Oakland Public Ethics Commission Special Meeting - September 19, 2024
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Oakland Public Ethics Commission Special Meeting - September 19, 2024
The Oakland Public Ethics Commission held a special meeting on September 19, 2024, beginning at 6:35 PM and continuing past 9:15 PM. The meeting addressed a proposal to temporarily increase campaign contribution limits, reviewed several complaint investigations, and took action on settlement agreements. Key statistics reported included 36 candidate committees, 3 ballot measure committees, 1 recall committee, and 54 registered lobbyists.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Minutes (July 10, 2024): Approved unanimously (5-0).
- Approval of Special Meeting Minutes (August 14, 2024): Approved 4-0-1 (Commissioner Talak abstained).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Open Forum: Multiple speakers addressed ballot measures, including Measure OO (democracy dollars) and Measure N. Mr. Law and Mr. Hazard criticized misleading ballot language and the city attorney's role. Asada Olikbala raised concerns about Measure N's citizen initiative process. Ralph Cannes criticized the agenda length and public comment posting practices.
- Item 5 (Contribution Limits): Gail Wallace (League of Women Voters of Oakland) opposed the proposal, especially for the upcoming election. Others supported the increase, citing candidate challenges. Mr. Hazard and others argued it undermines Measure W and democracy dollars.
- Enforcement Items (10-12): Marlene Sachs, a complainant in case 2209, argued the penalties were too low and that respondents knew the law. Others, including Jorge Lerma, spoke in support of former Mayor Libby Schaff, citing her contributions to Oakland. Ralph Cannes and Asada Olikbala raised concerns about the adequacy of investigations and penalties.
Discussion Items
- Proposal to Increase Campaign Contribution Limits (Item 5): The Commission considered a proposal by Councilmembers Ramachandran and Jenkins to temporarily raise limits from $600 to $900 for individuals and from $1,200 to $1,800 for broad-based political committees, with a sunset in 2027 or earlier if democracy dollars are implemented. Executive Director Nicholas Hydorn presented staff analysis, noting concerns about last-minute changes, increased reliance on large donors, and administrative burden. Councilmembers argued the change is needed to bridge the gap because democracy dollars are not funded. After debate, a motion to support the proposal with amendments (including expenditure limits for 2026) failed 3-2. The Commission then voted 5-0 to send a letter to the City Council summarizing the range of opinions, including concerns about timing, the need for expenditure limits in 2026, and the desire to avoid reimbursement-based solutions.
- Enforcement Matters (Items 10, 11, 12): The Commission reviewed three proposed settlement agreements related to alleged campaign finance violations by former Mayor Libby Schaff and others. These cases involved failures to register candidate-controlled committees, exceeding contribution limits, and improper earmarking. Enforcement Chief Simon Russell presented the details, noting that respondents admitted to violations but claimed reliance on legal advice. Proposed penalties included joint and several liability. After extensive discussion, motions to approve the settlements for Items 10 and 11 failed 3-2 (four votes required for enforcement actions). The Commission then voted 3-2 to direct staff to renegotiate the settlements to specify individual payment amounts for each respondent. The meeting adjourned before a vote on Item 12 (case 2041.3 involving William Whitty).
Key Outcomes
- Contribution Limits: The Commission will send a letter to the City Council expressing the discussion points, including concerns about the timing of the change, the need for expenditure limits in 2026, and the desire to avoid a reimbursement-based solution.
- Enforcement Settlements: Proposed settlements for Items 10 and 11 were rejected due to insufficient votes. Staff was directed to renegotiate these settlements to clearly state the individual financial responsibility of each respondent. The meeting ended before a decision on Item 12.
Meeting Transcript
All right, it looks like we have our commissioners here. So Ktop, let's start recording. The time is 6.35. And welcome all to the special meeting of the Oakland Public Ethics Commission. The Commission works to promote fairness, openness, and integrity in city government. And we have a quite substantive and full agenda this evening. And so we look forward to getting into it. We are going to start by taking the role. Here. Commissioner Gage. Here. Commissioner Steele. Here. Commissioner Talak. Here. And I am the Chair, Ryan Mitchick, and I am also here. We have a quorum. I'd also like to acknowledge our staff here tonight. We have our executive director, uh Nicholas Hydorn. We have our enforcement chief Simon Russell. And I believe, do we have uh Alex here tonight? Okay. Well, thank you to all that are here. I'd also like to acknowledge that we have our legal counsel uh for Hussein. Um and I need you mic is all I think it's on, but I'll I'll scoot a little closer so you can hear my beautiful voice. Thank you. Um so thank you all for attending. Um I would uh just like to note um before we get into uh open forum and public comments, uh I would like to encourage those are here those who are here to publicly comment to remember to wait for the agenda item that you are commenting on, and I will call for public comment on that item at that time. Um so we'll go on to item number two, which is staff and commission announcements. Are there any staff announcements? Are there any commission announcements? Okay, we'll move on to open forum item number three. So open forum is a time for members of the public to comment on any matter within the jurisdiction of the PEC that is not on tonight's agenda under the Sunshine Ordinance. The Commission cannot discuss the substance of any public comment made that does not pertain to an item listed in the agenda. Uh the commission also urges members of the public not to make complaints or ask the commission to investigate matters uh at public meetings, since the public disclosure of such complaints or requests may undermine any subsequent investigation undertaken. Uh, if you have a ethics complaint uh or request for an investigation to make, we urge you to email at ethicscommission at Oaklandca.gov for assistance in filing that complaint, or you can see staff uh after the meeting tonight. So uh with that said, and again reiterating that this is only for items that are not on the agenda tonight. Um are there any public speakers public comment for open forum? All right, you may approach. I think we have a place right here for you to come up. Uh please state your name if you would like that to be recorded in the meeting minutes, and uh you have three minutes for your public comment. Okay. I live in uh District Four. And I'm here for a comment that regards to uh our uh Alameda County Grand Jury Association. I'm the treasurer of the association. And one of the uh things that we do besides supporting the grand jury as retired grand jurors, we're not the grand jury, we're retired grand jurors, um, is uh support the grand jury and recruiting, and we also follow up on grand jury reports. And one of the grand jury reports had to do with ballot titles. Ballot titles are the 75-word summary at the beginning of each of the ballot initiatives that people have. There are 34 in Alameda County this election. And so what the report found was that many times those titles were uh at best marginal as far as uh um explaining it well, and at worst uh misleading.
openpublica.com