City Government

City Guts Affordable Housing Funds for Low-Income Oaklanders

Published

10 years ago

March 25, 2016

Oakland City Council’s Community and Economic Development (CED) Committee on Tuesday approved an ordinance sponsored by Mayor Libby Schaaf that affordable housing advocates say will “gut” low-income housing funds by expanding the definition of “affordable housing” to include moderate-income housing.

The council chamber was packed as low-income residents and housing groups spoke against the ordinance’s shifting of priorities from assisting low-income renters to people in the higher income scale.

The ordinance itself would implement Oakland’s first citywide housing impact fees, which are one-time fees imposed on market-rate housing developers that can add up to millions of dollars for the city to build much-needed affordable housing.

The organizations at Tuesday’s committee meeting generally supported the implementation of impact fees but were outraged by the last-minute and secretive modification to the ordinance that redefines affordable housing to include housing for households earning up to $110,000 a year.

As a result, this would mean less money to build housing for those earning less than $70,000 a year. Currently, the median household income for Oakland renters is $40,250 annually.

Organizations that opposed this change included SEIUUSWW, East Bay Housing Organizations, East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy, Causa Justa: Just Cause, Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment and Oakland Community Organizations.

The CED committee listened to over 50 speakers who said the shift of funding should not be written into the ordinance, but council members approved the resolution and sent it to the full council.

If passed by City Council, the ordinance would divide Oakland into three zones: Zone 1 for downtown Oakland and the hills, Zone 2 for parts of West Oakland and Coliseum City, and Zone 3 for East Oakland.

Each zone would have different impact fees that would be charged to developers. During a four-year phasing process that begins on Sept. 1, Zone 1 fees would gradually increase from $7,000 per market-rate unit to $24,000 by 2018.

Zone 2 would increase from $5,500 to $19,250 per unit by 2018, and Zone 3 would increase from $750 to $13,000 per unit by 2020.

By comparison, Emeryville and Berkeley have had housing impact fees in place for years, which are currently set at $28,000 per unit regardless of where in the city they are located, considerably more than what Oakland’s fees would look like in 2018 if the council passes the ordinance.

Speakers also opposed a modified provision that would allow developers to forego paying the impact fees if they include 10 percent affordable or moderate-income housing units on site.

“Given the choice to build an equal number of moderate-income units as affordable units, the developers will only build moderate-income units and it won’t generate money for trust funds,” said Gloria Bruce, executive director of East Bay Housing Organizations.

Since developers are likely to choose building moderate-income units, there would be no affordable housing being built on site and no fees going into the city’s affordable housing trust fund, which would also be competing with moderate-income housing for funding, said housing activists.

Housing advocates are calling the ordinance’s overall redistribution of funds for very low-income and low-income housing to moderate-income housing a “Robin Hood in Reverse,” meaning the city is taking money from the majority of Oaklanders who are low income and giving it to the more affluent.

Housing activists say this ordinance – backed by the mayor and city staff – would further displace Oakland’s poorest populations, which are disproportionately communities of color, while incentivizing middle class households to move to the city with the city’s assistance.

Lifelong Oakland resident Gregory Ward told the council members that it seemed they did not want to acknowledge what is currently happening in Oakland as a housing crisis.

“We voted for you because we thought you’d represent and address our needs,” said Ward. “I’m tired of having to come here and say the same thing over and over again. We need housing for the people who are living here right now.”

Another longtime Oakland resident, Theola Polk, said that due to skyrocketing housing prices and rent increases, her grandchildren will not be able to afford to live in the city they grew up in.

“We need to keep the families of low-income residents here so that their families will have a future here,” said Polk. “We do have a housing emergency. It’s an emergency.”

Councilmember Anne Campbell-Washington justified the shift to moderateincome housing in the proposal, saying she had teachers in mind when she backed the change.

The top household limit would be $110,000 for four people. “That’s a family of four with two teachers as parents. That’s who we’re trying to house,” said CampbellWashington. “It’s very important for me to keep our teachers here in Oakland.”

But according to Kitty Kelly Epstein, a longtime Oakland teacher, the councilmember’s ideas are misconceived.

“The typical Oakland teacher doesn’t make anywhere near $70,000 a year so making that number affordable doesn’t make any sense,” said Epstein. “It takes decades for an educator to earn $72,000 a year and the idea that there’s a few families that have two educators in them is not typical.”

“Teachers are concerned for their students,” she said. “They face a constantly rotating set of students because their families are being evicted. What teachers want is a classroom of students who are housed and able to sleep at night.”

Council President Lynette McElhaney responded negatively to the public comments. She said she felt heartbroken seeing low-income residents “vilifying” middle class people who have “finally made it out of the poverty cycle.”

According to James Vann, co-founder of the Oakland Tenants Union, Oakland currently has 6,000 housing units in its pipeline and 98 percent of them are for moderate- to high-income households.

By 2020, the pipeline will have 20,000 moderate- to high-income units, said Vann.

“Nobody is looking out for low-income people,” said Vann. “You’re raising the limit to $72,000 (for one person), and the average income is $30,000. So who are you housing and who is concerned about the people who live here now?”

Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan abstained from the vote, criticizing the city’s lack of transparency in making these last-minute modifications to the ordinance.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Councilmember Gallo Explains Why He Stood Alone to Oppose E. 12th Street Project

Don't Miss

Warriors Unveil Newly Renovated Gym AT EOYDC

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Bay Area

Oakland Mayor Pushes Charter Overhaul to Clarify Roles in City Government, Increase Accountability and Improve Service Delivery

Under the proposal, the mayor would serve as Oakland’s chief executive, overseeing city departments, implementing policy, proposing the annual budget, and managing day-to-day operations. The measure would also give the mayor veto power over legislation and the budget, though the City Council could override a veto with a two-thirds vote.

Published

3 days ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee. File photo.

By Oakland Post Staff

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee is backing a sweeping proposal to restructure Oakland’s government, arguing the changes would make City Hall more accountable and improve the delivery of basic services like public safety, homelessness response, and infrastructure repairs.

The charter reform measure, introduced April 7 and co-sponsored by Oakland City Council President Kevin Jenkins, would ask voters in November to approve a “strong mayor, strong council” system designed to create clearer lines of authority inside city government.

The City Council, meanwhile, would maintain legislative authority by adopting ordinances, approving budgets, conducting oversight hearings, and confirming key mayoral appointments. The proposal would also create an Independent Budget and Legislative Analyst Office to provide nonpartisan fiscal and policy analysis for councilmembers.

“I’ve spent months listening to Oaklanders across every neighborhood about what they expect from their city government,” Lee said. “The Charter Reform Working Group’s engagement made clear that residents want a system where there are no questions about who is responsible for delivering results on public safety, homelessness, infrastructure, and basic services.”

Jenkins said the proposal would strengthen both executive leadership and council oversight.

“I’ve long believed Oakland works best when residents have clear lines of accountability and a government structure that aligns responsibility with results,” Jenkins said.

The proposal follows recommendations from the Mayor’s Charter Reform Working Group, co-facilitated by the League of Women Voters of Oakland and SPUR.

Over five months, the group conducted more than 60 interviews, held 14 public meetings across Oakland, and engaged more than 750 residents while reviewing governance models used in other cities.

“The process of engaging residents across Oakland surfaced the governance clarity Oakland needs,” said Sujata Srivastava of SPUR. “The Charter Reform Working Group has produced a thoughtful set of recommendations that if adopted could strengthen accountability and improve service delivery across city government.”

Polling cited by the mayor’s office suggests voters may be open to the changes. A February 2026 poll by the East Bay Polling Institute found 64% of voters support adopting a strong-mayor system. Separate polling conducted by the Oakland Chamber of Commerce and David Binder Research found support ranging from 61% to 63% among likely voters.

The measure is scheduled to be heard by the City Council Rules Committee on May 21. If approved by the council, it would appear on the November 2026 ballot, where Oakland voters would have the final say.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

More and More, Black Californians Are Worried About Rising Costs of Housing, Energy, Food and Gas

According to an April 2024 report by the Greenlining Institute, low-income Black Californians are struggling with affordability due to a combination of historical systemic barriers and modern economic pressures. The Greenlining Institute is a California-based policy, research, and advocacy nonprofit founded in 1993 to fight systemic racism and economic injustice.

Published

3 days ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Antonio‌ ‌Ray‌ ‌Harvey‌, California‌ ‌Black‌ ‌Media‌

Housing, energy, food and gas are four essential household expenses, and their rising costs are forcing residents—especially lower-income households—to make difficult trade-offs, Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton) said at a conference on affordability last week in Sacramento.

Ransom, a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC), noted a shift in consumer behavior, stating, “Before people used to choose between things that they wanted and things that they needed.”

“Now, what we’re hearing from constituents is they are prioritizing their needs differently,” she said. “Because of the affordability crisis, it’s no longer about choosing between other needs. Our constituents are now saying ‘what needs to be prioritized?’ Gas and food are at the top of the list.”

Ransom made the comments about affordability at Capitol Weekly’s informational conference titled “Affordability: The Cost of Living in California,” which was held on April 30 at the University of California’s Student and Policy Center.

Co-hosted with the University of California Student and Policy Center, the political conversations focused on identifying policy solutions to the state’s extremely high prices for energy, food, and essentials.

The keynote speakers at the conference were former Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, and Mike Madrid, a political strategist, author, and senior fellow at UC Irvine.

Conversations about affordability are taking on greater urgency as the election season kicks in, speakers said.

According to an April 2024 report by the Greenlining Institute, low-income Black Californians are struggling with affordability due to a combination of historical systemic barriers and modern economic pressures. The Greenlining Institute is a California-based policy, research, and advocacy nonprofit founded in 1993 to fight systemic racism and economic injustice.

Black households in California experience the highest levels of rent burden; approximately 65% of Black renters, according to the Greenlining report. Historical “redlining” and ongoing discrimination have restricted homeownership. Black families also pay 43% more for energy than White households, partly because they are more likely to live in older, less energy-efficient rentals.

In addition, roughly 1 in 3 Black adults (36.5%) reported household food insecurity in late 2025, more than double the rate for White adults. This is often exacerbated by “food deserts” in predominantly Black neighborhoods.

In March, Assembly Minority Leader Heath Flora (R-Ripon) expressed concerns about affordability in California, describing it as a crisis where families are being “pushed to the edge.”

“Californians should not have to choose between putting food on the table or filling up their car,” Flora stated. “We need to cut costs now. Not tomorrow, not next week, not next month. Now.”

Cuts to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding are being driven by the Trump Administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), which is reducing federal spending by approximately $187 billion through 2034.

Those reductions are putting more pressure on the state to help, Ransom said. According to the AAA Gas Prices website, as of May 8, California’s gasoline prices averaged over $6 per gallon in some areas, with various locations experiencing spikes of $7 to $8 per gallon. In California, fuel prices are driven by refinery maintenance and market volatility, while high food prices are linked to rising transportation costs, experts say.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

The Marin City Flea Market Is Back

The Marin City Flea Market returns on May 23, offering arts, crafts, vintage items, and collectibles. The market aims to uplift local vendors and celebrate cultural diversity.

Published

5 days ago

May 15, 2026

Oakland Post

Customers shopping in Marin City Flea Market. Photo courtesy of marincityflea.org.

By Godfrey Lee

After a long absence, Marin City will once again hold its flea market. The market will have its grand opening on Saturday, May 23, from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the St. Andrew Presbyterian Church parking lot on 101 Donahue St. It will be held every fourth Saturday of the month

The market will be free to the public

There will be arts, crafts, vintage, collectibles, and other items on sale at the market. Interested vendors can contact info@marincityflea.org or text (415) 484-2984 for more information.

“The Marin City Flea Market’s mission is to uplift local vendors, celebrate cultural diversity, and provide an accessible community space where creativity, entrepreneurship, and connection can thrive,” says their website, marincityflea.org.

The flea market is sponsored and run by the Rotary Club of Marin City.

For more information, contact info@marincityflea.org. Or text to (415) 484-2984