Good evening and welcome to the public safety committee meeting of Tuesday, May twenty sixth, two thousand twenty-six.

The time is now six.

Oh seven 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 time.

This meeting came to order at six.

Oh seven PM, and speaker cards will no longer be accepted ten minutes after, making that time six seventeen PM.

We'll now proceed with taking role.

Council members Brown present.

Present.

We have no speakers.

We just need a motion.

Second.

Thank you.

That's a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Councilmember Fife to accept the appropriate accept the draft minutes from the committee meeting of May 12, 2026.

On roll council members Brown.

Aye.

Five.

All right.

Houston's excuse and Chair Wong.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item number one passes with three eyes, one excused Houston.

Reading in item two, determination of schedule of outstanding committee items.

And we have one speaker that signed up to speak.

Okay.

Colleagues, city administration.

Do the chair.

I have nothing.

Okay.

Thank you.

Move approval of the um pending list.

Okay.

Great.

Second.

Yes, we'll go to public comment.

Thank you.

Calling in the name that signed up to speak on item number two, Rajni Mandal.

Rajni, you can unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Rajni Mandel District 4.

This is regarding the NSA update.

For tomorrow's federal court hearing on Oakland's negotiated settlement agreement.

I wanted to take a moment to recognize something important.

For the first time in the history of the NSA process, OPD has reached compliance with all 51 tasks.

A milestone that reflects years of work and more recently, extraordinary collaboration.

I want to acknowledge the leadership and efforts of Mayor Barbara Lee, Chief James Beer, Assistant City Administrator Michelle Phillips, Deputy Chief Lisa Osmus, Deputy Chief Baron Smith, City Attorney Ryan Richardson, Bridget Martin, and many staff across OPD, the City Administrator's Office, City Attorney's Office who have worked tirelessly behind the scenes.

Tomorrow's hearing will likely focus not on whether progress has happened, but whether it can last.

I hope we recognize how much hard work has gone into reaching this point and continue supporting the leadership and collaboration that have brought Oakland here.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair that concludes all speakers on this item.

And we do have a motion.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Councilmember Fife to accept the determination of schedule of outstanding committee items as is on roll council members Brown.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Houston's excuse and Chair Wong.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item number two passes with three ayes, one excuse Houston to accept the pending list as is.

Now going on to item number six.

Adopt a resolution approving the 2026 to 2030 community violence reduction plan as required by the Oakland Community Violence Reduction and Emergency Responses Response Act of 2024.

And approved by the Oakland Public Safety Planning and Oversight Commission.

And there are three speakers that signed up to speak on this item.

Great.

Felicia, are you giving the presentation today?

Hey Felicia, how's it going?

Good afternoon, Chair Wong and members of the committee, Felicia Verde and City Administrator's Office.

The presentation will be made by the Chair of the Ops Back, Oakland Public Safety Planning and Oversight Commission, Yuana Chukleva, and Vice Chair Julia Owens, and they are both here to present this afternoon.

Great.

Thanks for clarifying that.

You guys have the floor.

Okay, good evening, everybody.

Thank you, Councilmember Wong.

Thank you so much, Council members, and all to all the community members who are here.

It is an honor to stand before you tonight to talk about the four-year balance uh reduction plan that we have developed in collaboration with our three superstar departments.

Um and I before I begin, I just want to name that I was the chair up until last week.

Now I'm just the commissioner, and our actual chair, Julia Owens, is here with us today as well.

And Vice Chair Carrie Gutierrez will be joining us shortly.

And we have with us also Deputy Chief Tedesco from the police department, Chief Covington from the fire department, and I think Chief Josh is here.

Oh, we'll be on her way shortly since we changed the agenda item time.

And they will also speak briefly as well.

And here tonight, we are going to present our uh community violence reduction plan for the years 2026 to 2030.

Um our presentation will cover a very brief reminder of what measure and then does, a synthesis of our process for developing the plan, and an overview of the plan's four-year goals, metrics, and strategies.

We're gonna move through this presentation at a lightning speed.

We've been given 12 minutes, so we're gonna be really, really fast.

So there's plenty of time for questions.

And actually, it would be really great if we could get the slides on up on the screen.

I'm not sure.

Ah, okay, wonderful.

Can we go to the next slide, please?

So, as you all know, Measure and N was approved by about 71% of voters in 2024 to provide stable funding through parcel and parking taxes to support violence prevention efforts in our cities.

It has three key objectives to reduce homicides, robberies, carjackings, break-ins, domestic violence, and all gun-related violence.

Number two, to improve Naiwan response times, number three to reduce the incidence of human trafficking, including the sexual exploitation of minors.

Every year, the measure is projected to raise 24 to 20, 45 to 47 million dollars.

If we can go back to the next slide, that would be great, of which about three million go to the fire department, 23 million or 60% of the rest after administrative expenses and net annual budget and financial expenses go to police services, and the last 40% go to the violence prevention services.

And the measure created us this OPSPOC, the Oakland Public Safety Planning and Oversight Commission to ensure accountability for taxpayer dollars.

And we can go to the next slide.

So we are a five-member citizen planning and oversight commission appointed by the mayor.

This is a photo of us.

This is my little baby.

As you can hear, she's upset that I'm not with her in this moment.

So she make more she might make more appearances.

But we're appointed by the mayor, are always to provide oversight of measure and end funding, develop the community violence reduction plan, evaluate the implementation and impact of the plan, and make policy recommendations to city council.

Our vision is for everybody in Oakland to be able to live free of violence, and our mission is to provide oversight, accountability, and truly transparency to the community.

Everything we have done so far has been about being accountable to the goals of the measure and showing our community the measure and then will make a difference.

If we go to the next slide, so the we're responsible for developing a four-year community violence reduction plan, like I mentioned.

The plan has to describe community needs related to violence reduction impact goals and outcome metrics and strategies for how we're gonna get there.

As mandated by the measure, the plan incorporates the spending plans of each department, and it essentially does this: it takes the spending plans, zooms out, and sets a high-level strategic direction for violence reduction in our city, while the departments themselves make all programmatic and implementation decisions.

And if we go to the next slide, it's a brief overview of the process we've taken to get here.

In the fall, we work closely with the police department, fire department, department of violence prevention to discuss their public safety priorities and to set together strategies and metrics for success.

We then consulted with a lot of the city agencies.

We spoke with the city administrators' office, the city attorney's office, the finance department, the mayor's office, the budget, the director of the uh of the budget of the audit, auditor Houston, the Department of Race and Equity, and also as well.

We spoke with some of you in developing the original goals and strategies.

And we also held focus groups with community members and community-based organizations that are doing violence prevention work that are focusing on human trafficking as well as the measure and coalition and some of the department of violence prevention staff.

In March, we refined all those strategies, and then we drafted our plan.

Then we send the plan to all of you for your input, and we also shared it out with the public because we wanted to get as much feedback as possible.

We held five community listening sessions, one online and four in person, one here, one in East Oakland, West Oakland, Fruitville, because we wanted to hear from communities that are most impacted by violence.

And so here we are today.

You have the final version in your hands.

We hope that you approve it so that you can bring it to the full city council meeting on June 2nd, and the plan will then go into effect on July 1st as required by the measure.

And we and just want to preface and note here that if you were to vote for approval of the this plan, you're not changing any of the budgeting processes, procurement processes, or financial processes the city already has.

The departments still need to develop their budgets and their spending plans in collaboration with the finance department.

What this plan simply does is sets a strategic roadmap for where we are going for violence reduction in the city as required by the measure itself.

So everything in this plan, as we've confirmed with the city attorney's office complies with the law, and you see you as city council members, you know, continue to have all the authority that you already have in the proving budgets and making other decisions for our city.

So with that, I'm gonna pass the mic to oops, uh Vice Chair, Vice Chair Gutierrez, who's uh joining us right now.

Um I'm just gonna give her a second to situate herself because she came right on time.

Okay, hi, good evening, council members.

Thank you so much for uh making the time to meet with us, and apologies for my uh tidiness.

Um so this next slide.

Uh you all know this uh slide.

It's really about how uh crime in Oakland has uh gone down through many different categories.

So, in respect of time, we're gonna move past this.

Feel free to take a look at that in your packet.

Next slide.

All right, so themes from community listening sessions.

So, in addition to relying on quantitative data, our listening sessions and other community engagement activities helped surface other critical community needs.

What we heard in these meetings was support for one, more upstream youth violence, youth prevention services in Oakland, two, renewed commitments to community policing, and three, greater investments in addressing commercial sexual exploitation.

Although the community violence reduction plan cannot do it all, the strategies laid out in the CVRP are designed to sustain and build on the momentum the city has made in violence reduction to accelerate improvement in areas requiring greater investment, and ensure reductions in crime and violence are experienced equitably across Oakland communities.

Next slide.

Okay, so now we're going to share with you the community violence reduction plan's four-year community violence reduction goals and an overview of the 12 strategies designed to achieve these goals.

So we're going to start with the first seven.

The four-year community violence reduction goals established by the commission and departments are these.

One, reduce homicides and non-fatal shootings annually by 10% through 2030.

Two, reduce domestic violence, sexual assault, commercial sexual exploitation crimes by 10% by 2030.

Three, improve clearance rates for violent crimes named in Measure N, including homicides, robberies, carjackings, domestic violence, and gun-related violence by 10% by 2030.

Four.

So four, improve feelings of safety, resilience, and reduce trauma among people served through direct services funded by Measure N by 2030.

Five, improve 911 answering speeds such that 90% of all 911 calls are answered within 15 seconds by 2030.

Improve OPD response times to meet the state average of five minutes for violent crimes by 2030.

And seven, maintain a sworn police force of at least 700 police personnel and at least 400 480 firefighters by 2030.

Okay, and now I'm gonna pass it to Commissioner Julia.

Hello.

Nice to see you all again.

These strategies were developed to achieve these goals and are organized by three main functional areas direct intervention for people most affected by violence, strengthening Oakland public safety systems, and improving emergency response.

Next slide, please.

One more.

So the majority of funding is allocated to Strategies 1 through 4, which are direct interventions for people impacted by violence and are led by DVP and OPD.

Strategy 1 supports direct wraparound services for people at the highest risk of gun violence, including outreach, hospital-based intervention, and life coaching.

Services supported under this strategy are provided by the DVP staff and CBO grantees.

Strategy two supports OPD's implementation of ceasefire, the city's focused deterrence strategy.

It funds sworn personnel to conduct enforcement operations and collaboration to reduce street group and network related shootings and homicides, decrease recidivism and incarceration for individuals engaged in violence, and strengthen trust between communities and public safety systems.

Strategy three funds the development of crime reduction teams within OPD, or excuse me, funds the deployment of crime reduction teams within OPD, which are tasked with investigating and responding to violent crimes in areas of the city that are hardest hit by violence and crime.

CRTs operate as a cross-functional resource within OPD, leading complex high risk operations and providing essential support to ceasefire, the special victims unit, homicide, robbery, and local and federal task forces.

Strategy four supports the provision of direct services to survivors of domestic violence or commercial sexual exploitation.

Similar to the CVI strategy or services in strategy one, these direct services are provided by DVP staff and CBO grantees.

For strategies five through nine, these will strengthen Oakland's public safety system.

Strategy five supports a multi-pronged recruitment and retention efforts to achieve and maintain the minimum staffing levels of sworn and non-sworn personnel as required by Measure NN.

Strategy 6 supports activities designed to foster and sustain trust between OPD and the residents of Oakland, which may include community engagement activities, communication efforts, and internal practices that strengthen transparency.

Strategy 7 supports increased capacity to pursue grants and new funding opportunities that align with the Measure NN objectives.

Strategy 8 supports capacity building and training for the ecosystem of nonprofit providers and DVP staff providing community violence intervention and gender-based violence services.

Strategy 9 supports OPD's efforts to increase enforcement and strengthen collaboration with other agencies in order to interrupt commercial sexual exploitation, including the sexual exploitation of minors.

Activities supported under this strategy include enforcement, investigation, expanded staffing, collaborations, and relationship building with CBOs.

For strategies 10 through 12, these focus on improving emergency response.

Strategy 10 invests in efforts to improve the quality and efficiency of Oakland's alternative response programs.

This may include evaluation, program improvement, capacity building, and efforts to scale alternative response programs.

Strategy 11 expands capacity for emergency response through staffing personnel and training enhancements.

It also supports partnership activities with Oakland youth and residents.

And finally, Strategy 12 funds equipment upgrades for OFD and OPD that improve the speed, quality, and equity of emergency response and protect the health and well-being of Oakland's first responders.

Thank you for listening to our very brief, very fast presentation on the CVRP.

Before we move into your questions, I will pass it to the chiefs to share their thoughts on the plan.

Good evening, I'm Deputy Chief Anthony Tedesco.

I have been working with the Commission over the course of, well, over a year now.

And was I was going through this process and looking at it and drafting an OPD strategic spending plan to supplement.

Looking at the measure and the language of the measure and what I believe is the intent, getting the Oakland police department to a minimum of 700 police officers, is really instrumental in accomplishing many of the intertwined goals.

And so when I look at this, it's going to be about retaining our current staff.

There's a number of ways that we can do that, and then recruiting and being competitive in the market.

And so when I look at this C VRP and working in it, it was important to OPD that this is that those were reflected in this plan.

And I can tell you from the police department's perspective, those are encompassed in this C VRP.

This does provide a framework to go forward that will need to be supplemented and reflected in budget that can allow the police department to grow back to 700, where it where it needs to continue beyond that, and allow for improved working conditions and officer wellness that can improve retention.

So in from the police department's perspective, this CVRP reflects the goals of the measure and what is needed from the police department in order to be successful.

It is not static, it has the ability because four years is quite some time, and the needs will change.

But I suspect that over that time, the need to retain and recruit will be maintained.

We will need that.

And so the prioritization of funding to those issues, wellness, improved working conditions, the use of technology, things that will make it more appealing for people in our current staff to stay, and then recruiting top quality candidates in the Bay Area, well qualified people to continue to work for the city of Oakland.

I think that is reflected in the C VRP.

And I am happy I'll I'll remain to answer questions and I'll pass it off to the next chief.

Good evening.

Um I'll just echo some of the sentiments of Chief Tedesco.

We worked with the Bright group as well as the commissioners for several months on creating lanes that identified OFD need and the objectives of the C VRP.

Every single spending item we had has a direct nexus to something that is in the CRP C VRP.

And we want to make sure that the public safety commissioners know that this plan is a two-year plan.

We have some definite needs in the fire department right now that specifically impact our first responders directly, whether that's emergency equipment, defibrillators, Lucas device, we've identified those.

As those come off of the spending plan, we can reallocate that money to different initiatives within the city that have not been identified right now.

But every single spending priority that we have is directly connected to the C VRP.

And we know that there's a lot of we don't we don't get a lot of the the measure money, but we want to be very efficient with the money that we do get and make sure that we're spending it in a way that um stands up to an audit the annual audit as well as input from the community to make sure that they're comfortable with how we're spending the money and that we're spending it wisely.

Um we uh have all different types of initiatives within our spending plan, whether that's community involvement uh from a core and cert perspective, where we're having forward-facing um instruction for that as well as mental health for our non-sworn uh responders.

So um I we we are very uh pleased, we're very appreciative from the commission as well as the Bright Group uh for assisting us uh and giving us direction on how year over year we can make this three million dollars be impactful for the city, and I'll be here for questions.

Thank you.

Do we have oh great?

Thanks, Dr.

Joshi.

Good evening, Holly Joshi, Chief of the Department of Violence Prevention.

From our perspective at the Department of Violence Prevention, this was surprisingly a collaborative and smooth process.

I have to be honest, we were very nervous about the process of creating a four-year strategic plan with a new body, a new oversight body.

And this body took the time to number one really understand the city's priorities when it comes to public safety, and very specifically to understand the work that the DVP is currently carrying, the landscape nationally, and what has supported us in leading to the reductions in violence.

The plan was developed directly in collaboration with the Department of Violence Prevention staff after many iterations of meetings, listening sessions, and we are feeling very confident that the plan continues to allow us the permission to focus.

And I think that is what's really important about this current iteration of the Department of Violence Prevention.

As a reminder, we were stood up in 2019, and we were absolutely not focused.

We were really trying to do a little bit of everything, including upstream prevention, intervention, etc.

And so over the past two and a half years, we've been given by council, the mayor's office, the city administration the permission to focus, and that is what we wanted to clearly come through in the plan.

And it's in alignment with the charter mandates of the Department of Violence Prevention, which are to specifically focus on the reductions of homicides and shootings, the reduction of gender-based violence, and addressing community trauma associated with those things.

And so that is what the plan allows for us to do.

It's alignment with our spending plan and our priorities.

So thank you.

I'll be here for questions as well.

And just a quick clarification.

Earlier, Chief Covington mentioned a two-year plan.

This is the four-year violence reduction plan in alignment with their spending plan.

Okay, we're here for your questions, Councilmembers.

Yeah, and I I did want to make some commentary.

I know that we've been uh back and forth um all day, and actually before even today, that I first of all I want to appreciate you all for your hard work on this.

I know this is a lot, uh, a significant amount of responsibility for a volunteer commission to take on.

So I want to thank you for what is your tireless work on behalf of the community.

Um I also want to recognize and acknowledge that uh you all have incorporated much of the feedback that I've given over the last uh couple of weeks leading up to this plan.

Um, and I know that perhaps some of the feedback I've given today has you know ruffled some feathers, mostly because I I think that, you know, I had some conversations recently, and most of it is just I think this is an enormous amount of money.

It is 47 million dollars a year, and I do think that it is the job of this body and city council to scrutinize the spending.

It's not to uh criticize.

I think there's a lot of great things in here actually.

I had picked up that you all are recommending body worn cameras with like translation technology, right?

Um mental health support for our dispatchers, who we know are incredibly uh like burned out, like they are at capacity, they are literally getting cancer from the job.

I just talked to uh Antoinette earlier today on uh what's going on in the dispatch center.

So I want to acknowledge that.

I just for me, I think we need to scrutinize how we're spending this how we're spending this money, especially with another ballot measure related to uh public safety coming before us, and I think we need to just uh reflect on what we're hearing from our constituents and making sure that that is being reflected in this plan.

I will say that one thing that I don't think is uh just stressed enough in this plan is really on the 911 response.

I think it's embedded in some of the strategies, but it is not prioritized enough.

It was one of the four things I go back to the ballot text, since I think that should always be the guiding document.

The ballot text is what the statute says and what the voters agreed on.

And one of the top things they said was bringing down the 911 response time.

I actually spoke with the organizers who were responsible for actually ensuring that this money came before us.

They said the number one thing that they heard over and over and over again from constituents was the need to bring down the 911 response time.

I myself this last week placed a call um because I was I happened to be a block away from a traffic accident an overturned car in my district call 911 I first placed one call.

It took one minute and I thought maybe it's my phone that there's the issue.

So I placed another call and at the 30 second mark I thought let me actually time this to see how long it'll take for me to get through and I was on hold for five minutes and albeit while somebody else was able to get through um who was another witness my concern is what if I wasn't the loan witness for this incident so I I that is one thing that I really want to see more of and that's my my feedback on this plan is that I don't think it speaks to that I also have the pleasure of visiting the 911 dispatch center and and also talking to Antoinette about the specific situation and it seems that one of the issues is that we are relying on some outdated technology.

There's something that California is moving to called next gen 911 where it actually allows you to have like embedded GPS.

So when someone calls in they don't need to say I'm at this and this intersection they're actually you know automatically identified and also we're not routed through the CHP system.

So it's these things that I want to push uh just push the bar on that way we're really being responsive to what we're seeing from our constituents is as not being good enough in our public safety response system.

Colleagues Councilmember Brown okay I wasn't sure if you wanted uh them to engage your your comments.

I want it to be on the sofa okay um excellent well I will have really chime in first off I just want to you know thank you all for your amazing work and leadership.

I know that last year in um as we were trying to get the commission established right everything was moving so quickly and so just really appreciate appreciative of you all's leadership um during that time.

So I I had the opportunity of course to meet with um most of you as well as the Bright group and so and also just read the report um which is just so thorough and so thank you uh to everyone that was involved in really um providing a roadmap right um to support um the various strategies and also in answering um you know what the voters have approved for us to spin right um and being so detailed about it um and so one question that um I have and I guess maybe it's more of clarity and it was in my notes from when I met with the Bright group um it says not all spending strategies will be the same every year um there will sometimes be like one-time expenses and different prioritizations is that accurate yes yes that is accurate uh absolutely there's some for example some of the equipment that the Oakland fire department can um purchase with these funds ones that's bought then it's replaced then the next year it doesn't need to be put purchased again this is why there's some flexibility in this plan and and to council member wang's previous point if you have a specific idea around next gen for example you can work with the department itself over the next years to make sure that that is funded through measure and end funds.

Everything that's here is not uh is not the limit of what can be done, right?

Like what we are doing is setting goals and strategies that are high level, and then the activities themselves are determined by the departments each year, and the activities that we have listed in the plan are examples.

They're the kinds of things that departments can spend money on.

They're not exhaustive.

So if you have an idea on something, you know, that is something that you can bring up to the department, and the department itself retains the discretion and authority to make programmatic decisions.

Excellent.

Uh thank you.

Um and then my second question, um, I guess it's just more around like community engagement on this plan.

I know that you all had a handful of community engagement sessions.

Um, what was it that the public was saying um kind of in their feedback as it kind of compares to this finalized document that we have?

Yeah, thank you for that question.

Community engagement was really at the center of the work that uh we led.

Um we had a training with uh Darlene Flynn around how to equitably engage our community through this process, and so we held a total of five community engagement sessions uh throughout Oakland, DP Soken all the way to the West.

Um, and some of the themes that came out of that, um, I'm really proud to share that uh in Fruitville, we held a session, and there were maybe about 20 folks that were there, and we were talking about the need to hire 700 police officers.

Um, and the community was really excited about partnering with the police department, inviting them to our work um workforce fairs to make sure that the community is part of this process and that community folks um are actually applying to the police department.

As we know, a lot of folks in the police department do not come directly from Oakland.

Um, so that was one thing that I was really happy to hear about.

Um the other thing was about youth workforce.

Uh, definitely wanting to uplift the need to provide more opportunity for young people to um have access to jobs, um, and so you know, those are some of the priorities that we're gonna be working on with the departments on.

Um, and yeah, uh, really satisfied with the community engagement part of it.

Excellent.

Um, and so I was asking that question around community engagement, um, because I know that my office has received various varying community engagement around some of the needs that are top of mind to residents, and so I'm just going to state a couple just for awareness, especially as we are looking into some of the future years and how we're allocating the funding.

And of course, with this first one that I'm gonna uplift, I a hundred percent agree that we need to prioritize staffing OPD, and that has to come first.

Um, but we all know that a lot of community members are also interested in community policing and really have a strong desire to uh bring that back as well.

Um, I was delighted to see um the of course the cadet program being outlined.

We also saw something similar with OFD as well.

Um, but um I can continue to ask this larger question around how we are indeed supporting uh young people in our city uh through all of our programming, and including some of the programs that may be offered through the DVP as well.

So just wanted to uplift those points.

Yes, and thank you for lifting that up.

Um actually that's one of the things that came up in the community listening session sessions, too.

Um community members feel like the CROs are just a critical part of the uh corridors within our neighborhoods, and so they really are adamant about bringing that particular piece back.

Um, we're working with the police department and chief uh to DESCO to make sure that that's a priority as well.

But I think one of the first things that needs to happen is for us to fill those roles first, but it's definitely uh top of mind.

Thank you.

Councilmember Houston.

Yes, through the chair.

Um, you know, Oakland, you guys are doing a great job.

Everybody's doing a great job.

And I've enough of I've started to focus just more in district seven, district seven, because I was always all over the place in every district, so I've just been honing in on D7.

And um and and I wanted to find out that 10% for the CBOs, that um penalty if they don't um handle or you utilize the money for the result-based accountability of for these tier ones.

This is for um director Yoshi, because she's been really good at keeping me um organized.

I'm sorry she had called me and I didn't I called her and I didn't get her back.

But I wanted to find out is that mandated at 10% if they don't bring back result-based accountability to address these um tier ones, because my folks in D7 is tier ones and they they're not being touched, they're not being that it's not to you, it's not to you.

I'm just saying my tier ones, they out there is rough, and I want to know how can we mandate um a higher percentage, like is can we do like a 25% if they don't?

Because if you give get somebody a million dollars, and I don't have to bring back result-based accountability, I don't have to bring back data, and I've got to give you a hundred thousand dollars back and I can keep nine hundred thousand dollars.

What you gonna do?

I'm gonna give you back a hundred thousand, not me, I'm just saying, right.

So, is it any way we can mandate a higher percentage on that?

If they don't bring back that result-based accountability and look at the ones that were getting this money, because my folks in D7, my tier ones are not being touched.

Okay, council member Houston, thank you for the question.

I just want to make sure before I answer it that I'm understanding what you want.

It sounds like you're asking if the 10% that is often utilized as a punishment accountability measure in the CBO contracts by the city that if the currently if the CBOs do not meet their deliverables, we are able to reduce their their income by about 10%.

So are you asking if that can be upped to 25%?

Yes, yes, ma'am.

Okay, that would have to be a conversation that we would have with contracts unit and the city attorney's office during the contract conversation, and that will be coming to you all in June.

The community-based organizations are not named in this strategic plan.

This is a very general, as as they indicated, high-level strategy conversation today about the things that we'd like to focus on and the types of activities that we will fund.

We just went through an RFP process though, to your point, um, and now have a ranked list of community-based organizations that we will be coming back to the council to ask for approval on those funding uh levels for those community-based organizations.

And this is the first time since I've been at the Department of Violence Prevention that we've had a new list, a new ranked list of community-based organizations to choose from.

The other contracts have been inherited, and we've been working with inherited contracts.

Um the other thing that I'll say is that I think because this strategic plan does have accountability specific measurements of results in the strategic plan that we're all be held accountable to those results, including the Department of Violence Prevention internal staff.

I always say that I'm not gonna hold community-based partners to a standard that I'm not willing to hold my staff to.

And that we're actually creating sustainability and a healthy ecosystem of community-based organizations that are able to rise to the level that you want them to rise to, and I'll just very very briefly speak from my experience when I was leading a community-based organization that was receiving money from the city.

At that time, before there was a department of violence prevention, and there was just a small unit called Oakland Unite, that unit focused on pushing out dollars to community-based organizations, and they very much focused on results and making sure that the community-based organizations had the training and support and coaching that we needed in order to deliver on those results.

When we pivoted to the DVP, the entire budget for supports around coaching and training for community-based organizations went away.

And so we've just recently brought that back.

So to your point about accountability for community-based organizations, I think it's hugely important, and it also goes hand in hand with what's outlined in this strategic plan around making sure that we have the capacity through measure and end dollars to support the training needs of the community-based organizations so that they can deliver services in alignment with all of our expectations.

Thank you.

So if we keep this in in committee, will that mess anything up if we keep it until I find out they're gonna be doing 25% penalty?

I mean, will that mess anything up if we keep this in committee?

I think that maybe these ladies can answer that question.

I don't think that it's mutually exclusive.

I don't think that the two things are necessarily related in the way that I understand.

And I'm saying this, this is my people is hurting out there, doctor.

They hurt D7.

It's like it's rough, and I want my people to get, you know, get some some support, you know.

So you we forced into the underground economy and to do um savage things because they they left out.

So, Council Member Houston.

What I'll say just in response to that, that I think is really important about the plan and about our capacity to spend and end dollars, is it allows us to scale what we know is working, right?

We need to just scale what's working.

So when you're saying that some people aren't getting supports and services, I absolutely believe you hear you witness it and understand what you're saying, and I think you know I'm from D7 as well.

So, so when you say your people, I feel like those are my people too.

Of course, I'm focused on all of Oakland, but D7, of course, has a special place in my heart as well because that's home, and I do think that there is probably a disparate number of people who need supports and services living in specific um areas of Oakland, and we want to make sure this this is an equity conversation always.

We want to make sure that those individuals that need services and supports the most are getting them.

The problem at this moment is scale and our capacity to serve the number of people that need services.

Um we are serving a extremely high-risk population and we're serving them well.

It's just really increasing our capacity to do it, and we cannot do that alone internally at the DVP because we only have 12 life coaches, and as you know, those 12 life coaches can only serve 10 people at a time.

So we need the community-based organizations to be able to step into the gap.

So, last question through the chair.

Last question.

Um, this 10 to 14 million dollars, is that only for our tier ones?

The vast majority of the strategic plan is focused on tier one.

Now, the I know that a lot of people want us to be able to get to tier two, tier three prevention, upstream prevention, and we want to get there as well.

Once we are able to scale and serve the 240 to 350 highest risk individuals that you're speaking about, then the department will be in a really strong position to begin to serve tier two risk level, upstream prevention, etc.

We want to be in a situation like Richmond, right?

Richmond had an office of violence prevention for a long time.

Their office of violence prevention is now in a scenario where they don't have enough shootings, homicides, gang group violence to focus all of their resources on tier one.

So they're in a position that we want to be in where we are doing prevention and upstream uh intervention work.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

So I haven't got most tier ones.

Mm-hmm.

We got the tier ones.

All right, so all right.

Councilmember Fife.

Are we going to have commentary by Celia?

If I may do the chair.

Now it's an appropriate.

Oh, sure.

Yeah, sure.

Sure.

Sally O'Warren, Office of the City Attorney.

I just wanted to respond on two things.

Um, Councilmember Houston.

On the question of uh whether holding this plan would um impact or or whether it would mess up this plan if you held back, held it back to wait for the 25% issue.

Those things are separate.

That would happen at the contract negotiation stage.

So staff can bring that to us and we can help them modify the contracts to do whatever they want with them to set those accountability standards that you're asking for, and we can do that.

That's separate from the plan.

The council's role when it comes to this plan is actually very limited under the measure.

You do not modify this plan.

If council rejects the plan, it returns the plan to the commission with recommended changes, and then the commission submits a new plan to the council.

So the role of the committee here is different than normal legislation where you might submit recommended changes to the legislation as part of sending it to council.

Here you're really just deciding to let it go to council to review pursuant to the measure by the full council.

Um the committee could send comments with it, but you couldn't um you couldn't change the plan itself.

The plan is locked in in its current version as it's I just wanted to note that.

I have a follow-up, so because I am interested in holding it in committee.

Is that one way to if we hold it in committee?

Does the commission come back with modifications or we have to basically move it to full council?

Thank you.

That's a great question.

You have to move the plan to the full council for it to reject it in order to trigger the send the return to the commission with comments to have it change.

The commission cannot accept comments from the committee and then go make changes under the measure.

The measure is very clear, it's the full council approve or reject, and if reject, reject with comments, and then it goes back to the commission for changes.

So there is no role for the committee to intercept the plan at this point to cause changes to be made before it gets to the full council.

Okay, gotcha.

And could we also just for the options ahead of us?

One option is to move it forward with that it's recommended by the committee or to move it forward, or it's just move it forward regardless.

I'm not sure I understand the question.

So moving it forward where the committee has recommended it, like advancing this with full committee backing, or do we advance it just you know, like a standard piece of legislation?

I think I might defer to the parliamentarian on that one.

You could sub you could forward it with comments, which would be part of the record if there are comments that you want the full council to consider, including changes that you would like to see.

For example, if you're already thinking, I'm not I'm going to vote to reject this.

You can talk about the things that you take issue with and still vote to send it to the council.

Okay.

But you're you're in no way bound at the time that it's before the council to vote for it.

You can vote to reject the plan at the time it's before the council.

Okay, gotcha.

Understood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fife.

I I think Councilmember Houston had a clarifying question for the initial question that he asked.

So okay.

Councilmember Houston.

President Jenkins do the chair.

President Jenkins, it everything needs to be in committee and solved in committee before it goes to full council.

That's what he always tells me that every single time.

So do we do it here and then we do um would you would you say council member?

I mean, yeah, it sounds like we are required to advance it, but I I also think that given this is 47 million dollars a year, this is worthy of a full council discussion.

So, but it's also apparently the the procedure we must follow.

I would soften that slightly.

You could choose technically to not forward it, practically speaking, at rules, somebody else could pull it and put it on the agenda anyway.

Um, there is no practical impact from the committee's standpoint of actually holding it because it doesn't do anything to change the plan.

So to the extent that your goal is to cause the plan to be modified, the only um avenue for that is to forward it to the full council, vote to reject it, hope that a majority does so, and then it will be returned to the commission for um with comments to modify.

Got it.

Understood, thank you.

Okay, council member Fife.

Yes, thank you.

I just have a couple questions, and I I want to share some concerns, but first I want to thank um thank the committee for all of the outreach that was done to get in contact with my office.

I know that you all are doing your work because the amount of times and the ways you tried to get in contact with me.

I I just really appreciate, and for an all-volunteer group that says a lot about what you're trying to do.

Um, so I want to appreciate you for that.

And I also want to express publicly, because I don't know if it reached you, that I I trust the ability of all of you all to do this work for the best interests of Oakland's residents.

And I knew that this body, my committee, this um, that we didn't have much impact over the actual report, but I do want to say that I think it is moving in the right direction, particularly hearing from the department heads.

I appreciate that.

But one of the things I'm I'm a little confused by, and I hope you all can help me understand is people's feelings of safety.

How is that monitored?

Because we are at record lows of you know, crime, and I hear different reasons about why that is.

Some people say it's we're, you know, showing lower incidents of crime in Oakland because people aren't reporting anymore.

But then I hear from some of our law enforcement agencies and other partners that no, it's lower because we are we have all of these different technologies and resources and relationships that are helping drive down crime, and crime is down is trending down nationally, it's not just Oakland, it's it's trending down nationally, but I don't see in the plan where there's a way to even monitor people's feelings of safety, and that's particularly troubling for me because if we are experiencing lower numbers of violence and people still feel unsafe, how does that get measured?

If I could yeah, I'm happy to kick that off and then I'll maybe pass on to others.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Fife, for that question, and it's very real, right?

I hear all the time, even for my own partner that he doesn't feel safe in the his own home city.

Um this plan has is written some outcome metrics that are listed there, and those outcome metrics are based on the goals.

So, as you noticed, um, one of the goals had to do about people's sense of safety and sense of resilience, etc.

The outcome metrics uh that we have written into those strategies are going to measure measure those things.

How exactly they're gonna be measured is gonna be determined by the evaluation process that we're gonna design, which comes as a step after this plan passes.

There's multiple, and this actually relates to Councilmember Houston's questions.

There's multiple um oversight or um multiple ways to measure impact the impact of this plan.

Um the goals that we have set include people's feelings, but also include crime data.

And also include specific outcomes that we want to see.

So that's one is the goals and the outcome metrics that are in the plan.

From there on, there's um the the biannual reports that each of the departments gives to the commission to let us know how they're spending their money pursuant to their spending plans and what outcomes they are seeing from there on level number two is the evaluation which we which I mentioned, which is gonna have a lot more specific metrics like people's feelings that you're mentioning, council member five, that we would like to track, and we would work with an independent outside evaluator in order to design ways to actually track that and to actually and to see and to track that not just as a whole, but by zip code as well, by race, by zip code, so you can see each of your districts with how people are feeling about safety in each of your districts.

Um, the next level of oversight from there is that departments like Chief Joshi mentioned, they have their own evaluation metrics, and I can invite Chief Josh to the podium also to share more about how DVP is measuring people's feelings of safety.

And then lastly, uh again on the oversight part, there is an um and an annual audit, and then there is an annual financial report.

Suppose the finance department and the auditor's office are going to be evaluating whether the measure and then funds are being spent appropriately to further the objectives of measure of the measure.

So there are these multiple, you know, ways that we want to measure impact because we know that this is why we're all here.

We're not here because we want to write beautiful plans.

We're here because we want to see the actual impact of this work on our communities, and um thankfully the measure has written into it multiple ways of providing that evaluation.

And when it comes to the evaluation plan itself, Councilmember Five, we're going to solicit input from all of you all as city council members as well into that in that stage of the process to hear the kinds of metrics that you want us to see tracked, um, so that we can include that in the in our evaluation process.

But the first step is to pass this plan.

This is why, as a brand new commission, we spent the last year just working on this plan so we can get that done, and then we can work on the details that come after with the evaluation.

Is that answer your question partially?

Partially, I will say it it partially answers a question because we're talking about the difference between quantitative and qualitative data, yeah.

And if we just saw, I I said this in other committee, um, with the text messages that everybody is talking about all over the city of Oakland, the former mayor stating that there was someone in the police department that was spreading misinformation about crime statistics.

And the the officer above this officer said that it was being taken care of, it was being handled.

I just read the same text other people read.

And so I'm I can't do anything else but to be honest about what I'm seeing.

And I know my perspectives may differ from other folks, but if we have the same, and I I hope that there was some accountability in that instance, but if we have the same folks that are working to keep the city safe, spreading information, misinformation about what's actually happening, we're fighting against ourselves.

And I don't see a place in the plan that addresses that because there's people are gonna feel safe or unsafe based on media reports, based on their personal experiences, and is if is the administrative budget that ops box has with the 1.4 million going to take on the costs of those surveys across the city because that sounds really expensive, yeah.

And so I'm I would be interested, and we're not dealing with that right now, but I do think that should be factored into the evaluation.

Yeah, because I I don't know how you get to an honest answer.

If crime is down, yeah, but people still don't feel like it is, but every organization, DVP, um, OFD, and OPD are doing what they're supposed to do according to this plan, but people still don't feel it.

That doesn't, it's not even logical.

Yeah for uh yeah, are we gonna invest in communications?

Is this part of the administrative budget as well?

It actually is and I I think we've spent a lot of time on this agenda item, and I do want to make a motion um to to move this forward, but I I'm not clear on how that works.

To me, it's not it's not a logical argument, yeah.

So it's difficult for me to come up with a logical response to what I find to be a logical.

But I also have a deep concern that if Oakland doesn't get to the required number of officers, that this body has no control over outside of um a budget allocation that there will also be repercussions.

Cause what I'm what it sounds like what I heard um from DC Tedesco is that if if Oakland doesn't get to that number of officers, the plan is almost irrelevant.

And if I'm incorrect, I would, you know, I would love to be corrected on that.

I uh on that issue.

Um, because recruitment from what I understood from the commentary was recruitment and retention is key, and I want to be clear that that those funds are included here and not in our upcoming mid-cycle budget allocation.

So I need to understand that so I know how to um to be in those other spaces.

Yeah, absolutely.

Um I'll let Deputy Chief the Desco speak to the last point, but just to answer your questions around evaluation.

Yes, the evaluation budget is coming out of the 3% administrative funds that the commission has it is discretion, so we'll be going through an RFP process, hiring an evaluation team, etc.

Um, we actually did also want to use part of it for for communications for in including potentially having um some of the folks who have come to present to our meetings are young people who tell us everything you're doing here is really great and really important, but the people don't know about it.

My people don't know about it.

Yeah, and we want to be able to potentially hire them as fellows, like commission fellows, obviously through a competitive process, obviously approved by the city council and the regular procurement processes of the city so that they can share what's happening and on this on our you know, our side of things on City Hall right here and in TikTok, all the social media stuff, and so we can hear from them, right?

Like we want young people to become commissioners.

We want young people to tell the story um of the future of the city of Oakland.

So we have lots of uh ideas that we also would love to share with you, Councilmember Fife or anybody who's interested about how to involve young people in in the telling of the stories of the good work that's being done so as to help people you know experience uh their city a little bit differently.

Thank you.

Um Deputy Chief of the School.

Oh, Council, uh you want to say add something, Julia?

Go ahead.

Yes.

Um I'll also just add that our we recognize that issue of like crime is going down, but people say they don't feel safer.

Um it's a it's an ongoing issue, and this is certainly a long-term investment, and that is why one of our strategies is focused on community accountability or community trust and accountability.

So that outlines uh several activities around improving communications, transparency within OPD, especially regarding crime statistic data, and um in general, like we wish to have more communication with the public, like we will always be available to them for their questions, and uh it's our goal to have a very robust evaluation, and we'll be partnering with the Department of Race and Equity in the design of that evaluation so as to ensure that it is both accurate and includes quantitative and qualitative data and standardized measures as well.

Um Councilmember Houston, uh, I think I think Tedesco I like the desktop, come on.

The question was through the chair, is that you um gave a lot of reasons why um there might be challenges to this, and particularly around retention and um recruitment.

Does this funding this 22 point nine million will that allow you to do that work?

And then what happens if there aren't say enough academies to yield maybe you can even help me do the math.

How many academies will we need to have in the next fiscal year to get to that number that would even allow us to operate efficiently under Measure N.

And does that because you you said recruitment and retention are factors, correct?

Yes.

So what if we don't get there?

Does that what happens to the plan or the roadmap?

Um through the chair.

A few pieces to this, and I first would address that the plan, if we the time spent without 700 officers does not make the plan irrelevant.

I think the plan is a pathway forward to reach and supports reaching 700 and I hope beyond 700.

Uh I don't want to under sell though that we do need to reach 700 and continue on from there.

I think that many of the goals uh of the measure and the strategies are supported by staffing.

Now within those strategies, there are things that I believe are intertwined.

We can improve working conditions, thus like and improve retention if we give officers the technology to be able to be successful at their job.

That is built into the CVRP.

If we improve wellness at the police department, we can increase retention, which will help us reach 700 more quickly.

That is built into the C VRP.

There definitely needs to be police academies in order to reach 700.

And the math on that is dependent on retention.

If we continue to lose five and a half officers a month, we won't reach 700 in the next uh fiscal year.

It's not going to it's not possible because we have a cap on the number of people that we can put and graduate through an academy.

So we're at 604 as of today.

A minimum of three academies a year in order to build to this, and it's gonna take more than one fiscal year to get to 700 if attrition stays where it is.

If we can impact attrition through some of the strategies that I believe are contained in the C VRP, we can speed that up.

So I think that the police department has actually put out a chart on this, a couple of different graphs.

I can share those to show essentially with declining retention and increased recruitment, how quickly we can get there and what's realistic and what isn't.

If we continue it at current pace, uh it's gonna be multiple years and perhaps beyond.

So I think it is critical that we enact the strategies outlined in the C VRP and that the budget allocations reflect those goals and strategies so that we do have the police academy so that we do have the technology, we do have the positions to carry out those strategies.

So just to summarize the charts and the graphs that you have that will you send that to this body, or how where was it sent so far?

Where should we look for the that information?

I believe it's things that the police department has previously published.

Um I'd have to go back and check where which committee as part of the ballot measure, there's actually mandatory language that says that OPD needs to come before this body with a detailed retention recruitment plan.

Um I don't think it's actually achieved the level of detail that it needs, um, which as it's specified in the ballot text that discusses like being able to chart out the math, you know, all that to actually predict where we need to be or where we will be based off of academy levels, all of that.

So all that I will work to schedule that report so we have that before this body.

So and the charts and graphs that were responsive to the questions that I asked would be helpful for the public safety committee.

Um I don't know if it's inclusive of what you're speaking of, Chair Wong, but um whatever helps us understand.

Because I to summarize, I just want to understand if we're at 604 today, this funding starts this 22.9 million, 23 million, is it impact the ability to deliver what's being required under this under measure N and is really ultimately what I want to understand?

I do you want to take I will say that I agree, I share your concern, and that is why I'm scrutinizing this plan to the degree that I am because um, I'll I'll give an example.

In the plan, it says because the ballot measure text makes clear that 700 officers is the voter mandate, and yet when I look at this current plan and the retention and recruitment allocation, it's a three to seven percent, albeit in the appendix, it says five to twenty percent, but I assume it is three to seven percent, and I have concerns given that, you know, one of the top things I hear is we need community resource officers, right?

People want to see community policing, but we're not able to get there when we don't have enough officers.

So that is something that I don't see yet enough in this plan.

It's actually the OPD spending that I'm scrutinizing the most that I have that take the most issue with if I'm being blunt in this current plan.

Um there's also and don't get me wrong, I think the ceasefire program is fantastic.

It is a 30 to 34% allocation, that's actually double compared to measure Z.

And I want to I want to just make sure, given that we're not gonna be able to have a ceasefire program if we don't have enough officers, right?

Or our or our 911 response time is gonna suffer because I keep on hearing.

We disbanded our traffic enforcement unit, we disbanded this unit all because we don't have enough officers, and so I I just and I'll be honest, I have not been satisfied with the police department in terms of its recruitment um approach.

Um I want to see more innovation given that Measure NN actually allows for uh funding distribution to go to CBOs, like how can the police department partner with youth mentorship organizations to actually identify that young person who is least likely to enroll into the police department because that is probably the person that should consider a career in law enforcement.

Um, so these are the things, especially around recruitment that I currently am challenged with when I look at the plan and I think about what did people and the voters approve of.

I I'm not sure if I see this plan it's almost there, I don't think it's quite there yet.

Who's responsibility is that?

Are you saying that opspoch chair should revise this plan?

Because that was my last question.

Yeah, are we am I getting the feeling that this committee does not want to forward this to the full council or wants to have notes or amendments because that's kind of what I'm hearing from at least two of the body, but I still would like my question answered around us being way beneath the measure NN numbers and then having this plan move forward as if I I'm not clear.

Are we assuming that 700 are needed or that we can operate under the current operational strength that OPD has right now to um undertake this particular plan?

That's my overarching question that has.

You want to take that one?

Okay, yeah.

Um thank you, Councilmember Five.

So um City Council passed a waiver uh last year of the 700 police officer floor minimum.

It was uh you all made a finding of an extreme financial um event, so emergency um that necessitated that waiver that was happened completely independently of the work of this commission.

Having done that, practically speaking, we all want to get to 700 officers and beyond, and this is why recruitment and retention as a strategy is a key part of this plan.

So, to your question, Council Member Five, even though right now the department is at 604 officers, they can the whole point of this plan is to get them to more police officers to get them to be able to recruit and retain and to build community trust so that they can do other things other than just basically respond to 91 ownership calls.

If the 22 point nine is primarily for recruitment and retention, 229 I don't think the million, you mean the funding, no?

No, the funding is not primarily for recruitment, it's the recruitment is a huge part of that.

Ceasefire is also ceasefire positions are funded through measure and end funds, and we all know ceasefire light lifeline is a critical strategy for violence prevention in the city.

Um, and then the last thing I'll just mention before I pass on to um the budget, uh the director, uh Director Bradley, is that um to your point, council member, around the language of the measure.

If we look at subsection E of section six, it does say that in each fiscal year, as a component of its two-year policy budget or mid-cycle budget adjustments, the city should adopt the sworn police personnel staffing plan, which indicates the estimated starting and ending number of police officers by month, and basically how staffing is gonna be improved, right?

That's you're correct that there is language in Measure N that requires the police department to present to you all a staffing plan.

That requirement is entirely separate of the C VRP requirement, and this is something that the police department has to do as part of your city council police budget or mid-cycle budget adjustments.

So the the budgeting processes and the plan that the Oakland police department has to present to you around staffing is separate from the need to approve the C VRP or not.

Um and with that I'm gonna I would like to pass it to the director of finance because I hear a lot of questions around budgeting.

Um so if you if if I may through the chair, he would like to share if you would.

Yes, absolutely.

Good evening, committee Brad Johnson, Director of Finance.

Uh so the plan that's being outlined here does not supersede this body's ability as acting as a full council uh through your the budget process to allocate resources.

This plan is the framework by which we will uh go through that allocation process, but it is not the allocation itself.

In your budget process, you have the ability uh to do sort of that fine-tuning and determination work.

This doesn't have specific dollar amounts to it, those will vary uh as we go through the years and as the measure uh resources measures grow or shrink or whatever might happen with the economy.

Um, and also it's the space where we will ensure compliance of the specific spending plan elements of the measure in terms of its percentage allocation.

I want to note that NN is a continuation of measure Z and Measure Y.

Um, given the uh declaration of extreme fiscal necessity and anticipated financial event made by council during the biennial process, the measure uh in requirement of 700 was waived, and the budget kept the officer count at 678, which was the same number under measure Z.

The spending plan in front of you uh is consistent with the mayor's proposed budget and maintains through that spending plan the operation of those 678 budgeted positions.

So a com a component of the 678 that you already budgeting and are planning on going forward with are actually included in measure NN spending.

So a lot of what the work done with ceasefire that is already being done is now being funded through NN.

So it's a continuation and a continue in support of some of the effort that's already occurring.

Not all of it is brand new because the general purpose fund was not paying for all of it in the beginning, it was coming from Z.

So most of what you see in NN is actually continuation of those ongoing programs.

That is helpful for context.

It is council member Houston.

Um to the chair, I'm not sure if um uh moving it or seconding it, but I would like to move it to the full council on the non-consent uh with no dis uh recommendations from the council.

If I if I don't know if I'll no, I I made the motion, but I just wanted to get that question answered first.

Okay, I'll second it then.

Can we do it on non-consent, Councilman?

Non-consent on uh with this with discussion, no recommendation from the committee.

Yeah, no discussion with recommendation okay, yeah.

Um before we go to vote, since we have you here, Bradley.

One question I have is um because you had sent me the budget chart, which was helpful.

One thing I had noted is that in your the chart that you had sent over to myself and my team that OPD's allocation is 25.38 million.

In this plan, it's around 22 or so one the million.

I will just note that in the measure E proposed plan there includes a police academy.

Um, if that doesn't pass, we don't have a guarantee, like there's a gap right there in that OPD spending, and at least this body has stated that there's concerns around the the police staffing levels, and that is something that um we're not gonna change it here, but I'll just state on the record that I'd like for some for that gap.

That is my ask um as the public safety chair, because again, our our staffing levels, I think we have six oh four, the operational number is even lower given the folks on uh leave.

So Madam Chair, if I may uh I can you articulate or if you could rearticulate from me, what is it that you're asking about staffing?

Because that is one of my concerns as well.

How do we uh since I've been here attrition has been five to six officers per month every single month with a spike in maybe 2021, I think, or around COVID, um, where you know, some folks once get didn't want to get vaccinated.

I think some of those folks came back, but how are we ever going to reach this with uh the number of people that are we're processing through our academies?

Well, I will say the last or the upcoming academy, and OPD can speak to it.

They have actually reached, I think it's 46 can candidates.

I think that came through in finance and management.

So uh I will say after a less than adequate first academy, we're seeing some progress, but um that is why my my feedback to this commission is the three to seven percent for recruitment and retention to me does not seem to reflect what we're hearing consistently from our constituents, which is like we want CROs, we want you know, and what's the preventative from getting CROs?

It's not having enough officers, and so I I would like to see I think that's fine, but I my point is I I would rather be honest with the numbers that we actually can get versus having these astronomical idealistic numbers that we've never been able to reach.

So if we're gonna get 20 officers or 15 officers, let's be honest about that because we all know that people wash out after a certain amount of time, and um if if 50 is the cap, that's great, but where do we really honestly end up with and and what's the trend so we can kind of just be more honest with the public because what I'm hearing, even around measure E is that we the public has been lied to with all of these ballot measures about what we promise, and I am tired of overpromising and under delivering.

So I want to just be just straight up about the realities of what we can produce, so that we're being honest with the public.

Um, for sure.

That's it.

And uh the so if I could just complete my thoughts.

So my point too is at least my based off of the budget numbers I got from Bradley Johnson finance versus what I see in the plan, there is actually a gap there for the OPD spending, and what you know you're all ha my ask is we look at that retention and recruitment piece because I think we continue to be inadequate there with that gap.

Uh to answer the chair's question, so the budget allocation is that specific metric for allocation that I mentioned where we actually have to allocate into the different buckets by the dollar amount.

So that's very specific, and again, it will vary year to year to year.

I will note that the spending plan that you are looking at right now does sort of constrain the level of strategies that we can look at using that those resources to do.

So the dollar amounts will vary as we go into budgeting, but the strategic objectives that you're looking at are constrained by the spending plan you adopt uh or as a full council you adopt through this process.

So that's maybe the way to see that as we're looking at that.

And I'm happy to through the budget process, which is not germane to this particular conversation, talk you specifically about what the allocations and breakdown of both PD's budget are, both in general and in and the work that's being done around police officer retention and hiring, which are addressed in the budget.

I'm happy to have those conversations in a different space.

Okay, great.

Um before we back.

I'm sorry, Chair, if I may.

Oh, yeah.

Uh, just to address kind of some of the numbers that you threw out there.

So the 196th currently has 17 in that graduating class, and then the one that you were speaking of, I want to correct for the record.

Um, it's not 46 in that particular class as of right now.

There's eight thirty-eight 38, excuse me, for the one, yeah.

So we lost six uh there's you know, some some injuries and things of that nature, which we all can understand going through the academy.

So I just want to make sure for the record that that expectation is clear.

Okay.

Thank you.

Eight.

We lost eight.

But that's a lot, right?

Okay.

I mean, if we're trying to get to fifty per.

Uh what we put in the the um policy objectives with the budget process, it was 45, was what we told OPD has to reach with every academy.

So, all right.

Well, I yeah, I hate starting class.

I made a uh motion.

Okay.

Adopt this resolution of the uh C VRP and move it to the full city council on non-consent.

Okay, but we also have public comments, so let's move to that.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on item number six in no particular order, you can come up to the podium.

If or if you're on Zoom, please raise your hand to be easily identified.

Colleen Brown, Gabrielle Garcia, and Rajani Mandal.

Good good evening.

My name is Colleen Brown, and I'm the current chair of the community policing advisory board.

I wanna say counter to what was said about the listening speakers where they were uh support for community policing, problem solving, and SEPTED.

I just wanna point out there has been a change in the language of the draft version of this plan to the current plan.

Uh it removes language of the CPAB, and it also uh inserted a word may, and it may only be a single word, but it means a lot to the community, where basically it says that they may uh be involved with resident outreach.

They may be working with the neighborhood councils, etc.

Um, I don't know with regards to what happens if you don't get the recruitment, we if you don't get the CROs, what's gonna happen to the neighborhood councils that are existing?

We want to make sure that there can is continued support for community sub uh policing and those that are active in our neighborhood.

I don't want to see community policing to die, but I I just want to voice my opinion and also just to point out I would like some of the language to be reinstated from the original report, and also one thing to point out is it also had that they were supposed to work with the community policing advisory board on aspects related to community policing and all that has been removed.

Thank you.

Good evening, council members.

My name is Gabriel Garcia, and I'm the policy and advocacy director for Youth Alive.

I'm a district one constituent, and our offices are in Jack London Square.

Uh first of all, I want to commend everybody who's done work on this report.

It is an incredible undertaking that these folks have taken on again on a volunteer basis, um, and it is the most comprehensive overview of the spending that Oakland is doing related to our public safety.

That being said, there's a lot to build on here, and I appreciate that on page five twenty-five of the report, the uh commissioners noted one of the things that came out in listing sessions that Oakland can focus more on is youth prevention, these upstream solutions.

So uh the theory behind ceasefire and intervention is paying attention to the folks that are most likely to be involved in violence immediately.

But when we look at youth prevention services, there is no um cohesive Oakland strategy.

So doing very similar work, but bringing together um probation, bringing together OUSD, OFCY, and uh stakeholders across CBO organizations to talk about what can Oakland's combined cohesive youth strategy be could be a next step to build off of what is already contained in this report.

Uh next, I want to highlight that um in addition to the theories behind ceasefire that that are highlighted, there is uh a way for Oakland to be more bold about the way that we talk about our victim services that were created here.

Hospital-based violence or invention programs were created here in Oakland, are now an international model for addressing and reducing violence.

The Qaddafi Washington Project, a homicide response program, one of the first of its kind in this nation is lift up lifted up as a model.

When we look at the data sources, um recent data from the California Department of Justice showed that individuals who survive a gunshot wound are sixty times more likely to have a homicide or the homicide rate is sixty percent sixty times more likely than those who have never been injured.

The California Violence Experiences survey shows that those who have been violently impacted in the last year are 28 times more likely to perpetrate violence.

Thank you for your comments your time is up switching to Zoom user Rajani.

You can unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Rajmi Mandel District 4 I wanted to start with a personal observation.

I'll admit that before this process I had no idea that Measure N created this entirely new planning and oversight structure and I knew very little about Opspock itself.

Measure N was a civilian written measure that created a new governance model with significant planning and oversight responsibilities and as we saw over the past year there were several areas that required clarification and interpretation to align with existing city charter requirements and city processes.

I want to commend Opspock the Office of the city attorney and an administration and staff for working through these questions and building a framework around this new structure.

And I also appreciate that the C VRP stayed focused on strategy rather than operational direction.

The plan sets goals priorities and metrics while recognizing that implementation decisions belong to the departments responsible for carrying out the work.

I think that distinction is important because clear roles and lines of accountability matter.

I support this plan as written but I have one broader governance question for the future and that is around council's ongoing role after approval.

The plan appropriately discusses tracking outcomes evaluating progress and learning over time but I hope future reporting also helps clarify how recommendations and lessons learned move back into the council process.

Accountability is not just measuring outcomes it's creating a framework to learn adapt and improve this is Oakland's first attempt at a model like this and I appreciate the effort that went into creating something that can evolve and improve over time.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments chair that concludes all speakers on this item we do need a motion to adjourn into a special council meeting due to the presence of uh council president jenkins.

Great.

Yeah we got the special session baby look at that beautiful yes I'll make that motion.

Thank you.

Uh due to sorry we have a motion made by council member hewson seconded by council member brown to adjourn into a special uh sorry to adjourn the public safety committee meeting and reconvene into a special city council meeting due to the presence of council member Jenkins on roll council members Brown aye aye aye Houston aye and Chair Wong aye thank you uh motion passes with four ayes to adjourn to convene into a special meeting yep let's move to the motion on the floor for the vote thank you we have a motion made by council member five seconded by council member heuston to approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the June 2nd city council agenda on non-consent on roll council members Brown aye aye Houston aye and Chair Wong aye thank you item number six passes with four eyes to forward this item to the June 2nd city council agenda on non-consent now moving on to item number three.

Adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to enter into a professional services agreement with PMAM Corporation for the administration of the pulse alarm reduction program from July 1st 2026 to June 30th 2031 for a total contract amount not to exceed 1,127,115 dollars and waiving the competitive multi-step solicitation process and the local small local business enterprise requirements and there are no speakers on this item okay great opd you have the floor and uh what is your name?

Can you introduce yourself to us?

Yes, good evening, Chair and members of the committee.

Laraja Marshall, the Fiscal Services Manager for the Oakland police department.

Before you is a request to waive the competitive bidding bidding process and authorize the department to enter into a five-year professional service agreement with PANAM.

It's the false alarm reduction program totaling two hundred and twenty five thousand four hundred twenty three dollars per year.

Panam has managed this program for the city since 2013.

Currently, there are no small local businesses that provide the specialized service.

As confirmed today from department workforce standards, there was analysis done that zero percent local small businesses can provide the service.

However, there are two other vendors that can provide a similar service.

That was done in the last RFP process.

And so for these reasons, the department would like to move forward with enter into a contract and waiving the competitive bidding process.

Councilmember Fife.

I'll move approval.

Councilmember Brown.

Excellent.

I did have a quick question on this item about where the revenue goes.

It's a fund for false alarm 2411.

It's its own fund.

And so ideally, based like when you do the math on how many false alarms, etc.

It's basically a like a revenue rated fund.

Yeah, revenue generating fund.

Okay.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Is that a second?

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Council Member Five, second by Council Member Brown to approve the recommendations of stop and support this item to the June 2nd City Council agenda on rule.

Council members Brown.

Aye.

Five.

Aye.

Heaston.

Aye.

Chair Wong?

Aye.

Thank you.

Item 3 passes with or I support this item to the June 2nd City Council Agenda on consent.

Reading in item four.

Adopt a resolution adopting the 2026 to 2000 2031.

Oakland Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as an amendment to the safety element of the Oakland General Plan and adopting appropriate California Environmental Quality Act findings.

And there are no speakers on this item.

Okay.

Hi, I have actually a presentation if you could load that.

Great.

Good evening, members of the public safety committee.

My name is Veronica Cole.

I'm an emergency planning coordinator with the Oakland Fire Department, Emergency Management Services Division.

I have members from our steering committee who are here to answer questions as well.

And I'm here to talk to you today about the 2026 local hazard mitigation plan.

To reduce risk and increase resilience equitably, the mission of the City of Oakland local hazard mitigation plan is to establish and promote a comprehensive mitigation strategy and effort to protect the whole community and environments from identified natural and human-caused hazards.

Neighboring jurisdictions, community members, and other stakeholders.

It includes profiles of the hazards that are likely to impact Oakland and as well in mitigation strategy for what steps we would take to reduce the impact of those hazards.

And this updated plan is required to access certain types of pre and post-disaster funding.

New in our 2026 to 2031 local hazard mitigation plan, and this is a partial list.

The mission goals, objectives, and actions have been revised with a stronger emphasis on equity.

We have updated hazard profiles and capabilities analysis with new equity analysis content.

Climate change considerations have been incorporated into the hazard profiles.

And we also have an updated risk ranking methodology that accounts for resident displacement, impacts to the economy, environment, and transportation.

Using this hazard ranking, we found the following hazards ranked as you see on this slide.

At a high level, we have earthquake, severe weather, and wildfire.

At a medium level, we have drought, flood, landside, and sea level rise.

And at a low level, we have dam failure and tsunami seich.

And in case you were wondering, a size is the sloshing of uh water in an enclosed bodies such as Lake Merritt or the San Francisco Bay.

In addition, we have approximately 75 mitigation actions.

The final count is 72, that have been developed by city departments in the Port of Oakland, an annual maintenance plan that will track Oakland's progress in these actions, and we'll progress the city towards defined mitigation goals and objectives.

FEMA, Calfire, USDA, and the state climate adaptation grants may supplement city resources for these projects.

Here you'll see a map that shows an overlay of equity priority communities and zones of liquefaction susceptibility.

It's one example of the map that we have, the mapping we have in the LHMP this time.

For our equity priority communities, we use the environmental justice communities that are defined in the general plan environmental justice element, and we have this mapping as a new feature.

We conducted robust community outreach for this effort, and it was expanded from our prior efforts that were conducted shortly after the pandemic.

So we were able to meet in person this time.

We conducted outreach to approximately 300 individuals through presentations and forums for public comment.

We held multilingual in-person public meetings at trusted locations and equity priority communities, including West Oakland, Chinatown, Downtown, Fruitville, and East Oakland.

We held online community forums for public comment during the public comment period.

We conducted a multilingual public survey that received 131 responses.

And we maintained a website and contacted an email interest list to provide updates.

So as mentioned, we can use the plan to be eligible for certain types of funding.

So AB 2140 compliance requires that the general plan safety element adopt the LHMP.

If we meet this compliance, then we may be able to access additional public federal post-disaster funding that's related to federal public assistance.

But this is not guaranteed, but it does allow us to potentially be eligible.

And as an example, after when public assistance is triggered, a typical local cost share is 25%.

Through the California Disaster Assistance Act or CDAA, the state can pay up to 18.75% of this cost share.

And if we are compliant with AB 2140 and the safety element adopts the LHMP, that potentially brings our cost share down to zero percent.

So we have an exciting update.

So we do now have full approval from FEMA.

That was submitted on May 1st by Cal OES to FEMA, and the approval came today.

We visited the Planning Commission who forwarded their recommendation to bring this to City Council with their recommendation.

We're talking to you today, the public safety committee.

We'd like to go to City Council on June 2nd.

On an ongoing basis, we're going to be implementing these mitigation actions.

And then the plan includes an annual update process that includes a progress report, and we'll begin that on in spring summer 2027.

And if you'd like more information, here's our website, www.oaklandca.gov slash oakland hazard plan, and that concludes my presentation.

Okay.

What is liquefaction?

Susceptibility.

Thank you, yeah.

Those are those are those areas in an earthquake that are more subject to ground movement because of the geology of the area.

So they are more likely to receive damage than say something that was filled with um on an area that has, you know, is not susceptible to liquid faction.

Okay.

Because I is that connected to the Hayward fault line since a good portion of Oakland falls along that, which is this major earthquake.

There are three major faults.

Each of them is mapped in scenarios in the local hazard mitigation plan.

So we have great information on that.

Um the earthquakes would be causing the shaking.

The liquefaction is how a piece of land responds to that shaking.

So it's kind of like the ground um doesn't stay steady.

It it turns into, you know, more of a liquid state, maybe not literally a liquid state, but that's why they call it liquefaction.

So if you're on something that's say landfill or has mud, um, yeah.

Did you have something to add to this?

Okay.

Then that would be more susceptible to an earthquake than um, you know, say something that's on rock or or something more steady.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you for all the hard work on this, by the way.

So it seems it'll allow us to access more funding.

Council Member Five.

Yes.

Through the chair, I was wondering if the draft Cal and Biro Screen the reports that they uh put out earlier this year, or the the tool that they're putting out this year that identifies disadvantaged communities or impacted communities, has any relationship to what's happening here at all?

Because I um in another commission that I sit on, found that they are changing the designations of a lot of these impacted areas, particularly in West Oakland, based on you know the climate's changing because we're doing better around our emissions and things like that, but it's still very much impacted by sea level rise in a host of other emergency potential emergency events.

I wonder if that definition or if the the draft language is impacting what you're doing.

And I see Laura might want to answer that question.

I could talk a little bit about our choosing of the um environmental justice element, and Laura maybe you can add um Laura Kaminsky's here from planning as well.

Um, but we chose the environmental justice element because it had a very comprehensive list of fields that were identified to identify the communities.

And so it was fairly robust.

We actually had a conversation with the Department of Race and Equity and other staff uh to decide which tool to use, and that's why we wound up with that tool.

And I'll I'll pass the mic to Laura to expand on that.

Um, yeah, through the Chair Laura Kaminsky's uh strategic planning department.

Um, yeah, so when we did the environmental justice element, we actually started with a base, you know, of the looking at calamir screen as well, but we went much deeper and more comprehensively to have more local um issues addressed.

And so we looked at a lot more different um disparity issues in the city to come up with a more broader um uh look at a lot more criteria.

So I think what you're talking about really wouldn't affect what we've done because we've looked a lot deeper than that.

That already.

Please thank you.

Please and thank you.

I don't know.

Thank you, thank you, squared, whatever.

I appreciate that because these communities are still highly impacted, and I don't know if the state of California understands just how much.

So thank you for using other tools in addition to Cal and Biro Screen, and I will uh make a motion to adopt this resolution for the hazard mitigation plan and send it to the council meeting, the next council meeting on based on how we vote.

Are there speakers on the side?

Awesome.

Second, thank you.

We have a motion made by council member five, seconded by council member Brown to approve the recommendations of staff and support this item to the June 2nd City Council agenda as a public hearing.

Thank you.

On roll council members Brown.

Aye, five, aye, Houston, I and Chair Wong.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item four passes with four eyes to be forwarded to the June 2nd City Council agenda as a public hearing.

Now reading in item five, adopted resolution authorizing the city administrator to enter into a professional services agreement with elite corporate service solutions LLC, previously known as Elite Public Safety Investigations LLC, to provide pre-employment background investigations for the period of June 1st, 2026 to May 31st, 2029, in an amount not to exceed 300,000 dollars with an option to extend the agreement for two years up until May 30th, 31st, 2031, at a cost of up to 200,000 and without returning to council for a total amount not to exceed 500,000 dollars, and we have no speakers on this item.

All right, Michael, go ahead, take it away.

Good evening, thank you for all for being here.

Uh Michael Hunt, Oakland Fire Department.

Uh the Oakland Fire Department is currently recruiting firefighter trainees and firefighter paramedic trainees to fill several academies in the coming years.

Non-sworn positions such as fire investigators and fire communications dispatchers will also need to be filled.

Adoption of this proposed resolution will authorize a city administrator to enter into a contract with elite corporate solutions LLC to provide background investigations as part of the pre-employment process to identify the most suitable candidates for this moment in Oakland for this department.

Conducting an effective pre-employment investigation is especially important when hiring first responders and public safety professionals.

It builds trust with the community by ensuring that individuals uh entrusted with the lives and safety of others are of high integrity and reliability.

In December of 2025, an RFP process was initiated to select a contractor who will conduct comprehensive background investigations for sworn and civilian personnel as part of the pre-employment process.

Proposals were received from three different vendors.

The RFP review process resulted in the recommendations to award the contract to elite corporate solutions LLC.

They will perform this uh the following services necessary for the completion of background investigations, including but not limited to completion of personal history statement by candidates, conduct an interview and detailed review of uh of the PHS with candidates, requests from candidate authorizations to release information to obtain an investigative consumer report and procure a consumer credit report under the investigative consumer reporting agencies act.

They will also review the candidates' personal history statement, DMD record, criminal court history, civil court record, sexual offender index, education verification, employment verification, and professional reference interviews.

Um this vendor will ensure each background investigation meets the standard OFD has set forth.

A complete and thorough written report on each candidate will be submitted, report submissions will remain and maintain a consistent standardized format and will include all documents collected during the investigation.

There are some key points on why we selected this vendor and why they uh basically were proven to be a better fit than the other uh candidates.

They showed better alignment with project requirements and scope, greater relevant experience and past performance, higher evaluation scores based on the RFP criteria, better understanding of OFD's general and very specific needs, superior implementation plan and timeline, strong project management approach, better long-term partnership potential.

Their proposal demonstrated the best overall value for the city of Oakland, which is currently managing an incredible budget process on its own, stronger technical alignment with project requirements.

Uh, I have Chief Covington here as well with me who can speak to um potentially any questions that uh go above my pay grade and the report.

Councilmember Brown.

Excellent.

Um, thank you so much for the report.

Um, I just had a quick question about the table.

Um, I know that it says here the amount not to exceed 500,000, and then the table with the option to extend as well, but then the table shows like in year one five hundred thousand, year two, five hundred thousand, and then in year three, four and five, it it's re reduced to a hundred thousand, um, even though the total amount of the contract is five hundred.

So just wanted to get some clarity around the specific allocation for the years.

Good evening, Bam and Covenant and Oakland Fire Chief.

Um, so our goal to just give you a little context.

Uh, we were using we had a contract with the vendor, it expired.

We used OPD last time for our backgrounds.

They did an incredibly thorough job, but it took several months because they were doing ours as well as they were doing their own for their own academies, and with their with OPD being, you know, attached to multiple academies coming up, we needed our own vendor because we also want to hire uh 50 firefighters a year, so uh in it include in addition to macro dispatch and civilians.

So we needed to have a contract.

Um, the reason we asked for up to 500,000 is just so that we don't have to come back to council repeatedly.

Contracts is are hard to come by, as you may know.

Um, and so we just wanted to have an extension.

We don't plan to approach anywhere near 500,000 annually.

Um with 50 backgrounds, we would probably be less than a hundred thousand annually, more like in the 50,000 to 60,000 range annually.

I see.

So should the table reflect a hundred thousand per year?

The table should reflect a total of five hundred thousand.

I would think over the entire entirety of the contract, including the extension.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Yep.

Councilmember Pike, go ahead.

Do we need to make that amendment then, Chair?

Um, when it before it comes back to maybe that's a question to the parliamentarian.

Does that information need to change?

Maybe in a supplemental so that the table is reflective of what the chief actually just said.

You hear that?

No, no, can you repeat the question for the parliamentary?

I'm just following up on a question that I also had around the table in the in the report.

Um, should it be reflective of what the chief just said about what's actually can you can they bring the item when it goes?

Let me answer the first.

Okay, great.

Question first.

So to your point.

Um, they could the report is the report, but you can request that it be clarified.

You're right.

We can bring it back to clarify.

Yes.

Yeah, I think that's important.

Was there a question?

I'm sorry.

Yeah.

I have a quick question, I'm sorry.

Through the chair.

Um, or through the chair and through to the parliamentarian, can we forward since the resolution is signed, if that's what I'm understanding, and then we can correct the incorrect data on the table for uh prior to council.

Is that yeah?

That that was something along with what I was thinking was good.

Thank you for that solution.

Great.

Councilmember Brown.

Okay, so okay.

Um I'll make the motion to move the item as long as we um with the amendments, um, to be corrected prior to the publishing of the agenda.

I'll make a second.

Oh, you have a question.

Okay, council member.

Through the chair, I'm good with it.

Um, only thing I didn't just across the board when it says do not return to council, I like things to return to council just on the strength that that's what we're elected for.

Um is it a reason why we don't it doesn't return to council back to council?

Chief?

Yeah, through the chair, thank you for that.

Um, with all of our contracts, we're trying to write them with extensions already built in because again, contracts, we're we're we're struggling getting our contracts approved.

So if we if we give you the you know, when we update this chart and we say the contract will be for a maximum of 500,000 over a three-year period, then it we there's no need to really come back to council to say we here's what we spent so far, unless that's what the will of the council is.

We want to have it where we don't need to continue to come back for additional contracts when we could just extend the contracts that's we've that are already approved by council.

Yeah, and that's let's go through the chair.

I just like to know updates and know what's going on and if it's working, if it's not working, because that's what we're elected for, Chief is is to see how things are going and how things are working.

It this this has nothing to do with the contract, it just triggers me when it says no return to count school because I sit been seeing that ever since I've been elected.

So I'd like to have some type of update if it's going good or it's not, you know.

Just like to know, yeah, and through the chair, um, we can always re report out, um, but I think it matters on the contract too, you know.

You know, backgrounds are backgrounds, and we're they're just gonna repeatedly be going through background, but things that that require, you know council update we're happy to to come back to council or send a report.

Thank you Chief.

All right.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown seconded by Chair Wong to approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the June 2nd City Council agenda with the request to staff to provide a supplemental report uh with updated information on the data um to sorry to reflect the correct numbers on the data chart in the staff report on role council members brown aye aye Houston aye and Chair Wong aye and thank you Councilmember Brown.

Good catch.

I'm sorry.

Thank you motion passes with four eyes to forward this item to the June 2nd city council agenda on consent.

Moving on to open forum we have one public speaker who signed up Mr.

David Boltright but it looks like we don't have him anymore.

So Chair that concludes all speakers.

Dismissed or whatever.