Week in Review [while Trump invaded Oakland, a lot of other stuff happened]

In this week’s review

—Council Decision Leaves Oakland Police Commission with Bare Quorum, Body Unable to Meet on Thursday

—EAP Would Have Come to Council in Special Meeting Monday, With One Business-Day Notice, But Brown, Ramachandran Intervene

—Oakland Arms Embargo Demands Port Commission Ban Weapons Cargo Transits at Oakland Airport  

Council Decision Leaves Oakland Police Commission with Bare Quorum– Body Unable to Meet on Thursday  

In an unusual deliberation that often resembled a jury trial, City Council last Tuesday denied the reappointment of two members of the Oakland Police Commission [OPC], triggering a potential collapse of the Commission. In an unsurprising outcome, two days later, the OPC cancelled its scheduled meeting after failing to achieve quorum. 

The first of its kind action was set in motion a month ago, as Rules Committee Chair Kevin Jenkins improperly sidelined the reappointments of Alternate Commissioner Omar Farmer and Commission Chair Ricardo Garcia Acosta, citing unspecified “concerns”. Jenkins said he would send the appointments back to the Selection Panel to re-adjudicate—that's a power to convene the Charter-mandated part-time body of volunteers Jenkins does not possess.

The City Administrator brought the item back to Rules for scheduling on October 2, since the only next step for a Selection Panel decision is full Council review according to the Charter. But at that meeting, Jenkins added a second delay, now claiming that the item had to first be substantively discussed by Rules Committee members. When the item returned a third time on the day that Farmer and Garcia Acosta's terms expired, Jenkins made no attempt to discuss the item, but only moved to schedule it to Council. CM Carroll Fife insisted the item go to Consent, or that it be discussed at Rules as planned, but at the suggestion of CM Houston, a non-member, with support of CM Rowena Brown, the item was scheduled for Non-Consent and full Council discussion.

"Concerns" Thoroughly Rebutted

The concerns noted by Jenkins in his original dilatory action were apparently triggered by a letter sent from Oakland Report contributor Rajni Mandal, who also runs a public safety focused email list for her neighborhood in affluent Montclair. Mandal has been a regular at Commission meetings for about a year, since the issue of police pursuit was incorrectly posited by Governor Gavin Newsom as the purview of the Commission, despite the body never having played any role in the policy. Mandal’s list of complaints about the appointments are focused on Farmer. Mandal claims that Farmer had not been respectful enough in speaking to police officials, that he had “misused Commission time and resources”, had a “conflict of interest” and committed Brown Act violations, as well as a lengthy additional list. 

But in the meantime, on October 13, Katina Ancar, the Commission’s Counsel, sent the Council, Mayor and City Administrator a thorough debunking of Mandal’s claims, with ample evidence that the complaints are unfounded.

At the meeting, the Selection Panel members who twice chose Farmer and Garcia Acosta, also vocally rejected the claims about Farmer. Chair Rickisha Herron told the CMs in a presentation that she had personally reviewed the Commission’s meetings cited by Mandal and found none of Mandal’s claims to be valid. Herron criticized the long delay in reviewing the appointments—after the Panel made the appointments in July—noted CMs never gave explained delays and warned that the Council’s actions could destabilize the Police Commission. 

“[For Council] to question the selection panel's appointments without basis is to disrespect the work of the members on the selection panel...I myself went through every single video that was stated in Miss Mandal’s letter and found no verification of the allegations or adverse opinions…we go through our process with fidelity. We make sure that we screen without bias,” Herron said. 

Alex Clewis, another Panelist charged with doing background research on Farmer prior to approval said that given the vocal nature of the complaints, he expected to find problematic performance issues. But none of the complaints stood up to scrutiny.

“I found out extremely quickly that [the argument against Farmer] was false and there was no real basis to any of it...our panel followed the process laid out by this council, interviewing candidates, weighing qualifications and voting and recommend Mr. Farmer. To see that recommendation now challenged without substantive evidence, undermines not only Mr. Farmer, but the integrity of the entire oversight process. Our residents deserve an oversight system they can trust based on facts, not rumors or politics…” Clewis said in public comment. 

Farmer received recommendation letters from Alameda County Supervisors, Niki Fortunato Bas, Nate Miley and Lena Tam, as well as Paula Hawthorne, an emeritus of the Measure Z and Y oversight committees who served with him. 

During public comment, several allies of Mandal complained about the Police Commission more than the candidates, but specifics were absent and few seemed to understand the body’s role or history. Tuan Ngo, a member of East Bay Rental Housing Organization, and former proponent of the recalls of Price and Thao, described himself as a veteran observer of the body—but Ngo thought Farmer and Garcia Acosta had both been on the Commission for five years, instead of their 2 and 1.5 year service, respectively. Recalls veteran Brenda Grisham was also unable to articulate any specific criticism, here is her comment in full.

"My name is Brenda Grisham. I'm a business owner in district two, and I oppose the reappointment of Farmer and Acosta. And to you, everything in Oakland is hard. Its hard. We have to work. We have to work, and we just have to work. But the citizens of Oakland want something different. We need balance. We have a great test ahead of us, and we don't need you to be, you know, talking about what you doing. We need you to do it, but you can't do it unless you're listening to the people. Now, we're silencing the people, and they're getting time. But they just stood here for 20 minutes and talked about what they're trying to do. That's unfair. These are the people that pay taxes here, and they need to be heard. I oppose it."

Only Mandal had specific claims about the Commissioners, specifically Farmer, but all of those were thoroughly refuted by subject matter experts, other Commissioners, and the Selection Panel as noted.

For his part, a weary Farmer told the Council that he felt offended having to defend himself from such spurious attacks after serving in City and County boards and commissions for over five years. 

“This attack on my character is extremely offensive. I'm in the process of evaluating all my rights in terms of righting this wrong, all these false things that have been said against me. I've given the city five years worth of volunteer work [in different boards and commissions]. I provided recommendations to improve public safety through multiple boards and commissions. You know, I really don't even feel the need to get up here and defend myself. If everyone reviews all the work that I've done, my body of work speaks for itself,” Farmer said.

Council Deliberation Focuses on Process, Not Candidates

Although Council President Jenkins directly told Garcia Acosta and Farmer the Council would have questions for them, no CM asked any questions of the commissioners. Council discussion never veered into the specific qualifications of the candidates, but focused on the low turnout of applicants, which Panel staffer Felicia Verdin noted was one of the lowest the Commission has received.

There were seven applicants, including Farmer and Garcia Acosta, one of the lowest showings in the near-decade history of the Panel, according to Felicia Verdin, the body’s staffer. Verdin said that she pursued a typical recruitment process, placing ads in local publications and with local non-profits, and sending the notice to Council members to place in their newsletters. 

Commission Dysfunction in Past, Public Allegations Blamed for Reducing Interest in Commission Appointments

While CMs tried to fathom the reality of low interest in the Commission, Chair Garcia Acosta noted that previous instability in the Commission may have made future applicants wary of being involved, and that rhetoric that blames Commissioners for public safety problems not in their purview may have done the rest. 

Garcia Acosta also noted that the current recruitment would have put new applicants in competition with existing Commissioners who were reapplying. But Garcia Acosta also directed strong words for the often disrespectful way the Commissioners had been treated in the current process.

“This show right here is going to ice out any of my existing commissioners, and it's going to ice out anybody that wants to apply for this. Because if this is what they got to go through after their hard work, it's going to be really hard. So I just want you all to know that this is also a consequence,” Garcia Acosta said. 

CMs Base Decision on Shaky Assumption, So Far Unfounded

Before taking the vote several CMs attempted to ensure, at least for public purposes, that denying the appointments would not cause instability in the Commission, which several acknowledged plays a key role in hiring a new police chief. With the appointments of Farmer and Garcia Acosta, the Commission would have only five commissioners, the bare number necessary for quorum, and no alternates. That means, as Selection Panel Chair Herron had told the Council, that the absence of any commissioner would prevent the body from meeting and carrying out legally mandated duties, like carrying out the Police Chief search, which can take a year or longer. A Selection Panel member told CMs directly that a new process to find candidates for the OPC would take 6 to 8 months. 

Some Council members, like Noel Gallo, said they were basing their decision to deny the appointments on City Attorney Ryan Richardson’s opinion that the two commissioners could, if they agreed, continue to serve in a holdover capacity at the Commission. But before taking their vote, no CM asked the Commissioners if they would indeed continue in such an informal way after such negative treatment. The Council voted almost unanimously to deny the reappointments, with CM Fife absent. 

Commission Fails to Make Quorum at Next Meeting

Two days later, at a regularly scheduled Commission meeting, not surprisingly, the Commission was unable to meet due to lack of quorum as announced by interim Chair Shawana Booker. Neither Garcia Acosta nor Farmer were present at a regularly scheduled Police Commission meeting, both notified they would not be present, and one mentioned concerns about “safety” influenced the decision. Commissioner Shane Thomas-Williams, a Mayoral appointee, was also excused for illness. 

The City’s Militarized Weapons Ordinance, passed independently by Council, requires the Commission to review and make recommendations on the OPD’s weapons and equipment yearly and the final deliberation and necessary vote for that was to occur Thursday. It’s unclear what will happen with the annual report. The next meeting of the Police Commission is next month. 

As of now, the Selection Panel has not scheduled any new meetings, it does not appear clear if a new candidate recruitment process will begin, or how that would happen. 

Stealth Scheduling of “Encampment Abatement Policy” Fails at Rules

An attempt by CM Kevin Houston and Council Chair Kevin Jenkins to schedule a special council meeting with little advanced notice for Houston’s Encampment Abatement Plan failed at Rules Thursday. The legislation was originally introduced by Houston’s staff on the dais at 10/16 Rules, but at that meeting concerns about the availability of Council people, including Carroll Fife who is at a conference abroad, prompted Jenkins to hold off on scheduling the meeting to that date. Jenkins stated that he would poll CMs for availability for a potential date on Wednesday the 29th and, importantly, stated that a date had not been chosen. So in the meantime, the item was not scheduled, and a potential meeting not noticed to the public. Jenkins Chief of Staff has partnered with Houston on the legislation, though Jenkins has claimed he should not be considered a co-author. Notes from meetings between the D6 Chief of Staff and other CMs taken by a D6 staffer state that Jenkins originated the legislation.

Special Meeting for Monday Scheduled in Advance of Rules Scheduling

But when the item returned on the Rules agenda Thursday, the special meeting was already scheduled on Legistar for 9:30 am on Monday, the same day Houston had requested, but now with one business day of advanced notice. And it was scheduled before the Committee had weighed in on the legislation, which requires a positive vote of 3 CMs on the Rules Committee.

No Changes in Houston Text or Amendments from CMs, Despite Potential to Lose Millions in Homelessness Funding

Houston’s scheduling request returned his original legislation with no amendments, nor amendments that other CMs had already publicly voiced their intention of making—no changes had been made to accommodate the concerns of the Interagency Commission on Homelessness, which advises the state’s Housing and Community Development Department on homelessness grants, normatively putting the City’s HHAP grants in jeopardy.

When last the public had heard about the legislation, it had been routed at the Special Public Safety Committee meeting also called for by Houston, after overwhelming public opposition to the proposal and the revelation that the language would put $20 MM in homelessness funds at risk. The item was placed on the Committee's "pending, no date specific" list, with proposed next step to schedule the item to another committee meeting after CMs had prepared amendments. Advocates have been waiting to see the item re-emerge on a Public Safety Committee agenda with amendments. 

Several members of the public spoke to the early morning meeting, expressing alarm at the process, especially because CM Fife, who has a reputation for championing issues of homelessness, will still be at a conference in Rome on Monday. Several speakers also said they suspected that the minimal time frame seemed like a way to rush through the EAP with little notice. 

Public Would Have Had 1 Business Day to Review Any Amendments Placed in Packet

The scheduling process appeared more dubious when city staff reminded the Council that amendments would have to be turned in by 4pm the same day, Thursday, in order to be introduced at a Monday meeting. The public would not be able to review the amendments until Friday, one business day before the meeting. 

In response to speakers who said that the procedure seemed like a way to rush the item to a vote with little time for homeless advocates to prepare, Jenkins admonished the public to stop floating “conspiracy theories”. Jenkins also told the public that the meeting would be intended only as informational with no vote taken—but, Jenkins added, a vote was always possible. 

Fellow Rules CMs Rowena Brown and Janani Ramachandran were dubious about the arguments for scheduling it for 10/27 as well, however. Ramachandran also questioned the short lead time, and the potential absence of Fife.

“Getting [legislative amendments] on Friday afternoon and then hearing it on Monday—that's a little tight…seeing and processing all of the other councilmember amendments that doesn't give us a time to talk to staff and others over the course of the weekend…Friday evening to Monday morning without being able to access staff doesn't give me that time to review,” Ramachandran said.

Brown wondered why the item could not be brought back in Committee with all CMs participating, if the goal was only to discuss the legislation and its permutations before bringing the issue to a full council meeting.

“Given that most of the engagement on legislation and different items that come before us happen in committee, I guess I'm curious, what is preventing members of the council from joining our public safety committee meeting already scheduled, and scheduling it there, and then we could just adjourn into a special meeting and have the discussion during public safety, October the 28th at 6pm,” Brown said.

At the prior meeting, Brown had already hesitated to schedule the legislation to a special meeting instead of one that is already noticed and the public aware of.

As Brown and Ramachandran approached consensus about scheduling the meeting to November 4 instead, Houston, who did not attend the meeting, spoke through a cell phone held by his Chief of Staff, demanding the item be scheduled as planned for October 27.

Houston Cancelled Travel Plans That Had Been Approved for Travel Subsidy by Council Two Days Earlier to Bring the EAP

Houston insisted the EAP is so urgent that he’d cancelled travel plans for a conference in DC and appeared to undermine Jenkins’ promise that the legislation would not be put up for a vote.

“Let me share this with you. I'm supposed to be in DC. I canceled because it was for Monday. I have some important issues, this is how important it is. This is my last word… let's put it on the calendar, 9:30 the 27th for listening…I can hear the public, I can hear the council members. But if it's something that we like, and we agree on it, and we have a consensus, let's vote on it,” Houston said.

Following Houston’s comments, Jenkins proposed that the item be made informational, and thus not legislation that could be voted on, which only again raised the question of why the meeting could not happen in committee. Jenkins admonished CMs for opposing the Monday date, claiming that Houston checked with all CMs about the Monday date and insisted that every CM had said they were amendable.

“He went around to every single council member, including council member Fife, and accepted this day. Well, it's all right, right? And so we're playing this out in public and now pushing back. And that's not fair to council member Houston. It makes it seem like council member Houston tried to rush this, and that is not the case, right?”

Brown and Ramachandran did not rebut or mention Jenkins’ statement. But Houston’s claim that he had cancelled his DC trip for the special meeting complicates Jenkins’ suggested timeline, because Council authorized the payment for the trip two days earlier at the 10/21 council meeting. With legislation that would pay for Houston’s trip before the body just two days earlier, neither Houston nor any other CM suggested the trip would be cancelled to put forward the EAP on Monday. 

Following Houston's call, the Rules members voted to schedule the Special Meeting to the following Monday, November 4, instead. Monday's Special Meeting was cancelled.

Update:

Per public records requested email received after this article was published, Council President Jenkins requested the special meeting for Monday 10/27 last Tuesday, while the City Council meeting was going on, and was informed that it would be scheduled just minutes later by the City Clerk's office by shortly after 4 pm. On the agenda that day was travel authorization for Ken Houston to travel to an out of state conference, a trip that Houston said he actually cancelled to have the meeting on Monday. Jenkins made no announcement about cancellign the trip, nor scheduling the special meeting during the Tuesday Council meeting, and Houston also did not mention the EAP returning by Monday, although practice of previous City Council President's has been to announce the scheduling of upcoming special meetings.

Oakland Arms Embargo Demands Port Commission Find a Way to Stop Arms Transit to Israel Through Oakland Airport

The Oakland Arms Embargo organizers are ramping up their efforts to shut down the transiting of weapons and equipment headed to Israel through the Oakland Airport. The movement has grown to include the endorsements of many local and national unions, including ones that work at the port. For the second week in a row, speakers demanded that the Port find a way to shut down the shipments.

Here's a Twitter Thread of some of the statements.