Community & Economic Development Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon and welcome to the Community and Economic Development Committee meeting of Tuesday 07/22/2025. The time is now 01:31PM and this meeting may come to order. Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit speaker cards for items on this agenda. If you're here with us in chamber and would like to submit a speaker card, please fill one out and turn one into myself or a clerk representative before the item is read into record. Online speaker requests were due twenty four hours prior to the start of this meeting. This meeting came to order at 01:31PM and speaker cards will no longer be accepted ten minutes after this meeting has begun making that time 01:41PM. We'll now proceed with taking roll. Council member Fife. Excused. Excused.

Council member Ramachandran.

Present.

Council member Unger. Here. And chair Fife. I'm sorry chair Brown. Present. Thank you. We have three members present one excused five. Before we begin chair do you have any announcements at this time?

And then before we get started was there a note around quorum at this time? A comment on that?

I'm checking but I think we need a quorum in person under the rules.

To my understanding, because I'm I'm present via teleconference notice Oh.

Not a B1449,

that that it does count for quorum.

Okay. Thank you. Sorry.

Okay. Perfect. Well, good good afternoon, community members, council council members. Thank you for joining us for community and economic development and we can go ahead and get started.

Thank you. Item number one approval of the draft minutes from the committee meeting held on 07/08/2025 noting that there is not a report attached so we cannot approve these minutes. So we will move on to item number two, determination of scheduled outstanding committee items also known as our pending list and we have one speaker that signed up for this item.

Can we hear the public speaker?

Ms. Sato Olubale, you can come up to the podium.

I repeatedly state that the Community and Economics Development Department does not make an effort to work in the best interests of the African American community. And, I'm going to demonstrate that because there are many initiatives and grants provided by the State of California that specifically target African Americans. There is the California Dream Fund micro grant that includes helping black entrepreneurs. There is the Oakland Black Business Fund, the 1,000,000 Black Businesses Initiative, the NAACP PowerShift Entrepreneur Grant, the WISH Local Empowerment Program, which includes targeting African Americans for entrepreneur pursuits, the California Black Freedom Fund, the Leading Edge Fund, which targets African Americans, and the Transform Business Grant. None of these grants have been pursued by the Economic and Workforce Development Department, but they have pursued funding the persons who are involved with the what is it called?

I can't think of it now. But you also have another one that's the non citizens grant that you they brought to you. Okay? So when are y'all going to hold this department accountable for serving everybody, particularly African Americans? We have an unemployment rate of African Americans of 8.9. 8.9. Highest in the country.

Alright, thank you so much

for your

comment. To the to administrator Lake, any changes or any updates on the pending list?

Thank you chair Betsy Lake assistant city administrator there are no changes. Thank you. Excellent.

And so I'll make a motion to move this forward.

Second.

Thank you that was a motion made by Chair Brown, seconded by Council Member Unger to approve the determination of scheduled outstanding committee items as is on roll. Council Member Baiup is excused. Council Member Ramachandran? Aye. Council Member Unger? Aye. And Chair Brown? Aye. Thank you. Item number two passes with three ayes one excused to accept the determination of scheduled outstanding committee items.

Reading in item number three, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to apply for and enter into enter into execute and deliver all documents required or deemed necessary for participation in the state of California's pro housing designation program. And we have three four speakers that signed up for this item.

Excellent thank you so much. We will hear for this item we will be hearing from Caleb Smith from HCD.

Good afternoon, Councilmembers. Caleb Smith for the Housing Community Development Department, senior policy analyst here. We are seeking the Council's authorization to apply for a renewal of the City Of Oakland's existing pro housing designation. The pro housing designation program is a program the State of California created to identify and reward cities that go above and beyond the requirements of State law for advancing housing at all income levels and especially affordable housing in their communities. This program has been in place for about three years roughly now, and the City Of Oakland was actually the first community in the San Francisco Bay Area to receive the State's pro housing designation.

A number of other communities have received it since then, and the design of the State's program has us reapply every few years to continue to demonstrate to the State that we are going above and beyond the requirements of State law to advance housing, both through our land use programs as well as through our funding programs and other activities. Now, this pro housing designation program provides the city with an advantage on a variety of State funding programs, most of which are related to affordable housing, but also some of which help advance other kinds of infrastructure. For example, I believe there is an intercity rail program that our friends at BART might find an advantage to from this designation. There is also a dedicated, though small grant program the State of California operates, called the Pro Housing Incentive Program, which is a special set aside of funding for affordable housing related purposes that the City of Oakland can apply for if it is designated as a pro housing community. Based off of our existing pro housing designation, we've already successfully received $2,390,000 from this dedicated funding set aside, which we were able to put towards our homeless housing programs as, I believe, a capitalized service reserve.

So with this continued designation, we will be in a good position to apply for that again in future if future funding rounds are available. And then for this wider spectrum of State funding programs, every advantage helps because these can be extremely competitive programs, so every edge matters. So this pro housing designation is, again, going to be very helpful. Now, I am pleased to say that this pro housing designation should be a slam dunk for the City Of Oakland. We have already self scored ourselves against the application, far exceed the minimum threshold.

And it's really a testament to the work of this Council, previous councils, and a variety of staff who have helped the City move forward a variety of policies and programs to advance housing. Some of the types of things that we are going to be including in this application, include Oakland specific plans, have been really helpful when it comes to advancing the construction of new housing. We recently saw that, over the past five years, Oakland completed over 14,000 new housing units, which is almost half the entire housing stock of the city of Alameda, for a sense of scale. And a lot of that has been built in the neighborhoods which are subject to area specific plans, like the Broadway Valdes specific plan, as among others. We've also seen the City of Oakland take other types of land use steps.

For example, ending single family zoning allowed for duplexes, citywide, as well as triplexes and fourplexes on many lots where that was previously not allowed. There's the affordable housing overlay, which creates a ministerial approval process for affordable housing across the City Of Oakland. And we also see other land use policy changes, such as the recent action that this Council took to create a new ministerial pathway for one- to 30 unit projects, a pathway that I am not aware of any other California city necessarily having something quite like that similar, as well as the work the city has done to create objective design standards, to create predictability for people who want to build in Oakland, and then creating a streamlined approval process for those projects as well. In addition to these very helpful land use programs, the City has also made considerable funding investment, as you all are aware. With the passage of the Measure U Bond, many of those dollars have been invested in a wide variety of projects around Oakland, and we will be pointing to a variety of those investments, whether that's some of the new construction program, some of the conversions of motels to housing through things like Project Homekey and other related investments, as well as our acquisition conversion to affordable housing of existing buildings, made, again, possible through local investment.

So there is a wide spectrum of activities that the City does to make it a welcoming place for people to build housing at all levels of the income spectrum, to make sure that we can maintain the economic diversity that is a key ingredient for why Oakland is such a special place to live and to work. And, we're excited to, again, receive this pro housing designation, to help us advance our work to maximize the amount of state resources we can bring to bear on affordable housing and other kinds of investment in Oakland. So that's a brief overview of this pro housing designation. We're now pleased to take any questions. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Colleagues, any questions? Councilmember Unger?

So just really briefly, what does this get us in return? What do we get from the state for being a pro housing designated city?

Certainly. So there is a so in addition to the public recognition of being a pro housing city, this provides us with an advantage on several funding programs. There's a long list. The full list is included in the staff report, but some of the examples include, for example, the State's Cal Home program, which is a program that cities can apply for to receive additional funding to pay for things like down payment assistance for their residents or home rehabilitation programs, the pro housing designations used, I believe, in some of the transit oriented development type affordable housing funding programs that the State has. So this really gives us a little bit of an extra edge for our projects in some of these incredibly competitive funding processes, as well as, again, this dedicated funding pool that the States established specifically for pro housing jurisdictions, where all other cities are not even able to apply for it.

So it's really a bit of a funding boost, is the primary way that I would think about, the State trying to make a tangible incentive for the state cities to go above and beyond. But, I have to give credit to Oakland. Oakland did it anyway even before we even heard this pro housing designation existed. Excellent.

Any hands online? Okay we can hear from the public speakers.

Calling in the names that signed up for this item. If you're in person you can come up to the podium state your name for the record or if you're on zoom please raise your hand to be easily identified. David Boatwright, Asada Olubala, Tamar Vereed, and Derek Barnes.

So, to help with housing, you need to do like the county is getting ready to do when they are looking at the city of Russell receiving reparations for being pushed out of their housing as Blacks and Latinos who had previously lived in the area known as Russell City. There are programs that housing and the city departments don't speak to that specifically look at housing or homeownership for African Americans. One of them is Building Black Wealth Campaign, which addresses home ownership gap for black Californians. Another one is Neighborhood Works Ownership Endowment initiative that helps blacks be included in overcoming barriers to homeownership. So we got all of these initiatives that you all never speak to departments that can the largest percentage of people who are homeless are African Americans.

But you don't come up with any solutions. So you also have that the city has made substantial financial investments in affordable housing. If that is the case, why have we got all of these homeless people still on the street? You also say that Measure U was used for affordable housing. Measure U has only been able to use $171,000,000 $32,000,000 of that was used for Lincoln Park Recreational Center to be rebuilt.

Majority of any money used for Measure U has not gone to affordable housing. In your race and equity statement, you say, we are increasingly investing in historical disenfranchised communities. You don't talk about you're not investing in black people who have the greatest need.

David Boatwright, District four. It is surprising that Oakland would qualify for this designation given the recent sad example of the removal of Oakland's tiny houses projects. And it is imperative that one, contracted project managers be thoroughly vetted before they are employed. And two, that the city has designated an effective oversight for each project. With the shortage of housing for the homeless in Oakland, the city cannot afford and then destroy any housing projects. Thank you.

Calling in the names that signed up for this item, Tamar Vareed or Derek Barnes, if you still wouldn't okay. EBRHA, you can unmute yourself and begin your two minutes.

Hi, madam clerk. Can you hear me?

Yes. You can begin.

Great. Thank you. Good afternoon, council members and city staff. Derek Barnes with EBRA. I'm here to offer cautious support for renewing Oakland's pro housing designation.

The good news is that the designation opens the door to hundreds of millions of potential dollars in critical state funding for affordable housing infrastructure and transit as the report suggests. As a d three resident, that's a lifeline, you know, we can't afford to ignore, especially as Oakland faces, the historic fiscal crisis and a mounting housing emergency and homeless prices, which seems to be getting worse. But the designation means not nothing if we can't deliver on what is promised. So I urge you to ask some profound and necessary questions. First, do we have the staffing, the systems, and internal discipline to meet the compliance reporting and execution standards this program demands?

We all know the city's performance measure limitations, the limited infrastructure, and antiquated technical resources. Let's make sure we're not over promising with no real plan to follow through with real impact. Next, how will the administration ensure this funding equitability, reaches historically disinvested, neighborhoods like East Oakland and West Oakland without, fueling gentrification or displacement. We're all exhausted by the promises of community and racial equity without any real and tangible results. And then finally, I'd like to know what went wrong with our failed, earlier round application.

It's unclear to me what happened. What lessons did we learn if we learned any and what's changing before we complete, in the next round. And counsel, the goal isn't just to call ourselves pro housing. The goal is to be pro housing in practice on the ground and across every neighborhood. Let's make sure the designation is more than just a political merit badge. Let's make it mean something. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments, chair. That concludes our public speakers on this item.

Okay. Excellent. Councilmember Ramachandran has her hand hand up.

Yes. Thank you so much. I have a quick follow-up question to staff. So since 2022, do you have an estimate of about how much money our state housing designation has gotten us or whether it's intangible in other ways, if it's not a dollar amount that we've been able to benefit from it?

Sure. Through the chair to Councilmember Ramachandran. So the State has had a direct funding program for these pro housing cities, the pro housing incentive program, we have received thus far $2,390,000 through that program. If we were to apply for a future round, we would need a separate Council authorization for that. We have also applied two times after we got the first $2,390,000 One of those applications was not successful.

The other one, we are still waiting to hear back on. The State has had a policy of trying to make sure that every pro housing city gets funded at least once. So the fact that we got funded first means that we have not yet gotten additional funding from that program. But the fact that we applied that we were so early meant that we actually got more money than the cities that got their pro housing designation later because the State actually reduced the maximum amount that cities could ask for once they got more cities with that designation. So it was good Oakland moved first.

And then there's also the broader question of, for these other programs where there's a scoring bonus for our pro housing status, how much additional funding have we got, I am afraid that that is difficult for us to tell because some of these are programs that our affordable housing projects would directly apply for rather than the city. So we don't necessarily have full visibility into their funding applications, the results of those competitions, and whether this designation was enough to push them over the top, as it were, into being funded or not.

Okay. Thank you so much, and thanks for your efforts. I think this is a great thing at our disposal and I hope it can help us stay competitive in the future.

Thank you, councilmember.

Excellent. So thank you so much, Caleb, for your presentation and, you know, kind of as was stated very appreciative of the leadership, prior leadership to ensure that as a city we have this designation and really wanting to ensure that we have it going forward. In doing some research I do see that some of the other cities that, cities and counties that also have that same pro housing designation. I think that it does make sense that whether it was in round one and waiting to hear back as far as in round two how that goes because I think a lot of our neighboring what I see is a lot of neighboring jurisdictions also have that same designation. So I think that that may kind of speak to how the state of California wants to also ensure equity in some of these other cities as well.

So just kind of want to say that publicly, and I really look forward to some ongoing conversation around how as a, you know, the city of Oakland can can can really truly be a leader both in word and then also in action kind of as was mentioned by our public speakers around equity and really looking at some of the neighborhoods you know across the city of Oakland to ensure that we you know are are indeed pro housing. So thank you so much.

Thank you councilmember.

And so I will entertain a motion.

So moved.

Second. Thank you. That was a motion made by council member Ramachandran, seconded by council member Unger to approve the recommendation of staff and to forward this item to the 09/16/2025 City Council agenda on consent. On roll, council member Beippe excused. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger.

Aye.

And chair Brown. Aye. Thank you. Motion passes with three ayes one excused byte. To forward this item to the 09/16/2025 city council agenda on consent.

Reading in item four, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement with the Unity Council or its affiliates for a term of twenty four months with one six month administrative extension for the potential lease disposition and development of an affordable housing project on the properties located at 3553 Thousand 5663603 Thousand 614 Foothill Boulevard subject to the completion of the California Environmental Quality Act determination and there are five speakers that signed up for this item.

Excellent thank you so much. So for this item we will be hearing from, I believe it's Rogers from EWD.

Yes, that's correct. Good afternoon Chairperson Brown and members of the committee. I am Kimani Rogers from the Economic Workforce Development Department. May I have a presentation? Okay.

Staff seeks authorization to negotiate and execute an exclusive negotiation agreement with the Unity Council or its affiliate to develop an 82 unit affordable family housing project on the city owned 36 And Foothill Properties. And, there's just a quick design right there. 36 And Foothill consists of four city owned parcels, split into two sites on opposing sides of 36th Avenue, site a and site b. Site a contains 3550 And 3566 Foothill Boulevard, while site b consists of 363614 Foothill Boulevard. In 2020, the City Council had the 36 And Foothill property declared surplus land pursuant to the California Surplus Lands Act or SLA.

In compliance with the SLA, staff issued an initial notice of availability or NOA in late two thousand twenty. In late two thousand twenty one, State HCD confirmed that the City had met the SLA obligations and could proceed with the sale or lease of the property through the issuance of a Request for Proposals, or RFP. So EWDD partnered with Housing and Community Development Department and the Department of Race and Equity to both draft and release the RFP on 12/31/2024 with a submittal deadline of 03/15/2025. Interested development teams were encouraged to submit their team's qualifications, a design concept, and a financial proposal for review by city staff. The city received proposals from two development teams.

One from a Five Keys school Five Keys Schools and Programs Urban Shelters LLC joint proposal, and another one from the Unity Council. And both proposal summaries are there. The Five Keys team proposed a senior housing project on both Site A and Site B with up to 101 residential units split between studio and one bedroom apartments. It would serve a range of income levels up to 50% AMI or area median income. Resident services would include case management, wellness programs, public benefits, and health benefits assistance, transportation assistance, etcetera.

Excuse me. The Unity Council proposed a family housing project on both side a and side b with up to 82 residential units, but between one, two, and three bedroom apartments. It would serve a range of income levels up to 60% AMI. Resident services would include educational activities, group events, referrals, language assistance, and assistance with benefits and health care documentation. The proposals were evaluated by interdepartmental panel, including staff from EWDD, Housing and Community Development, and the Department of Race and Equity.

The proposals were evaluated and scored based upon five criteria identified in the r r RFP, and that criteria are listed there. The average scores of the evaluation panel resulted in the Unity Council team proposal scoring significantly higher than the five Keys team proposal, with significant disparities, as identified up there, in experience, financial capacity, and financial feasibility categories. Interviews of the two development teams were also held by the evaluation panel. After factoring in both the written submissions and virtual interviews, the panel recommended the city enter into an ENA with the Unity Council team for the proposed development project. Some additional details about the Unity Council project.

It proposes three different levels of affordability with up to 25% of the units set aside for formerly homeless families at or below 30% AMI, with additional splits at 5060% AMI. Site A would be a five story building with 43 units, property management and services offices, a multipurpose community room, and outdoor space. Site B would be a five story building with 39 units and a shared podium parking garage. Services available for residents will include workforce development, youth services, senior services, family services, and job search support. The 21 formerly homeless households will receive intensive case management support to ensure their stabilization and success in housing.

The project will be designed to employ sustainable methods throughout the project, including managing indoor air quality, increasing energy efficiency, and ventilation through system design. The design also calls for a low water landscaping approach combined with bio retention planters and potential roof water capture for landscape. The developer has been awarded grant funds through the EPA to mitigate brownfield sites, which they plan to utilize on the property. The Union Council has extensive experience developing and managing properties in the area. There's a few of the examples up there.

Of note, their 1921 36th Avenue project, which is the one on your far right, is a preservation project they completed five years ago, which abuts the project site and allows for the possibility of shared resources amongst the two different properties. The proposed ENA will have an initial term of twenty four months for a nonrefundable exclusive negotiation payment in the amount of $25,000 and one administrative six month extension option with an additional payment of $6,250. The ENA process will require that the developer meet certain key ENA milestones, including soliciting community input and zoning approvals, while the city and the developer negotiate the specifics for the for the potential disposition of the property. Approval of this item would advance the citywide priority of housing, economic, and cultural security by providing up to 82 units of affordable ham family housing excuse me, fam affordable family housing in the Fruitvale area. Staff is therefore recommending authorization to negotiate and execute an e and a with the Unity Council to develop up to 82 units of affordable family housing at the 36 And Foothill site.

City staff and a representative from the developer are available for any any questions. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Is anyone here from the Unity Council and or the other provider? Or is it just the Unity Council?

The Unity Council will serve both as a developer and service And, there are representatives You're

welcome to take two to three minutes to offer any remarks if you would like.

You. Good afternoon council members. Thank you, Kamani. My name is Abra Levine. I'm the Vice President of Real Estate Development at the Unity Council.

And I'm here today with my colleague, Vivian, to represent the Unity Council and our partners. We're grateful for the opportunity to discuss and hopefully to move forward with an ENA for the 36 and Foothill sites and greatly appreciate your support. As you heard, our proposal for the 36 Ave and Foothill Boulevard sites will transform four vacant lots into a vibrant mixed use family hub. Our current proposal features 82 affordable family units with up to 25% set aside for formerly homeless families. Each building has a residential lobby, mailroom, on-site laundry, outdoor courtyard with shared residential amenities and parking concentrated in separate buildings to maximize space for each use.

Site A will also house classroom space for the Unity Council's Career and Resource Center and workforce and small business teams and include a head start program open to residents and the larger Fruitvale community. This integration of services within the housing development is designed to empower residents and to build resilient communities. And due to our deep roots in the Fruitvale community, our existing service delivery capacity and extensive experience in affordable housing, the Unity Council is uniquely positioned to develop these sites. This proposal is a natural extension of our long standing work in the Fruitvale. Over our sixty year history serving the Fruitvale community, the Unity Council has provided a wide range of programs including early childhood education, youth leadership, workforce development, small business consulting, senior services, housing development, property management, and resident services.

The project will enhance the community by providing quality housing that uplifts the commercially active Fruitvale Foothill Boulevard and underscores the Unity Council's long term investment in the community. To date, we have successfully developed or preserved almost 600 affordable apartments and roughly 200,000 square feet of commercial and community serving spaces, all in the Fruitvale. As Kamani mentioned, we currently own and operate three properties totaling 80 units on 36th Avenue, including an eight unit building directly adjacent to the 36 And Foothill Boulevard sites. Though we bring over six decades of experience delivering affordable housing and culturally rooted community services in the neighborhood, our work is grounded in centering resident needs and supported by deep sustained partnership with local organizations and stakeholders. The proposal shared today is merely our vision for the site, but this is just the beginning of what we know will be an exciting and productive partnership with the City of Oakland and the community to further refine the project's design to best reflect and respond to community priorities.

We look forward to the process and we thank you again for your support.

Excellent. Thank you so much. I have a couple questions but we'll definitely invite my colleagues if they have any first. Council member Ramachandran? Okay well I'm super excited for this for this project and I'm really grateful to the leadership of the Unity Council.

And then I guess I'm just curious a couple things. I know that as outlined in the report there are handful of you know kind of housing developments that you all have worked on especially in recent years. I am curious if there's any key takeaways from some of those recent developments that you will be like you know desiring to implement kind of in this particular proposal. And then I think it was also mentioned that there is a category that will be for you know those who are experiencing homelessness. I guess I'm curious how how does the Unity Council kind of plan to you know get folks into the housing that are experiencing homelessness.

Like, is there a particular area within the city you're focused on or you know what does that outreach look like?

So, I think one of the things that influenced us as we were putting together this proposal is certainly our experience leasing up our most recent projects. For the most recent one which is 181 units, we have had over 8,500 applicants and a lot of them needed larger units, frankly. And, we also, as I mentioned, own 80 units that are that we acquired actually in 2020 through our preservation activities. There were existing multifamily properties that were not restricted and we acquired them with the help of the city and we're able to restrict their affordability long term. And, a lot of those units also those are one and two bedroom units, predominantly one bedroom and a lot of household really need larger units.

So, as we were thinking about kind of the target population and the unit mix for this project, we definitely wanted to ensure that there was ample larger units to accommodate families. And, in thinking about the population, you asked about the homeless families, we have engaged through some of those other projects also developed relationships. Certainly, there's the coordinated entry system process and we would likely expect to work with them to as a referral agency for these homeless units. We've also engaged with the school district. The Oakland Unified Schools District has a McKinney Vento program where they outreach to homeless families within the school district.

And, we've been working with them as well to create a pipeline and referral source.

Excellent. Thank you so much for sharing. We can hear from the public speakers. Thank you so much.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on this item. In no particular order, you can come up to the podium or please raise your hand on Zoom to be easily identified. Maciel Jaquez, Asada Olubala, Abra Lavine, we already saw, and then Christopher Martinez. We can start with Zoom users. Maciel, you can unmute yourself and begin your time.

Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Maciel Hakas, and I'm the deputy director at Centro de Galle de la Raza, a longtime community based organization serving Fruitvale. And we're here today in strong support of the Unity Council's proposed new development at 36th Avenue in Foothill. As someone who was born and raised in East Oakland and as a community partner who has worked closely with the Unity Council over the years, we've seen firsthand their commitment to equitable development, cultural stewardship, and deep community engagement.

They are a trusted steward in this neighborhood. I can say that from personal experience, not just a developer, but an anchor institution that understands the needs of longtime residents and works collaboratively with local organization like ours. We're excited to see this project move forward and are confident that it will bring much needed affordable housing while uplifting the voices and priorities of the community. Thank you so much.

Thank you for your comments.

So, something is going on. I just pulled up the nine ninety form for the Unity Council. It's on their website, nine ninety, Form twenty eighteen. So, when you pull up the form, it says, Name of organization: Spanish speaking Unity Council. So where is the nine ninety for the Unity Council?

Then when you look at the staff, the administrative staff for the Unity Council and the administrative staff for the Spanish speaking Unity Council, these are the exact same people, what being represented here that you have the Spanish speaking Unity Council putting themselves in the position of being another group called the Unity Council? And when you look at the work that the Spanish speaking Unity Council does, it's the exact same thing that the Unity Council does. So something is going on, and I don't know what it is, but I got a feeling that they're trying to misrepresent that they don't really they represent Spanish speaking people. And Fruitvale. So they have in their report the race and equity statement, Fruitvale is an ethically and racially diverse area.

Fruitvale is 2053.8% Latino, 10% black, 10 to 15% white, and 15% Asian. Why do you have to misrepresent that you are a diverse community? Are a predominantly Lat ino community. There is nothing wrong with that. But don't give the appearance that you are representing diversity when you are not.

When you had the opportunity to partner with NeighborWorks America in 2016 with Wells Fargo Bank to help black ownership to take place. For people who were involved in redlining, what they did is gave it to all the Latino people. And no black people got any housing. If if they did, very few. Thank

you for your comments. Christopher, you can unmute yourself and begin your two minutes.

Thank you so much, committee members. My name is Christopher Martinez, and I'm with the Spanish Speaking Citizens Foundation, a community based organization serving Fruitvale and all of Oakland since 1965. And I'm here today to voice strong support of the Unity Council's proposed development at 36th Avenue and Foothill, not just as a partner, but as someone who has seen the impact of their work firsthand. Early in my time here at Spanish speaking, I worked with a multigenerational family living just a few blocks from this site. They were struggling with rising rents and poor housing conditions, but they stayed because Fruitvale is their home. Their roots are here. What was needed was not just shelter, it was stability, dignity,

and

the chance to thrive in the community they love. That's exactly what this project represents. The Unity Council has a long track record of doing development with the community, not just to it. They are not just builders, they are bridge builders. They listen, they collaborate, and they act with care and integrity. We are excited to see this project move forward and confident it will bring deeply needed affordable housing, not just in name, but in practice, while keeping the voices and needs of longtime residents at the center. Thank you so much for your leadership and for considering this important investment in our community. Thank you.

Thank

you

for your comments, Chair. That concludes all speakers on this item.

Alright. Well, thank you so much. I'll entertain a motion on this item.

So moved.

Second?

Second. And I also have a question. I apologize. I forgot to raise my hand. Is it okay to still ask, chair?

Absolutely.

Thank you. Thank you for the presentation and for detailing, the process. The transparency is very much appreciated. I have a question about the timeline. So if this is a two year ENA that's gonna be negotiated, do you have and then, obviously, based on funding applications at different state levels and all of that, do you have any approximate estimate of a range of times in which, you know, ground would be broken for this project and or when applications for the actual housing would be taken?

To the first part of the question, terms of timeline, D and A is just an exclusive negotiation period. And so, we allow for two years with an additional administrative option of six months to begin early negotiations. At this time, I wouldn't feel comfortable or confident giving any type of hard deadline through the NA period, as we discussed. Some of the negotiations will be seeking community input. There will be the process to go through planning and zoning requirements.

There are various negotiations with the city regards to potential lease. I mean, appraisal of property will need to be held, etcetera, etcetera. And so, I don't so, at this time, it would not be prudent to give a timeline as to when ground would be broken. And then the second part of the question, I I Can you repeat that? I don't know if it's more to staff or towards the developer.

No. I think I think that about covers it, that there's a lot of uncertainty, but it's just to clarify what you're saying is, I mean, a two year ENA period, but it's quite possible that it could the negotiation could be completed within six months. Was that what you had said?

No, sorry. To clarify, the ENA period is for two years or twenty four months with an administrative option for an additional six months. So, at this time, what Council will be authorizing is essentially up to thirty months of negotiation period. If the negotiations take longer, so if it takes longer to let's say get the full community input, have the actual project that best fits for the city and for the developer to go at that site. If it takes more than thirty months, then we would come to counsel for an extension.

But, we're in no way guaranteeing that things will, that this process will be completed definitely not in six months, and we're just allowing for flexibility through the thirty month period. That more clear?

Thank you.

Okay.

All right, thank you. I believe there is a motion and a second.

Thank you. That was a motion made by council member Unger, seconded by chair Brown to approve the recommendation of staff and to forward this item to the September 16 city council 09/16/2025 city council agenda on consent on roll. Council member Fife excused. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger?

Aye.

And chair Brown? Aye. Thank you. Motion passes with three ayes, one excused. Feife, to forward this item to the 09/16/2025 City Council agenda on consent. Reading in item five receive an informational report regarding the fiscal year twenty twenty four twenty five quarter one and quarter two update on the planning and building departments code enforcement activities and there are two speakers that signed up for this item.

Excellent. And so for this item we will be hearing a representative, from building and planning.

Good afternoon, Chairperson Brown, Dynasty members of the committee. My name is, Cecilia Amuela, and I am currently the acting building official, representing the Planning and Building Bureau. K Top, could we please load the presentation? Thank you. As I already stated, I am here to present before the committee the first and second quarter code enforcement informational report.

As per the meeting held 09/10/2024, this committee provided direction to present this report biannually, and this represents the second report that combines two quarters into one biannual report. As we see here through our table of contents, we're going to review today the complaints received quarterly by category, first inspections and follow-up inspections by category, case management duration, enforcement actions, enforcement fees assessed, abated and closed cases, the total open cases, and the end of quarter. Additional online resources that we also provide to our constituents. As we see here, we review our top complaints by category. But before I begin to go through this table, I want to add that the goal and purpose of the Code Enforcement program is to increase the safety, habitability, and livability of the built environment in the city of Oakland.

And we do this by aiming our enforcement to be able to maintain and healthy living conditions by addressing issues like dilapidation, preserve property values and community appearance by enforcing codes related to building maintenance, signage and landscaping, preventing blight and urban decay by ensuring properties are properly maintained, protecting the public's safety by addressing issues such as zoning violations and unsafe structures. Keeping in mind that these conditions can equally become anathema to neighboring property owners and the public collectively. So as we go through the report today, it's important to note that while there are other departments within the city of Oakland that have enforcement capacity, such as the Oakland Fire Department, Oakland Public Works, Economic Workforce and Development Department, we are only focusing our metrics as per the Planning and Building Bureau. So, as we see here, our blighted property maintenance, top cases were on trash and debris, graffiti being the second, and the third being overgrown vegetation. Moving on to our housing maintenance code and complaints thereof, our main goals or our main complaints were unpermitted work, complaints regarding mold, and complaints regarding plumbing.

Moving on to zoning, we saw a lot of complaints come in through business and residential zones, so businesses operating in residential areas, noise complaints outside of the permitted hours, as well as fencing heights that are over the approval limits, or the limits as provided by chapter 17. It's important to also know that these are only top complaints but not all of them. And, as we go through the complaints, roughly seventeen sixteen complaints were received per the quarter over the last fiscal year, over the last four fiscal years I should say. With the lowest in 2022 and '23 fiscal year where we received thirteen thirty complaints and in the highest seen in 2024 and 2025, where we see an increase of 2,314 complaints received. And you can see that throughout the course of time in this particular slide.

Moving forward to our first inspections, here we see the difference and the escalation between, or fluctuation I should say, between complaints received in quarter one of fiscal year twenty twenty one and quarter one fiscal year twenty twenty five. We see that our blight complaints tripled, our housing complaints doubled, as well as our zoning complaints equally doubled for this quarter. Moving on to our inspections and site visits thereof. For each category, for first inspections, we completed about a ten twenty six blighted property inspections, and these also include complaints of graffiti. Six seventy four housing maintenance inspections, 159 zoning inspections, and reinspections for blighted property were at fourteen forty seven with an increase of reinspections and monitoring inspections for housing of 2,395.

And, this is pretty significant because it shows that our compliance rate when we see a high number of reinspections has gone up. So it's pretty positive for us on our end. Moving on to our case management for quarter one July, for the, time period of July through September, we see that our case intake was about four and, four and a half days with our first inspection being scheduled, roughly three point eight days after receipt and a notice of violation being sent, within that time period that led to abatement of twenty six point one days in between with an overall compliance period of thirty three point six business days. For Blight case management duration, for quarter one, July through September, we equally see the case intake at five days, which is right at our mark. For first inspections, three point three days.

Our first notice of violation and abatement, twenty three point three days. Also at about thirty one point eight business days from initial to compliance. Moving forward to our housing case management duration for the same quarter, our intake, was completed at about two point eight days from receipt. Our first inspection being scheduled within our threshold of five days and our notice of violation being sent with approximately thirty two point six average time that led to abatement. This leading to about forty days for compliance.

And, it's important to note here that sometimes when we see days of compliance leading up to forty days, that could be because of a number of things. If we have, for example, on a housing complaint, something that requires a permit, let's say there's lack of heat and we need to pull a permit for heating or there's a plumbing deficiency and we need a permit there as well, that would be why the compliance time frame would lead to about forty days. Cause it allows for time for somebody to come down to City Hall and obtain a permit or pull their permit online. Moving on to zoning case management duration for the same time period, our case intake was at about five days. Our first inspection completed within our threshold of five days at four point three.

And our notice of violation and abatement, roughly up at about twenty four, twenty five days per se, bringing us to a, from start to finish compliance, of thirty four business days. And, as we move into our case management duration, our medium numbers, which are equally important, our case intake was at four days, our first inspection is three days, and our notice of violation is at twenty four days. Now these are the truest numbers that we have which really give us the metrics that we need so that we can generate you know more efficiency as we are responding, as we are following up on cases, and finding modes of compliance or solutions for compliance for our constituents. For blighted case management duration, we are about four point five days for case intake. Our first inspection being at roughly two and a half days, and our notice of violation and abatement timeframes being at roughly twenty four days.

Again, staying within that thirty one day marker of business days for compliance from start to finish. Going into our housing case management duration for this time period, our median numbers are at three days for intake, our first inspection, roughly three days, and also about twenty six days for full compliance and or abatement of particular complaint. And equally, as you see here, we are within our threshold for case intake for zoning complaints at two days, first inspection response within four days, twenty five days to full compliance from notice of violation being sent out. Some of the steps that we've taken for compliance and abatement. As you see here, we've had a total of four cases with cleanup contracts where the city took action on a property to ensure that the property was abated of its nuisance.

We issued two repeat offender violations. This is a violation that perhaps a property owner may have had within the course of twenty four months, one or more times. So, let's say somebody calls a complaint on property 1234, Happy Lane and then within eight months we receive a secondary complaint of the same type, this is where we would receive or issue a notice of repeat violation for that property. Stop work orders issued for non compliance were 30. This reflects on permitted work throughout the city or going beyond the scope of work on active job sites.

And, we entered into 12 compliance plans, which again, this is another mode of being able to create a pipeline for property owners to bring their property into compliance. This is a tool that we use that really allows us the ability to create some time buffer and timelines by means of milestones that assist us in guiding the constituents of the city to bring their property into full compliance. The total open cases for quarter one, for this time period, we see 3,099 open cases in the previous quarter, with thirteen thirty four cases for this quarter. So we do see a decrease of two thirty two cases for blight, as well as we see a decrease about thirty seven cases for housing or habitability maintenance, and an increase of seven cases for zoning violations. And, these zoning violations could be, again, noise complaints, home occupation, offenses over height.

And, moving throughout the course of time, we see the increase from fiscal year 'ninety six to today, present day, with our cases being open at about 1,200 per this fiscal year, 2024, 2025. Going on to our abated and closed cases, we see that we've actually done a really great job at increasing our abated and closed cases. So we started off at roughly eight eighty three closed or abated cases for fiscal year twenty four quarter one, leading us to fiscal year twenty five quarter one at fifteen sixty six cases that were closed, which is pretty significant. The same thing could be said for housing habitability cases where we had about four ninety four cases that were closed and we were able to almost double that abatement or closure of those cases to current date. With our zoning cases kind of trending just a little above what we closed in fiscal year twenty four quarter one, not doing too bad there.

Our complaints received by category, as you see here, this is representative of quarter two, fiscal year twenty twenty one quarter two, all the way to fiscal year twenty five quarter two. We see a slight increase of about 300 give or take cases, a minor increase in our housing complaint cases, and almost doubled in our zoning cases. Now this sometimes leads to climatic changes, Things that have changed throughout the course of time, dilapidation or deferred maintenance. So when there's a lot of deferred maintenance, we do see a hike in our housing habitability cases that come in for code violations. Our first inspections for fiscal year twenty twenty one quarter two and fiscal year twenty twenty five, we see here that we've had a slight increase but not too much.

Our primary housing maintenance, which is kind of the the most cases or the most complaints that we see that impact on a variety of different levels, our constituency did increase somewhat there by double. Well, it did double. But, we'd also show that we have been consistently maintaining through modes such as compliance plans, such as stop work orders, to be able to address those specific complaints. Going into site visits and our inspections for quarter two, for the time period of October through December, our first inspections for blighted property, we conducted about five ninety eight inspections. Our housing maintenance inspections were at seven thirty six and our zoning inspection or site visits were at 153 for first inspection.

Now here we also see that our reinspections and monitoring inspections have also increased quite a bit. And again, this just kind of tells a story that because they're increasing, we're getting a lot more done on these properties, we're getting more of a connection with property owners or stakeholders that have ed interest in the property that are trying to bring their property into compliance. So, when we do see that re up and reinspections, it's always a positive sign for us versus not getting any type of connection or compliance from property owners. Now moving into our case management duration for quarter two for the time period of October through December. Here we see our case intake overall at one point four days with our first inspection being scheduled within two point three days time, our notice of violation being sent and abatement within a twenty six day period, bringing our compliance period from start to finish to about twenty nine point seven business days.

Moving into the blight case management duration, equally for this time period of quarter two, we see our case intake at one and a half days with our first inspection at roughly just under one and a half days and our notice of violation at about twenty two days for full abatement. And housing cases, our initial intake, one day, our first inspection, eleven days, and our notice of violation was sent within twenty seven days, bringing our total to about thirty nine business days from onset to full abatement. Going on to our zoning case management, we see an increase here of forty five seven days compliance. Our case intake was at one day, our first inspection at six days, and our notice of violation sent was within forty days. This again speaks to any time there's a zoning case that might need review, it might need more than just know cease and desist, but rather providing a pathway by which constituents can bring their property into compliance.

So that increase in business days really speaks to being able to come in and speak with different departments to gain that compliance that's needed. And our case management duration for quarter two from October to December, going through our median timeframes, we have about one business day for case intake with our first inspection also being about one day overall, and our notice of violation being mailed out within twenty four and a half days time, bringing that to abatement. And, for our Blight Case Median Time, one day. Also, for case intake, one day for our inspections to be completed, as well as our Notice of Violation being sent in about twenty three and a half days and leading to abatement. Going into our housing case management, equally we're at one day for case intake.

So, it's really great to see how great we're doing with making sure that those cases are getting assigned as they're coming in. And their first inspections also equally staying within our threshold. Here we see an eleven day increase for first inspection. This would account, for the October time is a bit challenging. We have, people scheduled time off.

We have illnesses because it is the fall winter months. So, it's not, it's not as terrible as it may look. It's just really accounting for those specific instances where we may not have enough staff, readily available to be going out to these inspections. However, our notice of violation that's sent out leading to, abatement of the property is still at twenty seven days. So it's pretty positive to see that even though we had that little uptick there that we are still staying within our threshold of time frame for compliance.

And, our zoning case management duration, our case intake equally at one day for assigning to an inspector and the first inspection being conducted by six days time with our notice of violation being sent out about forty days and then leading to full abatement. So, our enforcement actions for compliance for this second quarter. We issued a total of three cleanup contracts. We didn't have any repeat offender violations that were issued. We did issue 34 stop work orders and we entered into roughly five compliance plans.

Again, which is pretty positive as far as trying to get these properties into compliance. Now going into our fees assessed, as you see here, we have our different fiscal years for comparison. So for fiscal year twenty five, quarter two, we had about three forty nine cases that were invoiced leading to fees and including bonds of 804,657, taking in a total of $23,000 for compliance plan bonds. Going into fiscal year twenty five, quarter one, three seventy cases that were invoiced, taking in fees at $721,834 bringing in a total compliance plan bond to $64,000 which are increases from quarter four, quarter three, and quarter two. The compliance plan bonds, again speaking to the compliance plans that we entered, are that pipeline by which we allow, constituents an opportunity to bring their property into compliance.

So, these bonds are returned to them once full compliance is met. Our abated and closed cases for fiscal year twenty twenty four quarter two through fiscal year twenty twenty five quarter two, as you see here, our blight cases again increased or took an increase from 2024 to today's date. Our housing maintenance has remained pretty steady over the course of the last four quarters with this specific quarter having an increase, and that usually is because climatic changes. So, it could have been because of rain in the fall, could have been because of rain in the springtime, cold weather, lack of heat, perhaps leaks, things like that, that would generate additional code complaints to come into our office. And, as you see here, throughout the course of time from fiscal year 'ninety six through fiscal year 'twenty five, we are at about fourteen twenty six cases that were distributed with an increase of 48.5%.

Now, the total open cases for quarter two, October through December, We had a total of open cases from the previous quarter of 2,867. Our current cases for this quarter, nine zero eight. Abated and closed cases at sixteen forty three for a total of 2,132 for blighted property, 3,082 for maintenance, and six seventy two for zoning, as we see here. Additional information that we provide our constituents, anyone that has a vested interest on property, is how to obtain a notice of violation. These are available to the public located on the links as you see here on the screen, and as well as how to collect any previous code enforcement reports that they may want to reference review before they come in and speak to us for finding a way to comply for their property.

Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you so much for the comprehensive report. We can hear from the public speakers first.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on this item, Ms. Tania Scott Smith and Ms. Asada Olubala.

Tinia Scott Smith. I am happy that I don't even have to read what I wrote because a lot of the questions were answered by the report. Having formally worked in building planning code enforcement in San Jose, I know the ins and outs and code enforcement is one of my least favorite departments because of it, mainly because of IBC, but that's a whole another argument. What I'd like to see is why we're in a deficit financially is that there is some way to streamline enforcement of deadbeat landlords to get them to comply. Some way to make stricter penalties upon landlords and developers who is more cost effective for them to pay fines than it is for them to make repairs and obey laws.

And, I know several that I work with in advocating that's a major contribution to the fact that we have this unsheltered crisis here in the city of Oakland. People cannot afford it and a lot of landlords will illegally evict people when they complain about circumstances instead of fixing their property and then up the property rents and put somebody else in there with the same problems. Code enforcement will come out and they just ignore the employees. They just ignore their calls, ignore their emails, don't fix anything and then illegally evict the tenants because it's more cost effective to pay the fines and we don't have enough staff really to implement. I like to see that fixed because that's a major contribution to our housing crisis.

So in order to deal with the issues of enforcement, we are working with a complaint based system. So we don't respond to an issue until a complaint is received. The other thing that's important is there's a backlog of cases because you need more inspectors. You have, in this presentation, so many different areas that come under this banner business residential zone inspections, fencing inspection, construction inspections. You have graffiti inspections.

And then I'm not going to go through a whole, but you've a lot of different ones. Then you've got code enforcement that is targeted to private property and code enforcement that is targeted to public property, and I didn't get the difference of how that works, what if any difference is working. The biggest issue that I have is blight and nuisance issues. And you can't wait for a complaint. You have to be able to have some way of identifying the need.

You had seventeen sixteen complaints regarding stripped vehicles. But related to that is that vehicles that have been stripped, you have illegal business owners selling those parts. So, it's not only that you're stripping vehicles, but you have business participants who are illegally selling them. What is the neighborhood enhancement service team in East And West Oakland? They were identified in the report, but I didn't didn't see what what the what they actually do.

Then you have the abandoned auto task force. Now remember, the grand jury is saying that we are ticketing abandoned cars when they've been stolen and

Thank you for your comments, chair. That concludes our speakers on this item.

Alright. Thank you so much. Colleagues, any questions? Council member Unger?

That Can you tell me what that first inspection looks like? Are are you actually going out? Is somebody driving out to every complaint to put eyes on it?

It's through the chair. To Councilman Unger,

Okay. And, so every single, like that 7,000 trips a year that that our inspectors are going out to put eyes on?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay, that's a lot. Thank you. Yes,

and so I would like to kind of ask an additional question kind of in that same category. I believe it's on page eight of the report. It states that you know there is ongoing recruitment to fill some of the vacancies. I did want to get an understanding of you know what is the current total of inspectors that we have kind of fulfilling these roles and how many I guess in this current budget cycle how many are currently how many how many positions are you currently you know trying to fill?

Yes. Thank you Chair Brown. We currently have roughly about 22 inspectors dedicated to the Code Enforcement Unit. We are actively looking to add three ELD code enforcement assistant inspectors to assist us with our lower level cases, such as blight, nuisance, things that they could put an auto focus on so that we can tackle that workload.

And, are those positions only funded for a short period of time?

They are not. Actually, we've been working quite a bit at making those permanent positions. There are a total of five positions. We are bringing in three in the interim to get them up and running with the goal of getting the full five on staff.

Excellent. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Does council member Ramachandran have her hand up?

Yes. Thank you. That you did ask my question already about hiring and staffing. Just one additional question about enforcement fees. Do you have an estimate of the percentage of fees that are assessed that are actually collected?

Through the chair to council member Ramachandran. We we do we can provide that information, so I can have my office put something together to provide that information to you.

That would be great. Is I I I would be interest well, depending on the will of the body, if that could be included in a supplemental, when this is forwarded. Well, actually, this may not be forwarded to counsel, I I assume. So I I would love that information in a email to my office. And then, actually, yeah, that's it. That would that in hiring was it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you so much. And, thank you so much, Councilmember Ramachandran. I think that that's an excellent addition that potentially as we receive this report in the future, maybe we can just kind of add that as something that's, you know added to the report if that's possible. Okay so at this time thank you so much. At this time I don't have any further questions so I'll entertain a motion to receive and file this in committee.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you. That was a motion made by council member Unger, seconded by council member Ramachandran to approve the recommendation of staff and to receive and file this informational report in committee. On role, council member Fife is excused. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger?

Aye.

And chair Brown? Aye. Thank you. Item number five passes with three ayes, one excused. Fife to receive and file this informational report in committee. Moving on to open forum, we have two people that signed up, Ms. Tania Scott Smith and Ms. Asada Olavala.

Oh, God. Don't have to come back here until September. Give me be ready for y'all. I gotta say this. Head Start is in big trouble.

I know Bonta has a lawsuit, but that crazy man has, implemented that, children who are not here legally will not be able to be a part of Head Start. That's very serious. Plus, we got all these issues going on with Head Start, with leadership, and with fraud and lawsuits. So y'all got to get on board to fix Head Start. I'm concerned you got a nonexisting nonprofit that you just bounced into getting a contract.

And I remember a couple of months ago, it might be as much as a year ago, you had to come back and redo a contract because it was written up as the unity council, and you had to resubmit it as a Spanish speaking unity council because you couldn't use unity council on a legal document. The city attorney knows this. Don't never speak up for anything. Lastly, when you're talking about permitting and what you did to the black Lake Merritt vendors, and how you specifically target them to be fined because they didn't have permits. And you have all over this city people who are setting up.

I've got a man who, on Kellen Mountain, parks his car, pulls up his trunk and sells food out of his trunk. We got some other guys that come with a truck and sell big barrels for flowering. And we got people that sells flowers, they sell foods, they're blocking the sidewalks, and they're not getting ticketed. And I don't have any problem with anybody trying to make a living, but don't target African Americans for the same thing other people are doing, and they're not being held responsible for not having permits to do this business.

The chair of our city of Oakland Head Start program. Thank you guys for supporting us. Thank you for taking care of that non Head Start employee who was committing fraud and is no longer employed by the city. Thank you. Our leadership team is amazing.

I appreciate each and every one of those over educated black women who are in this for the hard work, not for the salaries. I stand here as a proud Spanish speaking black woman just like the millions of other Spanish speaking members of the black diaspora in the world. And, I hate that a noted, bigoted, internal racist walked out instead of hearing truth. I want to I can't Now, I'm speaking as a citizen. I want to ask that we reconsider making some type of streamlined process to make it easier to have more green alternative housing options for people in our city.

We could have those, tiny homes on wheels. We have artists here in West Oakland who are creating tiny homes for our unsheltered citizens out of recycled materials. They are safe and in many times, green homes are safer and more structurally sound than homes that follow the IBC. We need to make processes simpler and more affordable for those that are most in need. It does not need to be some boutique option for the wealthy who already have infinite possibilities. It needs to be an option for those who are in need. We have too many people who work here and want to stay here because they're from here, but they can't afford it.

Thank you chair. That concludes our speakers for open forum.

Excellent. Well thank you, so much everyone. I would say it's not quite goodbye yet. I will see you at the Rules and Legislation Committee on Thursday at 10:30 and then kind of following that our next meeting of the body I believe is September 16 for the full City Council meeting and then our committee meetings will resume Tuesday September 30. So thank you so much this meeting is adjourned.