up remotely, I have to sign up 24 hours in advance.

But the entire agenda, specifically new scheduling items, does not show up until 24 hours, until less than 24 hours before the meeting.

So by the time item three, new scheduling items is online, it is too late to sign on.

Of course, I'm a glutton for punishment, so I sign up for item three just in case or show up in person.

We if we'd had advanced notice of this attempt to bypass committees with the fire code, we would have had many other people sign up remotely.

This policy discourages public comment.

I don't think it is what the rules committee wants.

Thank you.

Rajny Mundal District 4.

Last week, the federal judge overseeing the NSA accepted a community petition into the court record.

This petition had over 1,000 signatures from residents of all seven districts who urge the judge to end the NSA and allow Oaklanders to control their own policing.

The federal monitor again finds OPD not in compliance, especially with investigative timelines, which the city has clearly stated is due to low staffing.

We barely have enough cops for patrol, less than 30 per shift.

Should we be prioritizing unattainable NSA goals and timelines at the expense of public safety?

I believe not, and at this point, the NSA is directly affecting public safety.

I also believe that it's time to reassess civilian oversight of OPD and to examine the effectiveness of the police commission and this branches of CIPAR and OIG.

I'm anxiously awaiting the city auditors' findings of their most recent review.

I'm also heartened to hear discussions during the mayor's charter reform community sessions about reforming section 604 of the charter, which pertains to the police commission.

We need balanced oversight and enforcement, which we currently do not have, and it's hurting our city each and every day.

Thank you.

Hi, thank you.

Blair Beekman, thanks for the meeting today.

Thanks for the previous public comment.

I have the same problem.

In fact, a few weeks ago I had the very problem of uh signing up on Zoom, and then my uh items weren't fully understood what I signed up for for three because of what was explained, the 24 hours problem.

Good luck in really working on that.

Currently, if I write back to yourselves at around 3 p.m.

in the afternoon to the city clerk's office on Wednesday with a list of what you know agenda items have arrived, you know, for to speak at rules on Thursday, um, that's acceptable to you and makes it a clear process.

And that's the best way I worked out with the clerks how that can function well and smoothly.

Um but it is awkward.

Um good luck how to really work on it.

And uh so thanks.

I'm here today, and uh thanks for all your patience with me in trying to work it out.

Um I also wanted to mention um the importance with the uh ALPR vendor issue.

Um I felt that the judgment that council committee persons and commission persons from the PAC, they could not make motions to ask how to uh question if we can start looking into a new ALPR vendor.

Um, that happened in both committees and commissions.

Um, it was a very narrow interpretation that you could only speak to the flock item, I felt.

Is there an item now that it's been failed?

It was been said at those meetings that uh an item now has to come back to the committees and agendas on uh a new flock vendor.

Is that going to be happening for ourselves?

Um it has to be a question, and I hope we're questioning it.

Uh good luck, and good luck on having open communication about current Bay US the emergency preparedness for Bay Area.

It's an important issue.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Beekman.

Does uh conclude our public comments?

This meeting's adjourned.