The Oakland Public Safety Committee convened on May 12, 2026, at 6:03 PM to consider eight agenda items, including consent calendar items, a grant for community violence prevention activations, equipment contracts for the fire department, a proposed internship MOU with USC, and biannual reports from OPD and CPRA. The meeting included significant public comment and deliberation, resulting in several items being forwarded to the full council and one item being continued for additional information.
Okay. Okay. Okay. Good evening and welcome to the public safety committee meeting of Tuesday, May twelfth, two thousand twenty-six. The time is now six. Oh three PM, and this meeting may come to order. Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit speaker cards for items on this agenda. If you're here with us in chamber and would like to submit a speaker card, please fill one out and turn one into myself or a clerk representative no later than ten minutes after the start of this meeting or before the item is read into record. Registering to speak via Zoom is now due twenty-four hours prior to the start of this meeting. We'll now proceed with taking roll. Council Member Brown, who is noticed on the agenda for remote participation. Council member five present. Yeah, let's move forward. Okay, reading in item one, approval of the draft minutes from the committee meetings of March twenty-fourth and april twenty-first, two thousand twenty-six. There are no public speakers on this item. Okay. I'll move approval. Do I got a second? All right. Thank you. That's a motion made by Council Member Pipe, seconded by Council Member Houston to accept the draft minutes from the committee committee meetings of March twenty fourth and April twenty-first, 2026. On roll council members Brown. Aye. Five. Aye. Easton? And Chair Wong. Aye. Thank you. Item number one passes with four eyes to accept the draft minutes. Item two, determination of schedule of outstanding committee items, and there are two speakers that signed up to speak. We'll go to public comment. Calling in the names that sign up to speak on item number two. Asada Olabala and Rajni Mandal. I'm concerned about anything that has to do with how we're doing intervention with our youth related to public safety. Having said that, we do have a uh violence prevention interrupter program that goes into the schools to deal with uh challenges around violence. We need to have a report on that and how it's working. We also have uh our police officers and the stop data that they're required to do. They are required to implement truancy stops, and we haven't got any kind of report on that element of our children being out of school when they're supposed to be in school. I also am concerned about the last uh allowing of $250,000 for faith in action to do outreach to the ceasefire community, or what can be said it can be considered gangs or individuals. I'm not sure how y'all doing it now, but I do not see how that qualification was met. You have to have a skill set to do outreach to individuals who are engaged in criminal activity. Now anybody can't pick up the phone and say come to a meeting. You have to have a strategy on how to do that, and I don't know if faith in action has that strategy in place. I'm also uh challenged by the responsibility of officers to make a decision on citation or warning, and if that may have an element of racial profiling, the data does it exist when you make a stop, the citation, the warning that was given by race. Lastly, uh on public uh communication, identification. Sometimes you identify Rajni Mandel District 4. This is for the NSA item future agenda item. Uh, there's a growing narrative that reforming Oakland's civilian oversight structure could somehow threaten compliance with the NSA, federal oversight. But the commission, the police commission's own CMC statement actually highlights why we need to clearly separate civilian oversight from federal compliance administration.