Finance & Management Committee Meeting – September 22, 2026

The Oakland City Council Finance & Management Committee convened at 9:30 AM on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, in the City Council Chamber. All four committee members were present: Councilmembers Brown, Unger, Wang, and Chair Ramachandran. The meeting addressed eight agenda items, including audits, revenue collection, parking operations, and salary classification changes. Several items were forwarded to the full City Council, while others were continued or withdrawn.

Consent Calendar

• Item 1 – Approval of Draft Minutes (July 14, 2026): Approved unanimously (4-0).
• Item 2 – Determination of Schedule of Outstanding Committee Items: Approved as amended to withdraw the quarterly Cash Management Report and the Police and Fire Retirement System (PFRS) performance report from the pending list; these will be posted as informational memos on the city website. Motion carried 4-0.
• Item 8 – Amendment to Salary Ordinance (Classification Title Changes): Approved staff recommendation to forward to the October 6, 2026 City Council consent agenda. Changes include renaming “Exempt Limited Duration Employee” to clarify 37.5-hour and 40-hour work weeks, and renaming “Principal Employee Relations Analyst” to “Principal Employee and Labor Relations Analyst.” Motion carried 4-0.

Public Comments & Testimony

• On Item 2: One staff speaker (unidentified) requested withdrawal of two quarterly reports to relieve a crowded calendar, noting the PFRS report is also reviewed by its board. One public speaker (Sadio Olabala) cautioned that absent periodic spending reports, the city administrator’s authority to spend up to $250,000 without council approval could lead to misspending, citing a recent example involving Oakland Police Department use of Measure Z funds.
• On Item 3 (NeoGov HRIS contract): One public speaker (Sadio Olabala) criticized the report’s inconsistent racial/ethnic categories and questioned hiring outcomes, stating that Black/African American applicants are the largest group applying but may not be hired proportionally.
• On Item 4 (Vacant Property Tax Audit): Three public speakers: Madeline Stacy praised the audit and urged the city to shift spending toward homelessness and housing services rather than primarily on illegal dumping. Another speaker (Kevin Daly) asked the auditor to consider underutilized properties (e.g., parking lots) and questioned whether the tax violates the Ellis Act, citing a California appeals court ruling striking down San Francisco’s empty homes tax. A third speaker (Sadio Olabala) noted the report found some vacancies may go undetected, questioned unspent funds, and criticized administrative cost tracking.
• On Item 5 (Special Revenue Collection): Two public speakers: Sadio Olabala asked how sidewalk and mobile vendors are taxed, noting that liens cannot be placed on their property if they rent, and expressed concern about lack of enforcement and licensing. Another speaker (Derek Barnes) did not speak based on transcript.
• On Item 7 (Parking Garages): Four public speakers: Kevin Daly urged adoption of dynamic pricing and occupancy targets, expressing disappointment that parking policy moved to the Finance Department. Another speaker warned of potential lawsuits related to automated license plate readers and pay-by-phone overcharges, and questioned the city’s validation arrangement with the ice center. David Boatwright recommended the city make public its monetization plan for the Clay Street parking lot. Sadio Olabala did not speak on this item.
• On Item 8 (Salary Classification): One public speaker (Sadio Olabala) criticized the lack of detail on duties and responsibilities, noting that only 32% of city employees live in Oakland, which undermines local revenue generation.
• Open Forum: Two speakers: David Boatwright urged more oversight of authorized projects and measures, citing Measure M’s slow implementation. A second speaker (unidentified) reported that the Budget Advisory Commission is reviewing a document for the 2027-28 budget that includes budget stabilization issues.

Discussion Items

• Item 3 – Authorization to Enter into Cooperative Agreement with NeoGov: Staff requested withdrawal due to outstanding questions and a need to change the title based on feedback from contracts. The committee voted unanimously to withdraw the item with no new date. Staff indicated a similar item could return on October 27 after review by Rules on October 1. No service impacts were noted.
• Item 4 – Performance Audit of the Vacant Property Tax: City Auditor Michael Houston presented findings from a five‑year audit (FY 2021–2026). Key findings: administrative processes effectively identify vacancies; measurable goals and regular reporting are lacking; and the tax may be limited by a fixed-rate structure ($3,000 residential, $6,000 commercial). From FY 2021–2025, $29.8 million was collected, with 73% ($20 million) spent on illegal dumping through Public Works. Only 15% of revenue was spent on administration. Councilmembers requested supplemental data on residential vs. commercial vacancies, the reasons for spatial vacancy clusters, and the breakdown of exemptions in each cluster. The item was forwarded to the October 6, 2026 City Council consent agenda.
• Item 5 – Special Revenue Collection Project: Revenue and Tax Administrator Nicole Welch reported that the Oakland Business Tax renewal rate stands at 83.9%. Property liens totaling $5.4 million were transferred to Alameda County. Outreach efforts, including 6,879 landlord audit notices mailed September 11, 2026, have identified new rental accounts. Staff noted the project is part of normal operations, not a special initiative. Councilmembers discussed digital outreach, the relationship between unregistered landlords and rent control compliance, and the high number of closed accounts (10,376) attributed to prior backlog. The report was received and filed.
• Item 7 – Parking Garages Operations, Financial and Management Update: Assistant Revenue and Tax Administrator Osa Segura reported that parking revenues have declined 17% since the pandemic. The current gateless model relies on enforcement that only generates about 1% of garage revenue from citations. Deferred maintenance needs total $7.8 million. Staff will issue a new RFP to evaluate gated vs. gateless technology and other operational improvements. Councilmembers expressed strong preference for returning to a gated system or dramatically increasing enforcement. The committee continued the item to the November 10, 2026 Finance & Management Committee meeting with requests for: (1) analysis of gate technology options; (2) usage data per garage over time; (3) reasons for citation fluctuations; (4) lessons from other California cities; and (5) top deferred maintenance priorities.

Key Outcomes

• Item 1: Approved July 14, 2026 minutes (4-0).
• Item 2: Approved amended schedule; two quarterly reports moved to informational memos (4-0).
• Item 3: Withdrawn from agenda with no new date (4-0).
• Item 4: Forwarded to October 6, 2026 City Council on consent, with supplemental data requested on residential vs. commercial vacancies, spatial clusters, and exemption breakdown (4-0).
• Item 5: Received and filed as an informational report (4-0).
• Item 7: Continued to November 10, 2026 Finance & Management Committee meeting with five specified information requests (4-0).
• Item 8: Forwarded to October 6, 2026 City Council consent agenda (4-0).
• Open Forum: Two speakers addressed the committee.

The meeting adjourned at 11:05 AM.