SUPPORT: Council President Amendments to Mayor’s Proposed Budget

It is always important in budgeting to be responsible, sustainable and make choices among competing priorities.  Choices are not easy and reasonable people can disagree.  Today the clear need in Oakland is to address crime and promote job growth. 

There are three principal budget proposals: (1) Mayor Quan, (2) Council President Amendments (dated May 30,2013) and (3) Councilmembers Brooks/Gallo/Reid  (dated May 30,2013).  We salute the work and sincere advocacy each effort embodies.  As noted above budgets require making choices.

The Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce supports the Council President Amendments which we recognize as building on the good work done by Mayor Quan.  The Amendments add elements to the budget made possible by a slight revenue increase since the Mayor established her budget.  That these improvements are possible is testament to the prudent, careful work done by the Mayor.

The City of Oakland spends over one billion dollars every year, the General Purpose Fund makes up about $430 million of that.  Because the competing proposals agree in many ways and have a few critical differences we want to lay out our priorities and explain some of the suggestions we find most problematic.

The Council President Amendments budget does the best job of focusing on public safety.  It maintains the Mayor’s plan to run four Police Academy classes and add to civilian staff at OPD.  Spending on police makes up only twenty percent of the total budget.  Over the past six years while city staffing has fallen 16%, sworn OPD staff has dropped 27% and civilian staff has fallen 34%! A focus on rebuilding OPD is needed.

The alternative suggested by Brooks/Gallo/Reid has several particulars with which we disagree.  Eliminating the CHP support contracts that add patrols to Oakland would be a terrible loss.  Cutting the number of civilian staff being added to OPD would undermine the effort to increase the number of officers on the street and could hinder the solving of crimes and the crime reduction strategy just now being implemented. That plan also puts the funding for police academies on a less certain footing – which puts in danger the ability to grow OPD above 700 officers (and perhaps even above current levels). 

Instead among other things it uses that money to reinstate spending in City Council office budgets and most significantly adds several million for a COLA for city employees.  We understand the City is negotiating with employee unions and we encourage that work continue.  It is worth nothing that while the economy shows signs of improving, the unemployment rate in the City of Oakland is still high and thousands of people in the private sector have seen wage reductions, benefit reductions and other challenges.  In a choice at current levels between spending to increase OPD staffing and offering pay increases we choose public safety.

One other note on spending to address crime.  At current levels one of the biggest factors restricting job growth in Oakland is crime.  In previous communications, we have shared with you anecdotal evidence that fear of crime may cause some employers to leave and prevent others from coming to Oakland.  Investments in public safety today won’t just hopefully save lives and property but pay dividends in increased investment, more jobs and a broader, more robust tax base that will make greater city spending possible.  

Problems remain.  There are negative fund balances, underfunded pension and health liabilities, increased contribution demands coming from state programs and the normal upward pressure on costs.  Revenue streams are scheduled to expire and there are no guarantees that current revenue upticks will continue.  This Council and Mayor will need to find ways to do more with less and serve the needs of the businesses and citizens of Oakland.

The Council President Amendments to Mayor Quan’s Proposed Budget is the best option and deserves your support.  It has ours.

 

Debate on Oakland City Budget starts tonight!

The possibility of more spending on police protection for the citizens of Oakland will compete for attention as the City Council begins the process of adopting a two year budget.  Over the past 4-5 years the city has seen revenues decline and this has led to service reductions across just about every department.  While the people of Oakland have suffered the most, employee unions have made concessions to help balance the budget.

The good news is Mayor Quan and City Administrator Santana report revenues are starting to revive somewhat.  Nevertheless it is clear we are far from fully recovered and careful budgeting is still required.  Structural deficits still total over $150 million over the next five years and if contributions to pension and health costs were made as they should be that five year deficit total would balloon to over $650 million.  And that doesn’t include the amounts the City is already behind in paying! 

In the police department alone the number of sworn officers has fallen from 837 to 611. Civilian police staff has dropped by an even greater percentage from 394 people to 261.  Even with the just completed Police Academy and the two others starting this year the number of sworn officers will not reach even 700 officers.  If no further academies are scheduled the number will again start moving below the even intolerably low number we have today.

Even with these cuts of the last few years, police spending amounts to less than 20% of the overall city budget.  Public works takes up just a little more than 12% of all spending and the fire department 11%.  And yet in a city wide poll last Fall the people of Oakland identified road repair and police services as their clear top two priorities.

The City Council has made important steps to addressing our urgent public safety needs in the last few months.  We should continue to support those efforts.  At budget time many worthy and even not so worthy demands are made on the Council for funding.  We need to let them hear our voice calling for investment in saving lives and making our community safe!

 

Important Dates

April 2: Council budget workshop
April 15-19: Public Release of Proposed Budget

April 30: Presentation of Proposed Budget to City Council

May: Budget Town Hall Meetings Citywide

May 30: Proposed City Council Budget Hearing #1

June 13: Proposed City Council Budget Hearing #2

June 27: Proposed Final City Council Budget Hearing/Adoption

July 1: Implementation of FY 13-15 Adopted Budget

Oakland City Council – Committee Assignments

Committee assignments for the next two years were approved by a unanimous voice vote this morning (Council Member Desley Brooks abstained). The assignments are:

By Council Member the assignments (and total number) are:

D1 – Kalb – 3:                        Rules, Public Works, Public Safety

D2 – Kernighan – 4:               Rules, Finance, Econ. Dev., Education

 

D3 – Gibson-McElhaney -4:   Econ. Dev., Life Enrichment, Education, Public Safety

D4 – Schaaf - 5:                      Rules, Finance, Econ. Dev., Education, Public Safety

 

D5 – Gallo -4:                         Public Works, Life Enrichment, Education, Public Safety

D6 – Brooks -2:                      Finance, Life Enrichment

 

D7 – Reid – 3:                                    Rules, Public Works, Econ. Dev.

At Large – Kaplan -3:             Finance, Public Works, Life Enrichment

 

Election Results - City of Oakland

Unofficial it looks like these are your Oakland election results:

 

City Attorney:                         Barbara Parker   

City Council D1:                     Dan Kalb  52%   Amy Lemley 48%    **

City Council D3:                     Lynette Gibson-McElhaney 54%    Sean Sullivan 46%  **

City Council D5:                     Noel Gallo

City Council D7:                     Larry Reid     

City Council At Large:           Rebecca Kaplan 

 

School Board D1:                   Jody London          

School Board D1:                   Jumoke Hinton-Hodge

School Board D1:                   Rosie Torres        

School Board D1:                   James Harris        

 

State Assembly 18:      Rob Bonta 50.79% (50,028 votes)  Abel Guillen 49.21%  (48,470 votes) only 1,558 votes separate **

 

** provisional ballots could change things

A Kick off to Election Season

What’s best for Oakland? What do Oakland’s voters think are the most important issues? The Chamber has embarked on the first of what it expects will be an annual series on “The Pulse of Oakland,” a public opinion poll that is currently underway to find out what issues are most important and the direction that the city is headed. The poll of Oakland residents, conducted by EMC Research, covers everything from economic development and jobs to public safety and education.

The results of the poll will be announced at a special Chamber breakfast on Tuesday, Sept. 18 from 8 to 9:30 a.m. at Scott’s Seafood Grill & Bar in Jack London Square, and a professional pollster will be on hand to explain the results of the poll and answer audience questions. The breakfast costs $40 for Chamber members and $50 for non-members. Sponsor tables are available.

Join us to learn what Oakland voters consider the most important issues – and discover the story behind the numbers.

For tickets and information, contact Amanda Medina of the Chamber staff at (510) 874-4800, ext. 319 or at amedina@oaklandchamber.com.

Debate Wrap Up: Candidates for At-Large Council seat

Candidates for At-Large Council seat face off

Nearly six months into the electoral process, four of the five candidates vying for the At-Large City Council seat squared off earlier this evening at the Kaiser Auditorium in downtown Oakland.

The debate, sponsored by the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, was the fifth in a series of six debates to introduce the candidates for City Council and City Attorney positions who are running for office in the November election.

The At-Large face off, held in front of nearly 100 potential voters and business leaders, was moderated by Paul Junge, the Chamber’s Vice President and Director of Public Policy. The candidates were presented with a series of questions by a three-person panel – Dan Cohen, principal at Full Court Press; Barbara Leslie, director of external affairs at AT&T; and Jill Broadhurst, the director of community affairs and advocacy for the East Bay Rental Housing Association.

The five candidates vying for the At-Large City Council seat are Theresa Anderson-Downs, City Councilmember Ignacio De La Fuente, At-Large incumbent Rebecca Kaplan, Mick Storm and Carol Lee Tolbert. Unfortunately, Storm was not able to attend. The candidates answered a myriad of questions regarding policy positions and shared meaningful exchanges regarding current and potential issues.

The Chamber debates for City Council seats continue to revolve around the issue of public safety, and so it was at the At-Large forum at Kaiser Auditorium. “This city will succeed when we get the jobs in and the guns out,” said Kaplan, the At-Large incumbent. “My basic principle is to stop the violence and get the illegal guns out of our city.” She also urged more research on Operation Cease Fire, which is being used by other cities to help curb violence.

De La Fuente said the police have to be provided the tools to do their jobs, with those tools including curfews and gang injunctions.

Each candidate spoke about his and her experience, which will stand them in good stead to fill the City Council post. De La Fuente has represented the Fruitvale District for many years, and served as Council President for ten. He said he’d like to expand those successful projects from the Fruitvale and make them citywide.

Kaplan was voted to her current post in 2008 and turned attention to her successes.

Tolbert, who has years of experience with area nonprofits, wants “an opportunity to work with city residents to develop policies that make sense.”

Anderson-Downs is a small business owner in Oakland and is running on the Green Party ticket. Her work centers around youth and youth services. “Our children are in peril,” she said. “They have nowhere to go, nothing to do.”

Thanks for Joining Us

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 8:02pm

That’s a wrap! The debate has ended with a large round of applause for the all of the candidates and their efforts.

Full Debate Schedule

Tonight’s At-Large debate is the fifth of six debates in this series. The full schedule is posted below; all debates are FREE and begin at 6:30pm. 

See you next week for more live blogging at the District 7 Councilmember Debate, or join us in person at the Ira Jinkins Recreation Center (9175 Edes Ave) on Tuesday, September 4. Opening statements begin at 6:30pm.

What do you think of the discussion?

Let us know your comments by following the event on Twitter tonight @oaklandchamber and using the tag #oakdebates.

Closing Statements

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 8:02pm

Candidate Lee Tolbert wants to attract housing and partner with the schools cites her school board experience to “create a new direction for our city.” Candidate Kaplan trumpets “guns out, jobs in” slogan again, wants to work with businesses and the region, says we can “move Oakland forward.” Candidate De La Fuente says that he wants to continue to “make the tough decisions” and “continue to do the work that he has done in the Fruitvale” for all of Oakland. Says that he wants to make the “city better.” Candidate Anderson-Downs wants to “decrease homeless” and focus on “restorative justice” and the youth.

On Attracting Retail…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:56pm

Candidates are asked which retailers they want to attract if elected:

Anderson Downs: Target because they ‘employ ex-cons’

Lee Tolbert: Big Box, including Wal Mart and Home Depot

Kaplan: Urban Outfitters and Costco. Says that we should harness our ‘hipster’ cachet to woo retailers to Oakland.

De La Fuente: wants to streamline the application process so that “we don’t place super demands” on potential business that want to come to Oakland.

On Working with the three Oakland Sports Teams…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:51pm

De La Fuente says attracting the teams is “third on his list.”  He says that the teams are important to the City but are “responsible to their stakeholders at the end of the day.” He wants to be responsible to the Oakland citizen stakeholders by “making the streets safe.”

Anderson-Downs says that she “would like the teams to stay” but would rather have a conversation about ‘restorative justice for youth’.

Candidate Lee Tolbert has had the “privilege” of working with the three teams and concedes that they are important for “civic pride” and wants to work aggressively to “keep them here” will do that by supporting Coliseum City project.

Kaplan says that “redeveloping with sports teams” is one of the “best ways to grow jobs in our community” she says that “we have the sites and the land” to make this work. Kaplan says it is one of her top two priorities to work on keeping the teams in Oakland. 

On Police Officer Pay…

Live Blogging #oakdebtes | 7:45pm

Candidate Kaplan and De La Fuente agree that some reductions are important. Candidate Anderson-Downs thinks that “its hard to justify hiring more police when schools are closing.” She would like to see the discussion shift away from police hiring to supportive youth services. Candidate Lee Tolbert wants to support youth too.

On Parcel Taxes…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:40pm

Candidate Lee Tolbert thinks that “we don’t have deep pockets”  [in the city] and getting greater efficiencies from staff will be important to “eliminating’ waste and showing results form taxes. Results have to be ‘shown’ before “we can ask for more taxes.”

Kaplan wants programs to be “effective and efficient” says that she is working on putting building permits online to help with transparency, also cites that working regionally to decrease illegal dumping, and attract retail.  

De La Fuente says the “straight answer to the question is no.” He isn’t “convinced” that more money isn’t the answer instead points to staff accountability and greater controls like “GPS in police cars.”

Anderson-Downs says that she “wouldn’t vote for a parcel tax.” Mentions that city should explore ‘salary cuts’ and ‘buckle down’ to save money.  

On setting individual priorities…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:30pm

Candidate are asked to list their top priorities if elected:

Anderson-Downs: youth

Lee Tolbert: public safety, jobs, schools, and economic development/retail attraction.

Kaplan: ‘get the guns out, and get the jobs in’ Includes working on the following projects: Oakland Army Base, Broadway Valdez Specific Plan, Coliseum City, and the Lake Merritt Specific Plan.

De La Fuente : public safety, keeping the jobs local and “going back to the basics” of crime prevention.

On Pension Reform

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:25pm

De La Fuente mentions that this is “one of the most complicated problems” he was one of the only ‘no votes’ for the PFERS bond float in this past budget term.  Anderson-Downs says “pensions don’t make sense when we are closing schools” and she “couldn’t vote for it.” Lee Tolbert says that its “an obligation” and we “must fund it” but have to do that with “real dollars” and “won’t be an easy problem to solve.” Kaplan points to her motion from the last council term that would allow for the “liabilities to become funded.”

On Economic Development

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:20pm

Kaplan wants to improve infrastructure in Oakland to improve attraction and development across all business sectors, cites her record of assistance with food trucks, blue bottle coffee, and the Army Base.

De La Fuente says that getting the area “safe” is the most important to getting business to locate and develop here. He also will continue to “reduce the time and cost” of getting permits in the city to facilitate business attraction.

Anderson-Downs wants to ensure that local hire and “local currency” are implemented to expand opportunities for small business in Oakland.

Lee Tolbert wants to develop partnerships across all business types to “strengthen partnerships.”

On Measure Y…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:15pm

Carol Lee Tolbert says that “having beat officers is really important” but not all parts of Measure Y is working.

Rebecca Kaplan says “Measure Y is an example on why there has been such as loss of trust” between the government and the people. Kaplan says that the items in measure Y, the problem improves, it should be rewritten “not by the council” and include guarantees that “people will actually see what is written in the plan.”

Ignacio De La Fuente says that he “agrees with Rebecca” it was a ‘real challenge’ to implement Measure Y, says that city administration and police haven’t be able to implement it successfully.

Theresa Anderson-Downs feel that we need to “tweak” Measure Y and then “bring it back.” Wants to make it more ‘transparent’ and it will “work better for us.”

On Gang Injunctions…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 7:09pm

Theresa Anderson-Downs is not for gang injunctions, citing them as “ineffective.”

Carol Lee Tolbert says that she is for gang injunctions as long as they are implemented with other supportive services.

Rebecca Kaplan thinks “implement strategies that work” the top priority for her is to get “illegal guns out of the city” and wants to implement operation Cease Fire. Says that its not clear (via the data) that gang injunctions work.

Ignacio De La Fuente thinks that ‘targeted gang injunctions’ do work, but it takes “guts” to implement the injunctions. Says that it is a good “tool for the police to do their jobs.”

On Improving Public Safety + Hiring Police

Live blogging #oakdebates | 7:04pm

Ignacio De La Fuente wants to raise the level of police staff, and help them “do more with less.”

Theresa Anderson-Downs thinks that we “have enough police” and points to community policing and implementing a “block by block’ strategy as the key to crime reduction.

Carol Lee Tolbert says that bringing benefits and pensions in line will the “only way’ to get more officers on the street and “build trust” between the community and police department. Wants OPD to come into compliance with the federal consent decree.

Rebecca Kaplan thinks “we should be providing a combination of beat cops, fire services” says that she voted against the layoffs for officers.

On Collaboration with Fellow Council Colleagues…

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 6:55pm

Rebecca Kaplan wants to ‘encourage respectful dialogue’ through promoting a friendly demeanor and modeling good behavior. Wants to bring a climate of “inclusion and respect” to the city council, points out that (if elected) she will be one of the more senior members of the council and will work to set the tone.

Ignacio De La Fuente says that his record (including his role as Council President) shows that he was able to keep the tone polite, and get work done. Says his strong work allows him to “deal with issues not personalities.”

Theresa Anderson-Downs says that its “ok to disagree” and a focus on issues can help diminish personal conflicts reduce. She will focus on the issues.

Carol Lee Tolbert points to her experience as a non-profit executive (on the school board she was dubbed along with her colleagues as the ‘dream team’). Tolbert says that it takes “more than money” to run a functional organization and instead believes in the ‘power of partnerships.’

Opening Statements + Early Questions

Live Blogging #oakdebates | 6:45pm

Each candidate is given two minutes to make an opening statement.

Candidate Lee Tolbert a native of Oakland and has been working for “23 years for Oakland Civic Pride” and wants to develop comprehensive and ‘citywide’ that makes an ‘Oakland for all of us’. She points to her experience as a former Oakland School Board member and non-profit executive, to make City Hall “open and inclusive.”

Candidate Kaplan calls this a “very important election” says that with her work on this current council she has improved local jobs and worked on stopping violence. She has “upgraded ordinances” to encourage Bites of Broadway, and helped “land a grant” to fund the free Broadway shuttle. Kaplan states that she wants to get “the jobs in and the guns out.”

Candidate De La Fuente points to his last 20 years of service in District 5, says that he has ‘fought to make the city safe” and works on “deploying and maximizing” the resources that are available. Says that he want to “continue working” to “complete the task” and “expand [his efforts] city wide.”

Finally Candidate Theresa Anderson-Downs, mother of 4 and resident of District One, says that she wants to “give back” and help create as ‘sense of ownership in the community.’ Points to her work “feeding the hungry and distributing backpacks” as keys to reducing crime citywide. Her emphasis will be on reducing the high crime rate and improving schools to ‘start the healing of Oakland.’