Oakland Public Ethics Commission Special Meeting – December 10, 2025

The Oakland Public Ethics Commission (PEC) held a special meeting on December 10, 2025, beginning at 6:33 p.m., chaired by Commissioner Francis Upton. A quorum of four commissioners (Gage, Michigan, Talok, Upton) was present; Commissioners Baeva and Steele were absent. The meeting focused on proposed amendments to the Oakland Campaign Reform Act (OCRA) and an informational item on remote public participation via Zoom.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Ralph Cannes spoke during open forum, alleging that the PEC has violated the Brown Act by holding un-noticed ad hoc subcommittee meetings with staff or public participation, and that the process for selecting new commissioners must be public under the city charter. He also referenced a 2017 city attorney legal opinion to argue that special city council meetings called under Charter Section 208 are limited to a single subject and that recent meetings on September 15 and November 4 should be nullified.
• During the action item, Ralph Cannes commented again, questioning the purpose of officeholder accounts and asserting they function as vote-buying slush funds. He also argued the Democracy Dollars program is prohibitively expensive, citing Seattle's 46% administrative overhead.
• Diaz Arm of Common Cause California spoke in opposition to raising annual contribution limits for officeholder accounts, stating the increase would deepen dependence on large donors and worsen inequities. He supported the amendment to prohibit officeholder-funded mailers within three months of an election and encouraged the commission to continue exploring Democracy Dollars.

Discussion Items

Action Item: Proposed Amendments to the Oakland Campaign Reform Act (OCRA) Staff Director Suzanne Doran presented three components of draft legislation requested by Council President Jenkins:

1. Extension of the sunset date – The temporary increase in campaign contribution limits (to pre-Measure W levels) had been set to sunset June 30, 2029, or earlier if Democracy Dollars thresholds were met. The proposed six-month extension would align deadlines for 2028 candidates.
2. Increase in officeholder account contribution limits – Raising the annual per-donor limit from the current Measure W level to $900 for individuals and $1,800 for broad-based political committees, matching temporary candidate limits. Staff noted that 21% of individual contributions (accounting for a majority of funds) were at the maximum limit, and the increase would amplify large-donor influence.
3. Mailer prohibition – Barring officeholder funds from being used for mailings within three months of any election for city office. Staff supported this guardrail as consistent with FPPC guidance.

Commissioners debated each component:

• Extension of sunset: Commissioners Michigan and Talok opposed, citing the council’s disregard of the commission’s earlier recommendation for a 2026 sunset and the lack of justification. Commissioners Gage and Upton remained neutral. No consensus was reached; the commission directed staff to reflect the split in the comment letter.
• Officeholder limit increase: All four commissioners opposed. They cited the council’s failure to address prior requests for justification and guardrails, the potential for increased donor influence and inequity, and the existence of behested payments as an alternative. The commission voted unanimously to oppose.
• Mailer prohibition: All four commissioners supported the amendment as a common-sense measure to prevent campaign-related advantages.

Informational Item: Remote Public Comment via Zoom Staff outlined a proposal to allow hybrid meetings, enabling public participation and potentially commissioner participation under Brown Act just-cause provisions. The PEC already streams meetings via Zoom but does not allow public comment online. Staff noted that implementing hybrid meetings would require dedicated staffing to monitor the Zoom room and would create an expectation of continued availability. Commissioners expressed support for moving forward, with no objections. The item was informational only; no vote was taken.

Key Outcomes

• The commission voted 4-0 to send a comment letter to the City Council reflecting:
  • Opposition to the increase in officeholder account contribution limits.
  • Support for the mailer prohibition.
  • A split view on the extension of the sunset date (two opposed, two neutral), with staff to summarize the opposing commissioners' reasons.
• Commissioners agreed to proceed with implementing hybrid meeting capabilities to allow remote public comment, with staff to finalize logistics.
• Chair Upton suggested the commission could consider proposing its own amendment to eliminate officeholder accounts at a future meeting, given the commission’s role in administering OCRA.