|
|
In our monthly newsletter, we provide important information about the work of the Oakland City Attorney's Office, plus updates on legal issues and matters that impact Oakland residents and businesses.
This month: The City Council passes legislation co-sponsored by the City Attorney and Councilmember Kalb establishing comprehensive ethics law for appointed and elected City officials; City Council approves high-stakes negotiation policy co-sponsored by City Attorney and Councilmember Schaaf; City Attorney holds roundtable discussion of government data and privacy rights in the digital age; updates on significant legal matters; and the City Attorney in the community.
As always, I look forward to your comments, thoughts and questions about how we are conducting the City's business.
Very truly yours,
Barbara J. Parker
Oakland City Attorney
|
|
|
City Council to Vote on Comprehensive Ethics Reform Law
Government Ethics Act will empower Oakland's Public Ethics Commission to enforce high ethical standards for appointed and elected officials and candidates
On Tuesday, December 9, the Oakland City Council will vote on a comprehensive ethics reform ordinance that I and City Councilmember Dan Kalb co-sponsored.
The Government Ethics Act is a companion to the Charter amendment (Measure CC) that the Oakland electorate passed in November. Seventy-four percent (74%) of the voters cast ballots for Measure CC, which increases the Oakland Public Ethics Commission's authority and independence and provides funding for six staff to perform the Commission's duties.
The Act will provide a clear and comprehensive framework of laws to ensure that Oakland's government operates with integrity, that appointed and elected officials and candidates for elected offices make decisions in the best interests of the people of Oakland and that the Public Ethics Commission has the power to effectively and fairly enforce the law.
Among other things, the Act establishes rules regarding gifts to public officials that are stricter than state law, restricts former City employees' ability to lobby on behalf of or accept employment with potential City contractors (so-called "revolving door" employment) and bans City contracts with high-level City officials.
The Act also incorporates existing state and local laws, including restrictions on nepotism and the City Charter's prohibition on interference in administrative affairs by City Councilmembers.
Oakland residents overwhelmingly voted for higher ethical standards and enforcement of laws against corruption, conflicts of interest and other ethical violations. The Charter amendment and the passage of the Government Ethics Ordinance will fulfill one of my and Councilmember Kalb's commitments to the people of Oakland to ensure integrity, transparency, honesty and fairness in City government.
Oakland's Public Ethics Commission was formed in 1996. Since that time, the commission has had minimal staffing. Currently, the PEC has two staff members, and a limited authority to investigate potential ethics violations.
The Act is the result of months of research, drafting and collaboration by the Public Ethics Commission, Councilmember Kalb's Office and my Office. The City Council unanimously voted to adopt the Act on November 18. Because the Act is a City ordinance, the Council must vote on a "second reading" of the legislation on December 9 to pass the law.
More information
|
|
New Policy to Improve Transparency & Accountability in Major Negotiations & Transactions
In November, the City Council adopted a policy to improve reporting and accountability of City Councilmembers who represent the Council on boards, commissions and joint powers authorities ("JPAs"). For example, the policy provides greater specificity regarding the obligations and timing of Council briefings regarding high-stakes negotiations, such as the negotiations for a new license agreement with the Oakland A's at the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum which concluded this year.
City Councilmember Libby Schaaf and I co-sponsored this policy to ensure that the City Council has timely information to evaluate and provide meaningful input and direction regarding high-stakes negotiations and transactions before the boards, agencies or joint powers authorities take action.
The City Council has representatives on a number of regional bodies and joint powers authorities, such as the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum JPA, the Association of Bay Area Governments and the Alameda County Transportation Commission.
The new policy will ensure adequate training for Councilmembers who represent the Council on boards, commissions and joint powers authorities and will require that those representatives advise the Council in a consistent and timely way of major deals or other issues that have a significant economic or policy impact on the City. The policy also requires that the City Administrator's staff attend meetings and brief the Council on relevant information about negotiations.
This policy's clear procedure for informing the City Council in a timely way of the commencement of major negotiations and transactions -- and for providing the Council with updates regarding developments and the progress of major negotiations -- will significantly improve the City's position in high-stakes negotiations in the future.
More information |
|
City Attorney Hosts Roundtable to Discuss Balancing Government Transparency & Privacy Rights
Nationally Recognized Privacy Experts Come to Oakland City Hall for Government Data Privacy Roundtable
In November, I hosted a roundtable to begin a discussion about privacy rights in the digital age, and how they intersect and potentially conflict with government agencies' collection and use of data.
In the normal course of business, government agencies collect vast amounts of data about residents and businesses. The City of Oakland and other agencies must be thoughtful and ethical stewards of that information, simultaneously protecting the privacy rights of citizens and providing open and transparent access to government information.
Ultimately, my goal is to develop a policy that balances government transparency and personal privacy rights, and to coordinate region-wide, state-wide and nation-wide policies and standards.
To kick start the process, my Office partnered with Startup Policy Lab to convene the roundtable and moderate the discussion. Experts from nonprofits, government agencies, think tanks and other organizations participated in the thought-provoking and fascinating discussion of these issues at Oakland City Hall on November 12.
Participants in the roundtable discussion included Charles Belle, founder of Startup Policy Lab and the co-host of the event; Chris Vein, Chief Innovation Officer for Global ICT Development at the World Bank; Joanne McNabb from the California Attorney General's Office; Emily Shaw, National Policy Manager at the Sunlight Foundation; Joy Bonaguro, Chief Data Officer for the City of San Francisco; Bryan Sastokas, Chief Information Officer for the City of Oakland; Mayor-Elect Libby Schaaf; Chris Hoofnagle, Lecturer in Residence at Berkeley Law; Monica Winghart from the Richardson Oliver Law Group; Brian Hofer from the Oakland Privacy Working Group; and several members of my Office and of the Startup Policy Lab who contributed to the conversation.
The discussion focused on Oakland's increasing use of data to drive decision making, and how our use and management of data raises privacy concerns. I envision this roundtable as the first in a series of discussions. Our goal is to use Oakland as a real world model to identify critical issues, and to then leverage those insights as a model for other cities, culminating in a policy and standards that will guide Oakland and other cities.
The roundtable was the brainchild of Senior Deputy City Attorney Kiran Jain (sitting to my left in the photo below). I want to recognize Kiran for her leadership on this issue.
Government Data Privacy Roundtable Nov. 12
|
|
City Attorney in the Community
City Attorney Presents Proclamation at The Whispers Paramount Theatre Concert Declaring November 29, 2014 The Whispers Day
On Saturday, November 29, I attended The Whispers' sold-out concert at Oakland's historic landmark Paramount Theatre commemorating the group's 50th anniversary (see photo). 
I was honored to present to The Whispers the City Council's Resolution and Proclamation commemorating the group's 50th anniversary, and honoring and thanking The Whispers for providing half a century of timeless, beautiful, melodic ballads and foot-patting dance music with silky voices and harmony that are national treasures.
In November the City Council unanimously passed the Resolution and Proclamation that I co-sponsored with City Council President Pat Kernighan.
The Council's resolution declares Saturday, November 29, 2014 The Whispers Day in the City of Oakland. Ray Leon of City Councilmember Larry Reid's Office joined me in making the presentation.
It is rare for anyone in the music industry, or for that matter any industry, to endure, let alone excel for 50 years as have The Whispers. This milestone deserves recognition. For those of us of a certain vintage, The Whispers provided the sound track for our lives, our romances, our loves, triumphs, heartbreaks and losses.
More information
|
|
|
|
Updates on Legal Cases & Matters
Court dismisses case alleging improper arrest (US District Court Case No. 13-cv-05162-VC)
On November 5, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed a civil rights lawsuit filed by a plaintiff who was arrested after an altercation with security guards at a West Oakland grocery store.
The security guards told responding police officers that the plaintiff had attempted to use a counterfeit $100 bill, that he was intoxicated and hostile, and that he had shoved one of the guards.
The guards placed Plaintiff under citizen's arrest and called the Oakland Police Department. The responding officers detained Plaintiff, investigated, and then cited Plaintiff. Plaintiff sued claiming that he was the victim and that the officers improperly detained, arrested and cited him. The City filed a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that the officers responded appropriately. The Court agreed and dismissed the case.
|
|
|
|
