Oakland Public Safety Ecosystem Faces Upheaval; Chair Pulls Controversial Contract Ahead of Mayor's SOTC

Public Safety Upheaval; as Chief Mitchell Departs, the Police Commission Selection Panel Faces Pushback from Council That Could Change the Calculus Ahead of a New Chief Selection Process

A big City of Oakland public safety shuffle, and a possible secondary one, could bring significant change to Oakland’s public safety system and processes in the coming months. In an unexpected move, OPD Chief Floyd Mitchell announced his resignation effective December 5 the day after Barbara Lee’s State of the City address last week. Meanwhile, unusual moves at Oakland’s Rules committee threaten the reappointment of two of the most significant voices at the Oakland Police Commission [OPC], alternate Omar Farmer and Chair Roberto Garcia Acosta. Per the City Charter, the OPC interviews candidates and creates the slate from which the Mayor chooses the new permanent Chief. The proximity of the two arcs has highlighted a questionable OPC appointment process at City Council.

Few Facts on Mitchell's Departure, Voluntary or Pressured

Mitchell has declined to explain his departure publicly, leading to wild speculation and anonymously sourced statements in local media. It's not clear who had more to do with the departure, Mayor Barbara Lee or Mitchell—though it's likely Mitchell had already spoken to Lee about his departure, she only mentioned him by name twice during her state of the city address. Mitchell has made several unprompted negative negative statements about oversight during his short tenure that point to potential friction with a City leadership that has committed to emerging from oversight in the coming year, despite significant set backs from the last chief's tenure.

History of Public Statements Critical of Oversight Clash with Lee's Vow to Get Oakland out of NSA

At July's Negotiated Settlement Agreement Case Management Conference, Mitchell shrugged off criticisms from Judge William Orrick about the Internal Affairs Bureau [IAB] performance*. While Orrick praised Lee and expressed confidence in her ability to lead the city out of the NSA, he had less enthusiasm and more critiques for Mitchell. Orrick read aloud criticisms from the Coalition for Police Accountability that Mitchell's OPD is failing to mete out appropriate discipline according to the OPD’s own matrix. Orrick quoted the Coalition's statement that Mitchell is “dismissive of the need of reform”.

Earlier, Orrick also called the OPD’s claims for its delays on completing certain tasks a “staggering number of excuses for not being in compliance”, reading aloud the statement from the plaintiff's lawyers, John Burris and Jim Chanin and saying he agreed with it.

In his response, Mitchell said that he thought the NSA was flawed, and that that it could be harming Oakland.

“The NSA is meant to address specific things, but it's not a perfect document, and there's going to have to be adjustments for unintended consequences that come up…I'm going to come to you with the truth. The truth may not be what you want to hear, but that is the truth, and it's affecting the operation and the safety of this community, and it's my responsibility, whether you like to hear it or not, to tell you what the truth is,” Mitchell said.

Mitchell also told the public and Commissioners at an OPC meeting in January that he believed oversight had made officers afraid to do their jobs, a statement contrary to the spirit of the charter-mandated civilian body. The statement led to community pushback, and criticism from CPRA Director Mac Muir.

Mitchell's Departure Overlaps with Police Commission Reappointments Conflict

Mitchell’s departure overlaps into another process that would significantly change how his successor is chosen. Two key OPC Commissioners, Omar Farmer and Chair Roberto Garcia Acosta, are facing unusual push back in the Council process of approving their reappointments to the Commission. Appointees and reappointments are initially selected by the charter-mandated Selection Panel, a body separate from the OPC whose members are appointed by the Council. The Panel is charged with choosing 5 of the 9 Commissioners. Farmer and Garcia Acosta, whose terms end on October 16, reapplied for another term, and in July the Panel voted to reappoint them.

After the vote, the reappointments went to the City Administrator's Office [CAO] to be introduced at the Rules Committee for scheduling and a necessary Council vote. But what should have been a straightforward process at Rules has instead turned into a confusing morass that will delay any appointments past the end dates for both commissioners' terms.

Rules Chair Jenkins Tries to Return the Reappointments to Selection Panel for Further Consideration, Despite Lack of Charter Power to do So

Rules Committee Chair Kevin Jenkins immediately withdrew the reappointing legislation as it was introduced on September 25 by the CAO, saying he was returning the nominations to the Selection Panel for another deliberation due to unspecified “concerns”–a power to reconvene the selection process he does not appear to have in the Charter.

But the Selection Panel process was longer and more thorough than usual due to an acknowledgement that the applications of two other candidates had been mistakenly overlooked in the deliberation that led to the first approvals of the Farmer and Garcia Acosta reappointments. The first reappointment decision was rescinded, the process started anew to include the two new applications, but the Selection Panel still voted for Garcia Acosta and Farmer—Farmer and Garcia Acosta were effectively interviewed and approved by the body twice.

At the July 15 meeting which reviewed the two ultimately re-appointed candidates again, Council member Ken Houston left a Council meeting to make a strenuous, if vague, plea against Farmer and Garcia Acosta at the Selection Panel's public comment:

“We have to bring back law and order. So I'm asking you to select individuals that are going to bring back law and order to our city, and the ones that are not bringing back law and order, they need to go. They need to go. And I'm a firm believer in a clean, safe city, so I'm depending on you guys to choose the right individuals that's going to bring back law and order to our city,”

Ironically, Houston echoed the comments of perennial MAGA candidate, Mindy Pechenuk who just before he took the podium, told the panel that the “police in Oakland are very good,” and the commission needs “new leadership” to “untie” police hands.

CAO Reintroduces Reappointments to Rules

The CAO reintroduced the item the next week, October 2nd, with the same dates, and a reminder that the Rules Chair does not have the power to suspend the candidate selection process.

But on October 2nd, Jenkins cited a new reason to delay the appointments—Council Rules of Procedure 19 required the appointments to be first reviewed in the Rules committee as a substantive, not scheduling, item.

Thus the appointments will be discussed at Rules as substantive items on October 16, the day that the two commissioners’ terms end. The CAO accepted the scheduling, and no other CM on the committee contested it, nor was any comment heard from the Office of the City Attorney [OCA]. But it should be noted that Rule 19 in the current rules of procedure only refers to Mayoral appointments to the Commission, and does not mention the Selection Panel.

In the past, the Rules committee has sometimes discussed Selection Panel appointee items as subject matter legislation–and has often not, scheduling directly to Council. Garcia Acosta's first appointment , which began as an alternate, did not get a substantive hearing and was placed on the agenda as a scheduling matter, for example.

Failure to Accept the Selection Panel's Candidates Could Destabilize the Commission

In comments during last Thursday night’s Oakland Police Commission, Chair Garcia Acosta acknowledged the instability, noting he could be Chairing his last meetings in the coming weeks. If the Rules Committee fails to send on the reappointments to Council for ratification, the Police Commission would be left with only 5 members, which is bare quorum, and would have no alternates while the Selection Panel undertakes its process once again. Garcia Acosta said at the meeting that terms can extend for up to 30 days in a vacancy, but this publication could not verify that claim.

It's not clear if the Rules Committee can decline the appointments, and what impact it would have on the process. The Charter specifically says the full Council must rule on the appointments, and if they fail to after 60 days of receiving them, the appointments automatically go through. It's not clear how the Rules process fits into this timeline or process.

Farmer is Lead on Militarized Weapon Response

Farmer helped draft and led much of the discussion around the acquisition of new “militarized” equipment by the OPD in recent months in a special ad hoc with OPD personnel and members of the public. Farmer has stood on the fact that in a previous process, OPD made a non-binding commitment to divest from the Bearcat and purchase a civilian armored transport to replace it. The OPD originally asked for two new Bearcat armored vehicles and additional compliment of rifles, in a legally required report to Council and the OPC. Though the process is contentious, it could also be to a certain extent moot—OPD clearly wants the potential for Bearcats, but regardless has no funding source for them at this point. OPD backed away from its rifle request, asking only for a one to one replacement of aging rifles in its current arsenal. That deliberation was continued, and the item sent back to the ad hoc committee on Thursday—and the final decision may extend past the appointment term of the Commissioners.

Garcia Acosta Contests Anti-OPC Narrative From Dais

Thursday's Commission meeting was notable for Chair Garcia Acosta’s direct rebuttal of many of the false narratives in mainstream reporting about Mitchell’s departure, likely prompted by the push back from Council members and an unrepresentative contingent of public safety advocates. In an address that topped five minutes, Garcia Acosta chided members of the public for constant criticism of the all-volunteer commission:

"And it's an incredible difficult balance to be able to have a professional relationship to support the department and give them the tools that they want, while still being uncompromising when it comes to constitutional policing, transparency, and making sure that we reverse the culture and the history that Oakland Police Department has had in our city. Two things can equally be true at the same time, and I refuse to sit here on this dais and let my commissioners get attacked when they pour their blood, sweat and tears on top of their professional work hours, sacrifice their time at home, with their families, with their loved ones…”

Garcia Acosta continued with pointed rebuttals during the OPD's report back period, asking Deputy Police Chief Lisa Ausmus, the OPD’s oversight liaison to the Commission, about the working relationship of the OPD. He also asked Ausmus if the OPC had been party to the Chief’s own decision to scrap the addition of property crimes to the list of pursuit-worthy crimes. Ausmus said that the OPC worked well with the OPD and that the pursuit policy was Mitchell’s alone. Ausmus even brought up an additional example of the Commission’s help on a use of force policy:

“I've been with you for the last year now, and we have worked diligently hand in hand. We have put a lot of time together, a lot of personal time together, because I don't get over time either, and you guys are a volunteer commission, right? So all of us have spent many hours together, personal time away from our families, and we've done a lot of work together this year. So I do appreciate it, and I don't have to agree with all the comments, but I do appreciate the work that we did, we put forward the timeline policy for use of force to help captains and sergeants approvals that has tremendously helped,”

Despite Claims About Public Frustration with Commissioners, Thursday's Public Response Was Overwhelmingly Critical of OPD, Not OPC

Despite claims of public frustration towards the Commission that portray it as an antagonist to the police, Thursday's Commission meeting was overwhelmingly attended by critics of the OPD, not the OPC. The meeting saw significant outcry against the goal of increasing the Bearcat inventory. In comments, the OPD's militarized presence was often linked to the daily viral images of paramilitary immigration officers using similar weapons and body armor brutalizing the public in other cities. 31 participants who attended the meeting spoke out against militarized tactics and weaponry—only one speaker who took the podium had praise for the police or Mitchell.

There were also over 139 e-comments submitted to the body on the topic, several were read by the Chief of Staff Mykah Montgomery, and the vast majority shared the sentiment. Montgomery told the Commissioners and public that she was affected by the emotions in the comments given the state of world affairs and got "choked up."

Only 27 e-comments were supportive of OPD. The comments likening the OPD's use of militarized weapons to Trump's attack on urban centers prompted an emotional response from Montgomery.

OO’s thread of the evening has several video segments of comments that set the tone for the evening and the comments are worth listening to directly.

Chair Pulls Controversial Asphalt Contract Ahead of Mayor's State of the City Address

Shortly after Tuesday’s Council meeting began, with most gathered to celebrate Mayor Barbara Lee’s first state of the city address, Council President Kevin Jenkins pulled a controversial two year contract proposal with Martin Marietta for hot mix asphalt provision for the City’s large scale repaving projects funded by Measure U and other dollars. After reorganizing the agenda to hear the Consent Calendar before Lee's address, Jenkins pulled the contract item before the Consent Calendar was read in.

The contract, if approved by Council, would award up to $1 MM per year, with a limit of $4 MM over 4 years. The asphalt contracting role appears to have previously been filled by Lehigh Hanson, a firm with significant environmental issues in other areas of California—but Lehigh Hanson’s area industries were bought out by several entities. Martin Marietta purchased the western regional asphalt business in 2021, along with a prominent aggregate storage site located on the estuary in East Oakland.

The Milo Group was Lehigh Hanson’s long-time City of Oakland lobbyist and continued the role in 2022 after Martin Marietta bought the local business—Oakland Port Commissioner Michael Colbruno, a Milo Group lobbyist, has been registered as the lobbyist for Martin Marietta and Lehigh Hanson both, but there are no apparent reports of activity filed for either Lehigh Hanson or Martin Marietta in the City’s database since 2020.

Lehigh Hanson inked a contract with the City in late 2020 for the same asphalt provision, but it appears almost certain that Martin Marietta took over the contract at the time when it subsumed the company—the accompanying legislative report makes a hazy reference to the “previous” contract with Martin Marietta, but the only contract for this form of asphalt in the City’s legislative database is with Lehigh Hanson, with a four year timeline that would have also ended in January 2025.

Lehigh Hanson's contract was initially for two years, with two one-year contract extensions available to the CAO without returning to Council, and then a month to month arrangement for any gap between the end of that contracting authority and the next. Passages in the report note that Martin Marietta has been supplying asphalt to Oakland since Spring 2025, and that the City owes the company $250K. It would appear that throughout this period, Martin Marietta wouldn't submit to a ban on contracts to build the border wall and another that bans providing services for federal immigration authorities. That necessitated the waiver if the City Council approves a new contract with the company. A request to the CAO to confirm that Martin Marietta took over the Lehigh Hanson contract when it purchased the company's western business has not been responded to at the time of this publication.

*Due to Lerronne Armstrong’s failures to reign in corruption in the discipline process–notably with the wide-ranging impact of Armstrong’s Internal Affairs Department [IAD] to appear transparent and competent in its adjudication of the case of Phong Tran—the NSA court ordered OPD to separate the IAD as a Bureau under the direct leadership of the police chief. The Tran case had witnesses recanting of testimony revealing a potentially troubling history of bribed and extorted testimony in Tran’s investigations, two murder convictions have been vacated, with a third on deck and hundreds of cases under review. Tran was then charged by former DA Pamela Price for perjury and bribery.

But Tran apparently received preferential treatment at the IAD, backed by the leadership of OPD—a Community Police Review Agency [CPRA] investigation revealed significant and apparently deliberate flaws in the investigation which cleared Tran, leading to one of the biggest shake ups at OPD in its history. Nearly the entire command staff structure was terminated and reprimands in absentia for former Chief Leronne Armstrong and interim Chief Allison were issued—Armstrong would face suspension if he were still employed at OPD, or if, as his supporters desire, he were to return to his job over the mishandling of the Tran case.