Oakland Public Ethics Commission Regular Meeting, March 18, 2026

The meeting began at 6:33 PM with all seven commissioners present for the first time in two years, along with staff. Chair Francis Upton presided. The commission adopted a new hybrid format allowing remote participation via Zoom and phone. Key actions included a 5% salary increase for city council members, closure of two enforcement complaints with referral to the San Francisco Ethics Commission, approval of case closures, and establishment of a transparency subcommittee. Several public comments raised concerns about charter reform secrecy, prior complaint dismissals, and the constitutionality of a sales tax measure.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Gene Hazard argued that a prior dismissal of his complaints (25-30 and 25-37) was improper because the anti-injunction clause in Oakland Municipal Code 4.26.130 is unconstitutional. He requested the commission reopen those cases. He also criticized the salary increase for council members during a fiscal emergency and warned against voter deception regarding the April 15th special election.
• Ralph Cannes criticized the mayor’s charter reform working group for operating in secret, violating Section 601 of the City Charter and the state constitution’s open meetings requirements. He noted he has made two public records requests since December 2025 that remain unanswered. He also objected to the commission’s ad hoc subcommittee structure, citing the Brown Act.
• During the minutes item, Mr. Hazard and Mr. Cannes both asserted that public comment on a prior item was improperly handled and requested a cure and correct. Mr. Cannes stated he filed a complaint about the ad hoc committee discussion.
• On salary adjustments, a speaker (unnamed) suggested tying any increase to accountability and mentioned a 2% figure as an alternative. Another speaker urged rejection of any raise due to the city’s fiscal crisis.
• On enforcement referral, Mr. Hazard argued the commission should have referred his earlier complaints instead of dismissing them, and criticized the referral to San Francisco as insufficient.

Discussion Items

Approval of Minutes (January 22, 2026)

• Commissioners discussed corrections to the order of public comment. A motion to approve the minutes failed for lack of a second, so the minutes were not approved. Commissioner Mitchik opposed approval pending resolution of a related complaint. The matter will be brought back at the next meeting.

City Council Salary Adjustment

• Staff presented two options: a mandatory minimum 5% increase (resulting in $114,243.13 annual salary) or a discretionary 5.4% increase (resulting in $114,678.34). The CPI rose 5.4% over two years. The commission voted 7–0 to adopt the 5% increase, citing the city’s ongoing fiscal emergency and consistency with the prior adjustment.

City Attorney and City Auditor Salary Process (No Action)

• Staff outlined the process for adjusting salaries under Measure X, including data from 41 comparator jurisdictions. Commissioners requested range options and historical context for the next meeting, where a decision will be made.

Enforcement Complaint Closures (Items 7 & 8)

• Enforcement Chief Tova Ackerman recommended closing complaints 2527 and 2601, which alleged PEC staff did not follow procedures in dismissing prior cases. She proposed referring them to the San Francisco Ethics Commission. After discussion, the commission voted 7–0 to close both cases and directed staff to forward the complaints directly to San Francisco and request that the outcome be publicly disclosed.

Case Closures (Item 9)

• The commission approved the closure plan for two cases (including Collins 2334) without objection. Vote was 7–0.

Enforcement Program Update

• The enforcement chief reported progress on Form 700 backlog: nine open cases from 2024, two from 2023, and nine from 2025. She noted inefficiencies and plans to reform the process. Administrative hearings for old backlog cases are being scheduled, with one respondent deceased.

Executive Director Report

• Director Duran clarified that Democracy Dollars eligibility under the Fair Elections Act is based on residency (not voter status), consistent with state law. She also addressed the budget deficit and potential impacts on PEC.

Subcommittee Formation and Assignments

• Chair Upton established a Transparency Ad Hoc Committee (members: Upton, Fisher, Apfeld). Commissioners also expressed interest in additional subcommittees: Enforcement (Apfeld, Fisher, Taloc), Democracy Dollars Pilot (Brandon, Mitchick, Baeva), and Charter Reform (Taloc, Baeva, Mitchick). These were noted but not formally created at this meeting.

Key Outcomes

• Minutes not approved – motion died due to lack of second; corrections to be presented at next meeting.
• City Council salary increase of 5% approved (7–0), effective as required by charter.
• Enforcement complaints 2527 and 2601 closed (7–0) and referred to San Francisco Ethics Commission, with direction to forward complaints and request public disclosure.
• Case closure plan for two cases approved (7–0).
• Transparency Ad Hoc Committee established with three members.
• Subcommittee interest noted for future formation.
• Future meeting business – minutes revision, possible additional guidance on ad hoc committee rules.