Good morning and welcome to the Finance and Management Committee meeting of Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026.

Sorry.

And the time is now 9 30 a.m.

and this meeting may come to order.

Before taking role, 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, whichever occurs first.

Registering to speak via Zoom is now due 24 hours prior to the start of this meeting time.

This meeting came to order at 9 30 a.m.

and speaker cards will no longer be accepted ten minutes after, making that time nine forty a.m.

We'll now proceed with taking roll.

Council members Brown.

Present.

Thank you.

And Chair Ramachandran.

Here.

Thank you.

We have four members present.

Chair, before we begin, do you have any announcements at this time?

No announcements, thank you.

Okay, we'll take it on to item number one approval of the draft minutes from the committee meeting of June 9th, 2026, and there are no speakers for this item.

All right.

Um does staff have a brief presentation or anything.

Okay, um, I'll entertain a motion.

Excellent.

So moved.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by Council Member Unger to approve the draft minutes from the committee meeting of June 9th, 2026.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Aye.

And Chair Ramachandron.

Aye.

Thank you.

Motion passes with four ayes to accept the draft minutes from June 9th, 2026.

Moving on to item two, determination of schedule outstanding committee items.

We have one speaker for this item.

Okay, any changes from staff?

No changes at this time.

Thank you.

We'll move to the public speaker.

Calling on the member of the public that signed up to speak on item two, Mrs.

Olabala.

I'm asking that a report that reflects uh the $700,000 investment in the Oakland roots facility.

If that resulted in any revenue benefits to the city of Oakland.

In the transportation and public works department of 1.7 million dollars.

Was any effort made to return those funds back to the city?

There was a report, but there was no addressing of the funds being returned back.

Fiscal impact of the equity access to services ordinance.

Every year you have a report on this item, but you never, and it's in this department, but you never reflect on the amount of money that is being spent related to the equal access service ordinance.

I found a document that says on average you spend $900,000 a year.

That also includes or not does not include records of the cost of bilingual premium pay in every department.

Any individual who works for the city of Oakland is eligible to get bilingual premium pay.

I think that's the way it works.

But what is how much are you spending on that?

And lastly, you need a report on the agreement to merge three departments, several departments.

The purpose of the merger was to benefit in some way fiscal benefits.

So you had the Department of Human Services and Youth Development turned into the Department of Children and Youth Families.

And I'm not gonna go through all the other departments, but you did merge departments with the one of the main purposes was to financially create a benefit to the city of Oakland.

Thank you for your comments, Ms.

Olavala.

Chair that concludes all speakers.

We just need a motion.

Thank you.

Is there a motion?

Yep, so moved.

Second.

Thank you.

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

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Long.

Aye.

And Chair Ramachandran.

Aye.

Thank you.

Motion passes with four eyes to accept the determination of schedule of outstanding committee items as is.

Moving on to item three.

Adopt a resolution raving the waiving the competitive multi-step solicitation process required for the purchase of professional services and waiving the local and small local business enterprise program requirements to award a contract to NOFIN Solutions LLC for the purchase of professional services for the ongoing support for budget implementation and budget system operations and maintenance for the Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud Service for five years from July 1st, 2026 to June 30th, 2031 for the amount of 40,000 per year with a total contract amount of 200,000, and we have two speakers that sign up to speak on this item.

All right, um, anything from staff on this item.

Good morning, chair and members of the committee.

My name is Tiffany Kirkpatrick with the Finance Department Budget Bureau.

I'll be presenting on the NFN solutions professional services contract item.

The item is requesting approval of a five-year contract with NFN solutions for the ongoing support of the Oracle system planning and budgeting cloud services, better known as PBCS.

PBCS is the city's budget system.

It's used for budget development, mid-cycle budget, and biennial budget.

The proposed contract is for five years beginning July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031.

The amount is 40,000 per year for a total not to exceed amount of 200,000 dollars over the five years.

A little background, NFN originally implemented the city's PBS PBCS system in 2016, when the prior system was no longer being supported by Oracle.

Since then, NFN has continued to support the city through multiple budget cycles since 2017 through the recently adopted mid-cycle budget.

Because NFN customized and built the system, they are familiar with our budget process, our timelines, reporting needs, system configuration, and continually available to staff whenever needed.

For these reasons, staff is also requesting a waiver of the competitive bid process and the local small local business enterprise requirements.

Staying with the existing system and the current support model maintains continuity, avoids disruptions, and reduces operational risk.

INFIN built and has supported our customized PBS PBCS system since 2016 and transitioning to a new firm at this stage would create significant opportunity costs, including loss of continuity, institutional knowledge, inefficiencies, and we would lose cost savings already leveraged with inevits prior work.

Funding is budgeted in fiscal year 26-27 for future years funding, it would be subject to available funding and council adoption of future budgets.

Staff recommends that the committee forward the resolution to the full council for adoption, and this concludes the overview.

Thank you, colleagues.

Any questions or comments?

Okay, we will move to the public speakers.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on item number three, Mrs.

Olabala and Blair Beekman.

When I saw this item and it identified that it's it's uh involved uh with the support and ongoing maintenance uh related to the budget management and enhancing the budget process.

So what's confusing is where's the evidence of what work they did resulted in anything that enhanced the budget, or how did they in any identified way uh established uh management of the budget?

Also, the uh report and indicates that you've had seven contracts with this vendor starting in 2016, and 2016 it identifies two contracts 2017 one contract, 2018 one contract, 2019 two contracts, 2025 one contract.

So now today you have a contract that is 2026 July 1st all the way to June 30th of 31 2031.

That's confusing.

You pay in the past, you've had these short contracts.

What has led you at this point to have an extended contract with this vendor?

Um lastly, if you are dealing with any budgetary item, you just moved.

I'm hoping you're gonna have some detailed conversation about specifics of how the budget process has been enhanced by spending money with this vendor.

Y'all rubber stamp too many too many things, so I'm gonna listen to how you vet this particular item.

Thank you for your comments.

Switching to Zoom user Blair.

You can unmute yourself and begin your two-minute comment.

All right, thank you, Blair Beekman.

Uh, thanks for this item.

Thanks for the previous public comment.

Uh, yeah, to have explanations of what this uh program actually does uh is always helpful to the presentation process.

Um I hope we can do that more often uh in presentations and uh these sort of matters.

I felt that uh the contract was actually for a real low amount and over five years, uh 200,000 dollars over five years.

Oh my gosh.

To do the work that they want to do, uh I thought that was just it was a relief to hear those sort of numbers and thinking.

Um, but I'm interested in after our recent uh mid-year budget issues on uh Friday or two ago.

Um I'm interested a bit more how to, and with me being from San Diego and all the budget problems we've been having.

I've been trying to describe to yourselves here.

Uh, we really need to acknowledge that in Oakland.

Um, we have technically the highest budget deficit of any city in California.

San Diego is second.

And I um you guys have to make choices out of that, and we may have to be starting to talk a bit more how you make those choices.

You've been keeping that conversation a bit tucked away in order to respect the needs of social services and best practices, which you guys I keep saying have just do amazingly well.

But we have to make decisions around, say uh uh city government wage, uh, you know, if they if they have to pay for their own insurance or not.

And that's a tough question that I'd like to talk more about.

Um a lot of choices you guys have to be making, and uh good luck how we can have open conversations on the subject matter of budgeting.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair, that concludes all speakers on this item.

All right, I will entertain a motion.

So move.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by council member Unger to approve the recommendations of staff and support this item to the July 7th.

City Council, sorry, July 7, 2026, City Council agenda on roll, council members Brown, aye.

Unger, aye.

Wong, aye.

And Chair Ramachandron.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item number three passes with four I support this item to the July 7th, 2026.

City Council agenda on consent.

Okay.

Reading in item number four.

Sorry, receive an informational report on the Oakland Police and Fire Retirement Systems Investment Portfolio as of March 31st, 2026.

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

Good morning, committee chair, members of the committee.

My name is Tayer Jenkins.

I am the investment and operations manager of the day-to-day supervisor for the Oakland Police and Fire Retirement System, more commonly known as PEFERS.

The purpose of this report today is to provide an update on the PFERS portfolio as of March 31st, 2026.

To assist me in presenting this information, I have David Sanswish to PIFERS investment consultant from Makita Investments.

Just for a brief overview, PIFER is a closed retirement system closed in 1976.

After that, all city employees became members of the CalPur system.

Currently, all the PIFERS members are retired.

As of March 31st, PIFES had a membership of 573 retirees and beneficiaries.

And based on the most recent evaluation report, the fund is 100% funded.

Next PEF is an investment consultant, David Sands, which will go into more detail on the PIFER's uh investment portfolio.

Good morning.

I know you have the books in front of you, and as per usual, every quarter I will get to the point and keep the comments short.

Largely because the portfolio is behaving very, very, very well.

Um the report you have in front of you is through March 31st, 2026.

If you were to look at one page, I would look at page four of 71, which just gives you a snapshot of the portfolio.

And the takeaway here is in March the stock market was down.

The SP 500 was down minus five or 4.3%.

If you look at that table at the bottom and you look at the median public funds, so we look at median uh public funds across the United States in the range of 250 million to 1 billion dollars.

That median public fund was down 0.9%.

The PFRS portfolio was up 0.12%, uh gross of fees and 0.1 neta fees.

It ended the quarter at 495 million dollars.

And just a quick snapshot through the end of May, the portfolio is at 512 million dollars and has had an 11% return uh through the end of May.

The expected return on this portfolio is five percent, so it's more than vested its return expectation.

This is also after last year, where we de-risked the portfolio, we put over 60% of the portfolio into bonds.

Bonds, as you know, if you may have listened to the news are are fairly high yielding at the moment, and the Fed share has indicated they're holding rates steady uh throughout this year, and they may even have to increase rates at some point before the end of 2026.

Um the other thing to keep in mind is that as of July 1st, 2026, this portfolio will not be getting any contributions from the PTO fund.

That's reviewed every single year by the actuary.

Um so we'll hit the next fiscal year and see how the portfolio is doing.

The other comment I would make just to remind the public is that this portfolio has not taken any money from the general fund.

It's been funded by the pension tax override, which I think two years ago was reduced because of the increased funding and the strong performance.

So we continue to monitor this, and if there's any changes that need to be made, we'll certainly do that.

See if there's any questions.

Can you just uh go into a little bit more detail on that bit about the PTO not being collected anymore?

So some of it rolled off two years ago and more is gonna roll off.

So for the what is what does that mean for the average taxpayer?

Yeah, I'll let I'll let staff handle that.

David Jones, Treasury Administrator.

Um, the chair of Councilmember Unger.

Yes, a couple years ago we did reduce the uh property tax override rate, which slightly reduced the um uh property tax bill for the city local and taxpayers.

We'll be levying the tax again in August of this year.

Um we're doing the analysis right now to see what it'll look like, but I would imagine it pretty much will be about the same.

But you anticipate it going down in the future, um it's hard to say, it's hard to say.

Thank you.

To the chair to council member hunger, I can bring you more information on what we're going to be looking at with the tax override in the coming year.

We do I will note that in your report, PFERS is expect to be fully funded toward the end of at the end of this fiscal year, and the need for continued contribution tax overrides will be very diminuous of any at all.

So thank you.

Councilmember Wong.

Uh, thank you through the chair.

Um, so on page seven, you all you have noted in the report that um performance was aided by AI-related hardware demand.

I'm just curious since there was quite a bit of news this morning around the stock markets, crashing huge, yes, yes, uh chip makers and whatnot.

Right.

There was there to be an impact for the foreseeable future.

I'll turn it over to David.

But yes, this morning there was a huge sell-off on the NASDAQ.

Last time I looked at the silver down over 500 points.

So it wasn't really impacted by the Dow Jones this morning as much, but definitely on NASDAQ.

I don't know where it stands right now.

But let me let David add uh is regarding the AI and the hardware and you know what the future is is looking like.

Because we're gonna continue to see a lot of volatility around AI and in the tech sector as we uh as we move forward.

Okay.

I don't know if you want to add anything, David.

Yeah, just a couple of comments.

So that's one of the reasons why we de-risked this portfolio last year.

We don't want it to rely on a very volatile stock market.

Uh PFERS portfolio is invested not just in AI and big tech, it's invested across the spectrum.

They're also using active portfolio managers, so we would expect active managers to go in and sell those stocks when they become overvalued and buy them when they are cheap.

Um we try not to be day-to-day timers with this portfolio.

Um, too much emotion gets involved when you start doing that.

So look, we'll see how far the sell-off goes, but we've really been a portfolio.

We built a portfolio that's that's focused on capital preservation, not on capital growth.

It's just been nice to have the gains when they've come.

How can you not?

Could I on the topic of de-risking?

Can you I know we're speculating, but in the context of a very large equity sell-off, what is the typical reaction of the bond market in that circumstance where the majority of our portfolio for PFES is invested?

Yeah, that's a great question.

So generally, when there's a quick sell-off in the equity markets, folks like to de-risk, so they buy things that are safe, which is bonds.

So you generally see an uptick in the bond market when the equity markets go down very on a very quick basis.

So usually with a day or two or three or time, we see bond prices go up, which benefits PFERS while the equity markets are going down.

Probably in the next couple of days, this news will vet itself out, and you'll see the market start to go back up again in reverse.

That's one of the reasons why we don't want to be day traders in the portfolio.

Okay, council member Wong, can I complete?

Uh yeah, I'm good with my questions and just moving the item.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay.

Oh, sorry.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on item number four, Asado Olabala, Blair Beekman, and Kevin Dali.

Um the 573 retired individuals who come under the umbrella of this item.

Once they uh do they identify the beneficiaries who at the time of their passing then become uh the beneficiary of those funds?

Okay, good.

That's how my retirement works.

Um, so uh this document that you have, I get Charles Swab upkeeps of my investments frequently.

Do the retirees have the same opportunity to understand the investments that are going on with this portfolio, or is this strictly a document that is shared with you?

I don't know when I get this stuff, I don't know what it says.

I don't understand it at least, but I do know I'm constantly informed with the investments I have with Charles Swa.

Then uh the last thing is only it's very important to recognize and keep bringing this up.

What percentage of these retirees live in Oakland?

I know 32 percent of your employees live in all your city employees live in Oakland, and not living in Oakland, they are the City of Oakland taxpayers are contributing, but they are not contributing to this system, and we'll constantly bring up the fact that we have city employees who make no contribution, they're not invested in the city of Oakland, but they make in decisions about the city of Oakland financially and services and resources.

I don't see the clock.

Is my time up, sweetie?

Now it is.

Thank you.

Okay.

Just to I appreciate the report.

Just a quick check.

I I think you've implicitly answered the question, but on page two, uh, as of July 1st of last year, it said that there was a funded ratio of 95.3%.

And I think you said now it's fully funded.

I assume that was yay, market went up, and then you sold off, but moved to bonds, so everything's better now.

Uh anyway, thanks again for the presentation.

Thank you for your comments.

Switching to Zoom user Blair Beekman.

You can unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Hi, thank you, Blair Beekman.

I forgot to add previously, and from all of our budget questions we have, how we include that in that previous app item.

Uh, good luck.

So I could do that nice and formally.

Uh for this item.

Yeah, once again, just uh, you know, I've been describing uh I think San Diego's been learning incredibly important lessons how Oakland works its budget and its uh priorities.

We've made amazing changes in San Diego in the past few months.

Uh, really worked hard, and I really uh you guys can't be thanked enough for your dedication to social services first uh and how to address our budget.

With that said, um the mid-budget report you guys just had.

Uh it was being described that city workers are possibly gonna have to be paying for their own uh retirement and health care.

Uh and that's basically because of budget deficit issues.

And you know, um what I've learned in San Diego and in San Jose, they really try to take care of their city workers a lot, and uh, you know, uh so much so that I I would always ask that there has to be a certain they have to learn to step back and take cutbacks when appropriate, you know, for the good of the team, kind of thing.

You're trying to do that here in Oakland at this time with with you know uh taking away retirement plans and uh health plans, but I think that's a bit too strong.

And I'm wondering if if there's other ways like taking a small decrease in pay of maybe 25 or 50 bucks a month, uh, and then but allowing you know the health insurance and retirement plans, like what you're offering for this item.

So there can be I don't I think it can create a better harmony uh for city workers.

Uh good luck how we work on it, and thanks for your patience to listen with myself on this item.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair that concludes all speakers on this item, and we do have a motion made by Councilmember Wong, seconded by councilmember Unger to receive and file this informational report in committee.

On roll council members Brown, aye Unger.

Aye.

Wong I and Chair Ramachandran.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item four passes with four eyes to receive and file this report in committee.

Reading in item number five, adopt the following pieces of legislation.

One, a resolution recommending to the civil service board the exemption of the classification of employee and labor relations technician for the from the operation of civil service, and two, a resolution resolution recommending to the civil service board, the exemption of the classification of employee and labor relations analysts, assistant from the operation of civil service, and three, a resolution recommending to the civil service board, the exemption of the classification of employee and labor relations analysts from these oper from the operation of civil service, and four a resolution recommending to the civil service board the exemption of the classification of exempt limited duration employee from the operation of civil service, and five, an ordinance amending the salary schedule of ordinance number one two one eight seven CMS to a add the full-time classification of employee and labor relations technician and b add the full-time classification of employee and labor relations analyst assistant, and C add the full-time classification of employee and labor relations analyst, and D add the full-time classification of exempt limited duration duration employee, and E amend the salary of the full-time classification of deputy chief of fire, and F amend the salary of the full-time classification of assistant chief of fire department and G, amend the salary of the full-time classification of fire marshal.

And we have three speakers that signed up to speak on this item.

Good morning, Chair Ramashandran and members of the committee.

I'm Jamie Pritchett, principal human resource analyst with the human resources management department.

The item before you involves routine maintenance to the city's classification plan.

We typically bring salary ordinance amendments to the city council a few times a year.

These actions generally result in the creation of new classifications and revisions to existing classifications.

We are proposing the creation of four new classifications today.

Three of them are in the human resources management department, and one of them is a temporary classification that is a companion to an already existing temporary classification.

HR's employee relations division is adding division specific classifications at the technician, assistant analyst, and analyst level.

And this is in lieu of utilizing the existing general human resources classifications, they will not be represented by any bargaining groups, and we hope this will avoid any potential conflicts of interest.

As they carry out their duties, they are primarily responsible for collective bargaining, meet and confer, and providing guidance to departments.

The other classification being added is a temporary classification exempt limited duration employee, the acronym ELDE, and it will encompass temporary assignments that cover 40-hour work weeks.

The existing ELDE classification already encompasses 37.5 hour workweek classifications.

ELDEs are most commonly used when a body of work has not been classified yet, or there are revisions to existing classification specifications.

There are two other categories.

It could be for limited funding cycles that are up to one year, or it could be for short-term special projects that last six to twelve months.

ELDEs have to compete in a competitive civil service process and earn placement on the eligible list to be appointed to permanent positions.

All four new classifications will be exempt from civil service, more commonly known as at will, and they will not be represented by any bargaining groups.

Advancing these resolutions to the civil service board will ensure that these new classifications are properly classified within the city's classification plan.

Per section 9.02F of the city charter, these classifications are recommended for exemption based on their position in the organization, scope of responsibility, independence of action, and consequence of error.

Regarding the salary adjustments to the Deputy Chief, Assistant Chief, and Fire Marshall's warned classifications, these changes will ensure equitable retirement treatment for employees serving in these leadership roles.

This action incorporates an existing 15% administrative assignment premium into the base salary for the three OFD management classifications.

Staff recommend advancing these pieces of legislation to full counsel.

I'm available to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Thanks for the report.

For the new HR classifications, are those creating new positions to hire into, or is this moving existing people into new classifications?

We actually have placeholder positions in the budget, and so we will be filling them moving forward.

That's great.

I know that vacancies in HR have contributed to our problem citywide.

Do you think this will make a measurable impact on the amount of the pace of hiring that we're able to do?

If I may, again, through the chair, this is limited to employee relations, and so they are a separate division from the employee employment employment operations services division, and that is responsible for recruitment.

So this is the employee relations and labor relations wing.

Okay, so what what will in layman's terms?

Can you explain to me what they will be doing and what they will help the city do better by hiring these four positions?

Sure, through the chair.

So these positions will be responsible for helping guide through disciplinary matters, through grievances, they will be participating in collective bargaining as we're currently involved with right now, and then any meet and confer processes with a union.

And so the impact is part of the again employee and labor relations side of the house.

Okay, um, we can move to public speakers.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on item number five, Asado Olavala, Blair Beekman, and Kevin Daly.

Oh, there's such a shortage of uh jobs that are needed to be open to uh fill all of these jobs considered high priority needs jobs.

Are they at the top of the list of what the priorities are for having staff available to deal with any element of the city's uh services resources, whatever?

How did you determine these jobs based on other jobs that could have fallen into the same category?

What was confusing in reading the document, it says exempt limited duration appointments may not exceed one year.

Is that standard procedure, or is that something that you develop based on some criteria?

It also says in the document, employees with exempt limited duration will continue to receive the same fringe benefits received during regular assignments.

So it sounds like that these are employees who have been regularly employed, and now they are going to be temporarily uh employed.

And am I interpreting that correct?

These are regular employees or who had regular assignments that will now be doing temporary assignments.

And then at the end of the one year, are they going back to their regular assignments?

Um you already covered this one.

The classification will not be covered by any bargain units.

So if these had been regular employees who were covered under the bargaining unit, now they're in a position where they will not be covered.

And what is the risk factor for not having uh that ability to be covered by your bargaining unit that you put them under?

Kevin, a small request.

Whenever possible, when PDF files are attached, should be great if they're searchable and have text in them rather than scanned images.

That makes it a lot easier to look through rather than have to read it all.

And it looks like at least some of these documents.

Today seem to be scanned.

At least my tools can't easily search it.

Anyway, I appreciate your report though, and the information could be my fault.

My tools' faults.

Thanks a lot.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair uh calling Blair Beekman.

Did you wish to still speak on this item?

Okay, Chair, at this time all names have been called.

Okay, I will entertain a motion.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Wong to approve the recommendations of staff and to forward all pieces of legislation to the July 7, 2026 City Council agenda.

On roll council members Brown.

Aye.

Unger.

Aye.

Wong?

Aye.

And Chair Ramachanjan.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item five passes with four eyes to forward all pieces of legislation to the July 7, 2026 City Council agenda on consent.

Reading in item six, adopt an ordinance amending the salary schedule of ordinance number one two one eight seven CMS to amend the salary for the council member, city attorney, and city auditor in accordance with the Oakland Public Ethics Commission's charter mandated salary adjustment, and we have three speakers that signed up to speak on this item.

Good morning again.

Jamie Pritchett with Human Resources Management.

This item advances the Oakland Public Ethics Commission's charter mandated salary adjustments for the classifications of council member, city attorney, and city auditor.

The applicable charter sections are two zero two, four zero one, and four zero three respectively, which describe how salaries for elected officials are to be amended.

The PEC met on March 18th and approved if I have percent increased for the council member classification.

It will take effect on July 4th, 2026.

On April 15th, the PEC met and approve similar increases for the city attorney and city auditor classifications.

These will also take effect on July 4th, 2026.

Staff recommend advancing this legislation to the full council.

I am available to answer any questions you may have.

And that the executive director of the public ethics commission, Susan Doran, is also available.

Thank you.

Um I appreciate this item.

Just to clarify, this is the standard ethics commission action that they take every two years to increase salaries according to our ordinance, correct?

Okay, thank you.

And they had approved this back in March of this year, and we are adopting the PC's recommendations.

To the chair, that is correct.

Okay.

Uh colleagues.

If I may, just for a point of clarification, these are uh charter requirements, not requirements that were imposed by ordinance.

So these are uh in the city charter.

Understood, so voter approved amendments, all right.

Um if there's no uh questions, we'll go to public speakers.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on item number six, Asado Olabala, Blair Beekman, and Kevin Daly.

Okay, so y'all know I have nothing to say about uh you're gonna get an increase of salary of for you nine thousand five hundred and twenty dollars and twenty-six cents, uh, add it to your already one hundred and fourteen thousand two hundred and forty-three dollars and thirteen cents that you get every year.

So since we are the process of uh charter amendments, this needs to be a charter amendment, the ethics commission in a position on an annual basis to increase your salary.

Plus, we already have a proposed charter, not just proposed, it's gonna be on there with the mayor, and in somewhere in that charter, uh uh voting item in November, it talks about increasing your salaries.

So can somebody speak to you're already getting an increase in your salary every year, whatever percent, but there's something on the ballot in November to increase your salary.

Anybody want to straighten that up and make that clear to the public because it sounds fishy.

Now, here's the part of it.

You can decline you, you can decline this, you're not obligated to take the money.

So, how many of you gonna volunteer?

I can't take this money because whatever reason.

I want to give the money to to charity to the homeless.

No, you're not gonna do none of that.

So the city attorney is getting an increase.

Oh 33, uh 338,290, and increased uh 28,190 dollars.

The city auditor, I ain't gonna say nothing about the city order because I appreciate him.

Y'all give him all the money you want to give him because he's working hard.

Uh so the source of the funding is the general purpose fund, all total, we're talking about 123,885.

Calling in Zoom speaker Blair Beekman.

You can unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Hi, uh Blair Beekman.

Thank you for this item.

Thank you for the words of peace, public commenter.

Uh Mr.

Olivala, nice to hear.

I'm uh in something of the same lines.

Thank thank you for the explanations uh of you know why these uh salary increases are happening and all of this gone through and um I'm I'm still a bit unclear if it's ordinance or charter, um, which it is uh charter mandated salary adjustments that says here at the end.

You made those explanations clear.

Um thank you.

Um it's from that uh, you know, I I'm having um uh the work I do in San Diego right now.

I mean, we're really heavy into figuring out better budget practices right now, and um I I I figured out a very nice formula that if our city workers and city council and mayor all took a very small pay cut of like 50 to 25 to 50 bucks uh a month, which is about six, I mean a week, which is about six hundred bucks a month altogether.

Um that could be, you know, if you have 3,000 plus workers, uh city workers, that's a savings of about almost 2 million dollars.

And I think that can go a long way.

And I think it it's it would be a lot more um agreeable than uh than cutting uh you know health programs, health care programs, and retirement funding, and um uh uh we're looking for ways to get the community involved and and to feel that there's camaraderie and that you know our city government can take one for the team kind of thing, and I think these are the ways to do it where in how to address our budget issues.

Good luck in figuring out that good balance I guess um thank you.

Thank you for your comments that concludes all speakers on this item.

Thank you council member Brown.

Excellent um thank you so much for the report and the update um just wanted to um kind of uplip uplip some comments um that um that were already mentioned right this is very routine I know that in prior years maybe someone has some background on this but I believe in prior years um the council members have declined the increase um and so I'm not sure if you all are prepared with any of the data and the facts um relative to that um and um you know we know that you know I'm only gonna comment on the salary of the council members we know that in order to like live here in the Bay Area you know you you um and and not even to like maybe live comfortably right um there's a certain um amount that one needs to make I believe I read in a recent study that um in the San Francisco Bay area even like as a a household of of two you know a minimum of like a hundred and thirty thousand would actually uh barely be enough and so um in this moment I know that there is um we we have as a city we have a lot of financial challenges um and also I do think that the the work that we do daily it it makes sense to have a decent a decent wage as well um but I am curious um if we have the I guess like the for like over the course of the last five years for example how often have the council members decline um the increase that is information we would need to research and bring back to you okay and then what about last year for example did this item come before us last year again through the chair I believe it's every two years okay and so it would have been two years previous.

Yeah I think um I if I recall correctly I feel like um two years ago it was declined I think that's what um I remember sitting through one of the meetings and and knowing that um and so I could think I am curious like the uh maybe perhaps when this report comes before us again it maybe it could include um just like over the course of the last you know six to eight years how often um these raises have been declined by council members thank you all right I will oh sorry director Johnson just for clarification the item before you is an ordinance increasing the statutory salary for these positions that is distinct from uh council members individually choosing to do actions and I will note um based on our past practice with this we would recommend that we not engage in activities where council members individually decline salaries and said you do a donation back to the organization because of what it does with our payroll system.

However this ordinance to be really clear is about the statutory maximum for all council members versus individual council members and their own actions just to be clear and as I know some of the prior actions have been individual council members doing things versus declining the actual wage on that so just I wanted to clarify that because that's a question that's been asked.

Thank you.

All right I will entertain a motion.

So moved second thank you we have a motion made by council member brown seconded by council member wong to approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the July 7th 2026 city council agenda on role council members brown aye unger aye wong aye and chair Ramachandran.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item six passes with four.

I support this item to the July 7, 2026.

City council agenda on consent.

Moving on to open forum.

We have two speakers that signed up to speak.

Calling in the names Mrs.

Sada Ulabala and Blair Bakeman so I am very concerned with the ice Center parking situation where they validate parking, and supposedly the uh main management group sharks pays for the parking.

I haven't seen anything how that works.

I hope with the new proposed that the finance department will handle that, that you look into that.

I was very shocked.

There's an item coming up later on today uh that deals with the uh independent uh business groups that we have.

And within the payments that are who's responsible, the city has to pay.

For instance, Chinatown.

The city pays eight different uh assessments on your property in Chinatown.

One of them is the Oakland Museum of California, where you pay sixty-two thousand one hundred and seventy-nine dollars and ninety-nine.

Thank you for your comments.

Switching to Zoom user Blair, you can unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Hi, Blair Beekman.

Um, thanks for Council Person Brown's words.

Uh, really nice.

I, you know, my words, I spoke of city workers, it was meant for city council and may and the mayor too, actually.

So uh good luck how to be considering that within budget concepts.

Uh taking one for the team, as the saying goes.

Uh, and finding good ways to do that.

I think currently you're having a bit of trouble uh, you know, by by uh cutting into health insurance plans and retirement plans.

I don't it doesn't seem to be feeling good.

I'm trying to find a better way to do that, so good luck.

Um my big project things I want to talk about today.

I want to talk about the future.

What are we gonna do about Spark and finding a new ALPR vendor besides block and to talk about strong mayor things?

Um I got some disconcerting news about the future of SWAC, what it can be doing in this next 18 months that it's still here.

Uh I'll talk more in other public meetings today.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair, that concludes all speakers.

Thank you, everyone.

The meetings adjourned.