City Government

Mayor Reorganizes Jobs Programs, Says No Approval Necessary

Published

10 years ago

February 15, 2016

Community members, civil rights activists and advocates for more local jobs spoke out at this week’s Community and Economic Development (CED) committee meeting to oppose Mayor Libby Schaaf’s new reorganization of the city’s job programs, which they say was done without public input and could reduce employment opportunities for Black and other unemployed workers of color, leading to further displacement of low-income families.

Speakers were upset that funds for job services to needy individuals have been cut, effective July 1—even though Oakland has not yet been told what federal jobs funding will be for next year.

The speakers were also concerned about the lack of transparency in the process. The city administrator and Mayor Schaaf issued Requests for Proposals (RFPs) on Jan. 27, based on a new budget and major policy changes – none of which have been discussed or voted on in open session by the City Council or approved by a policy board.

Not following established city procedures, the mayor and city administrator approved the new RFP without a vote by the Workforce Investment Board (WIB), an official policy body appointed by the mayor, according to speakers at the meeting.

Nor have the RFP, budget or policy changes been discussed or voted upon by the City Council or the council’s CED committee.

Further, the speakers said there is no rush to adopt this RFP, and it should be reviewed by the city’s new Department of Race Equity for possible negative impacts on people of color who live in the city.

Though the mayor says there are minutes of public WIB discussions, copies of these documents have not yet been sent to the Oakland Post or posted on the WIB’s website. Most of the discussions mentioned by the mayor were not public meetings.

The city’s WIB staff has long been criticized for making decisions without public input, making decisions in committee meetings with limited public access, violating the Brown Act and for taking about one-third of federal jobs dollars off the top to pay for administrative oversight of service providers.

Speaking at the CED meeting, Carroll Fife, a community activist and co-chair of the Oakland Alliance, said she had only learned about the changes when she saw the RFP on the city’s Economic and Workforce Development webpage.

Carroll Fife

“I’ve been attending the WIB meetings for over a year,” said Fife. “I’ve attended all the meetings, and I have not seen one of the budgets that are in the current RFP.”

“I am asking that you rescind this until there is a Race and Equity analysis of how people who are underemployed, young people and the formerly incarcerated will be affected,” she said.

“There has been no true cost analysis.”

Businessman Frank Tucker, who has served on the WIB for years and is president of 100 Black Men, was also concerned about the new RFP. “I was really shocked that there was an RFP released that never went through the WIB,” he said. “It has dollar amounts associated with it, and it changes the structure of the system.”

Frank Tucker

“I am asking that it be pulled and that it be handled properly.”

One change would reorganize the WIB services by service “sector,” abandoning the geographical approach of placing offices in neighborhoods that are most affected by unemployment.

Businessman Dexter Vizinau argued that the reorganization of the city’s job programs should be done deliberatively, taking into consideration what the changes will mean for city residents.

Dexter Vizinau

“This is an important time for the City of Oakland because jobs are (growing). Unemployment is going down, and we want to be sure that that there is local hire,” he said.

“Why rush? You can defer this RFP, gather more information and look at more options and maybe reorganize another way,” said Vizinau.

Responding to the speakers, Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan said she was concerned. “When there is not adequate community involvement, we should be very cautious about going ahead with this,” she said.

Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney said, “It is alarming if this (RFP) has been released without a WIB meeting.”

Defending the issuing of the RFP, City Administrator Claudia Cappio said it was released after “about two years of work … the continued involvement of the WIB over a period of time.”

“The principles have been discussed,” she said.

In a reply to questions from the Post, Mayor Schaaf’s office said a vote by the council or the WIB is not required for the RFP, the new budget or the policy changes on which it is based.

“The RFP framework was agendized and discussed multiple times at meetings of the Board and subcommittees starting in August of 2014. WIOA does not require that the WIB formally review or approve an RFP, nor has it in the past,” according to the Mayor’s Office.

“The RFP is being issued by the Workforce Investment Board (WIB) through the Office of Economic and Workforce Development. The proposals (for the funding) will be evaluated and ranked by a panel of WIA/WIOA professionals from across the country.”

In response to the Post’s question about Race & Equity, the Mayor’s Office responded: “The Department of Race & Equity is not yet up and running, nor have its full roles and responsibilities been fully outlined.”

The city held a bidders’ conference Wednesday afternoon at City Hall. The deadline for submission of proposals under the new RFP is March 8.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Breaking Bars, Building Bridges: Justice Reinvestment Town Hall

Don't Miss

Andreas Cluver, Arabella Martinez Named to Port Commission

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Marin City Public Housing Residents Demand a Voice in County’s Renovation Plans

Representation has been a continuous struggle for the Residents Council, she said in an interview with the Post News Group. In 2014, the tenants took the county to federal court over this issue, and prevailed, resulting in an MOU that was in effect from 2014 to 2024, said McLemore. “Now, they are not responding to our rightful requests to participate. They are not giving us a legal justification for their position.”

Published

5 days ago

May 10, 2026

Oakland Post

The largest housing complex in Marin County, Golden Gate Village residents are for predominantly Black and low-income. Courtesy image.

Tenants say the County of Marin is ignoring federal law requiring resident council participation

By Ken Epstein

Marin City public housing residents say the County is illegally depriving them of their rights to participate in renovation decisions that affect the future of their housing, raising deep concerns over whether the county ultimately will find a way to displace them.

According to regulations established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Marin City public housing residents have the right to organize, elect resident councils, and hold public housing agencies accountable for involving them in management decisions.

Without resident participation, the Board of Housing Commissioners, made up of the five Marin County Board of Supervisors and two resident comissioners, has approved a $226 million project. The plan calls for renovation of the 296 units in Golden Gate Village (GGV) and focuses on interior improvements. The project is scheduled to start in July.

Residents’ concerns have a long history, said Royce McLemore, president of the Golden Gate Village Residents Council and a 50-year resident of Marin City,

With no current MOU mandating training and participation of residents, the legal basis for all the redevelopment decisions made by the county since 2024 is questionable, said Terrie Green, executive director of Marin City Climate Resilience. “We are experiencing voicelessness. If residents had a voice, we wouldn’t be where we are today,” she said.

County decisions include a plan, in line with federal regulations, to convert GGV from public housing to a public-private enterprise that allows for private investment. The Marin Housing Authority has created a limited partnership that includes Burbank Housing – which will renovate the units and manage the property – and Wells Fargo Bank, the investor.

This change in federal policy regarding public housing, which includes a shift to a Section-8 voucher system, has resulted in gentrification across the country, particularly affecting African Americans in cities such as San Francisco.

Shifts in criteria of what is considered affordable could also end up pricing residents out of their living units. At present, low income in Marin County is officially considered $156,000. But the median household income in Marin City is significantly lower at $68,846.

Damian Morgan, a community advocate with Marin City Climate Resilience, questioned why the county is renovating apartments without fixing toxic infrastructure that is impacting the lives of people in GGV.

Morgan said tenants have filed a class action lawsuit because of unsafe conditions at Golden Gate Village.

Residents are also concerned that the County still does not have an adequate family plan for temporary displacement while their apartments are being renovated. Although the County has suggested other community apartments as alternatives, nothing concrete has developed except vacant public housing units that have the same toxic conditions, such as mold and mildew.

Green said it doesn’t make sense. “…Why are we moving people around into temporary housing that’s uninhabitable, when you should be dealing first with the infrastructure, the foundational work, replacing old and rusted water pipes and new sewers.”

Morgan questions the County’s motivation for neglecting infrastructure repairs. “They’re remodeling the units but leaving the decayed infrastructure in place. I feel like they’re just setting this up for it to fail.”

“What slowed it down a little is that GGV is a historic preservation district, but I think what they’re striving for is demolition by neglect,” he said. “The neglect has always been on their part.”

Architect Ora Hatheway said her concern is about cutting corners. “You have to deal with the land issues. You have to deal with grading and drainage, and that’s being brushed under the rug.”

In an interview with KGO TV, Marin County Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters responded to some of these concerns. She said residents are guaranteed the right to return to their homes.

“This is a concern that we take seriously,” she said. “Every resident will move back into their own unit, and we’ve given this to them in writing. Before they leave their unit, we will sign a document together that guarantees their right to return.”

In response to residents who feel left out of the planning process, she said community input has focused on those affected by the first phase of the project. “So other residents may not have heard quite as much or felt like they had as much contact. But if there are residents who have concerns, we’re happy to hear from them. You can contact my office or the housing authority directly,” she said.

While County leaders may be giving some updates to some tenants, they are not sitting at the table with the Residents Council nor giving residents a voice in decision-making, said McLemore.

Without a voice in decisions, tenants are worried that Black people may be forced out of public housing, resulting in gentrification, she said in an interview with ABC 7. It’s still paternalistic, she said. “It’s still that ‘We know what’s best for you.’’’

Several years ago, the Residents Council proposed a land trust plan that would give tenants homeownership rights. Though the plan had broad support throughout the county, it was rejected by the Board of Supervisors

In the final analysis, Green said, for Marin City tenants the fight is not just for decent housing but to maintain their community with dignity under conditions of mutual respect.

“We’re talking about people who came here to work in the shipyards during World War II to bring about peace and safety to this country,” she said. “Look at the discrimination we’ve faced down through the years. Look at the life-span issue of Marin City folks – almost 20 years less than the rest of the County.”

“We want educational equity so our children will have decent schools. We need a land trust, property ownership, so we can have wealth creation. Marin City needs the same quality of life as other communities in Marin County.”