14 20-0493 Subject: Charter Amendment To Remove Limit On Fines
From: President Pro Tem Kalb
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution On The City Council's Own Motion Submitting To The Voters For The November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election Proposed Amendment To City Charter Section 217 To Remove The $1,000 Limit On Fines For Ordinance Violations And Directing The City Clerk To Fix The Date For Submission Of Arguments And Provide For Notice And Publication, And Take Any And All Actions Necessary Under Law To Prepare For And Conduct The November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election
Please do not steal our property with heavy fines. Please don't send us to jail for stuff we can't control! My plumber lost his property after he "sold" it to a church. The church was cited exorbitant fines so they defaulted on the loan; the plumber tried to take back the property, but the city would not forgive the >$100,000 fines that were racked up by the church, and the plumber lost everything. Is that what this city council is trying to do now? Why don't we start by picking up the trash. Thank you for fixing some of the potholes. Please don't pass this Item 14. Norma Francisco, PhD, Owner Occupied Duplex. (Bas district)
I oppose any action on this issue until more specific information is developed and provided about what the fees and penalties will be, and until collaboration by stakeholders can occur and develop the overall goal of the fees and penalties, how the fees and penalties should be structured, what exemptions might be included, and where the funds raised from the fees and penalties should be allocated.
All just part of a much bigger puzzle. So wrong and just bad for the health of our city and residents. Vote no! Plz think about where we are now and where this could go- because IT WILL.
Very concerned about the heavy handed city approach with punitive fees and penalties -- the city needs to exercise fiscal responsibility and trim unnecessary spending, just like the rest of us when the economy is down. Why is the city still spending millions, entering into contracts without bidding? Millions in wasteful spending to special interest groups even now as Oakland is staring at a record $122 million budget shortfall and our dedicated city staff worry about their jobs!
This sounds like a punishment that escalates to draconian measures and leaps from handcuffs and a trip to the bank for funds to the city, to prison, penalties, and long-term punitive repercussions. I heartily oppose this amendment and propose that the council review it in less money-grubbing light. Make a fair assessment of fines. Don't be like the Sheriff of Nottingham! We might need a Robin Hood to protect us!
I oppose this in its current amorphous uncertainty. I do agree that fines need to be brought to current economic levels, but a master schedule of what the fines would be would be a whole lot more transparent. That has to be determined anyway, so fines can be applied in a just and equitable way. People would know what would replace the $1000 fine-fits-all. This is shrouded in mystery. We want to know what we are in for.
Please do not steal our property with heavy fines. Please don't send us to jail for stuff we can't control! My plumber lost his property after he "sold" it to a church. The church was cited exorbitant fines so they defaulted on the loan; the plumber tried to take back the property, but the city would not forgive the >$100,000 fines that were racked up by the church, and the plumber lost everything. Is that what this city council is trying to do now? Why don't we start by picking up the trash. Thank you for fixing some of the potholes. Please don't pass this Item 14. Norma Francisco, PhD, Owner Occupied Duplex. (Bas district)
I oppose any action on this issue until more specific information is developed and provided about what the fees and penalties will be, and until collaboration by stakeholders can occur and develop the overall goal of the fees and penalties, how the fees and penalties should be structured, what exemptions might be included, and where the funds raised from the fees and penalties should be allocated.
All just part of a much bigger puzzle. So wrong and just bad for the health of our city and residents. Vote no! Plz think about where we are now and where this could go- because IT WILL.
Very concerned about the heavy handed city approach with punitive fees and penalties -- the city needs to exercise fiscal responsibility and trim unnecessary spending, just like the rest of us when the economy is down. Why is the city still spending millions, entering into contracts without bidding? Millions in wasteful spending to special interest groups even now as Oakland is staring at a record $122 million budget shortfall and our dedicated city staff worry about their jobs!
This sounds like a punishment that escalates to draconian measures and leaps from handcuffs and a trip to the bank for funds to the city, to prison, penalties, and long-term punitive repercussions. I heartily oppose this amendment and propose that the council review it in less money-grubbing light. Make a fair assessment of fines. Don't be like the Sheriff of Nottingham! We might need a Robin Hood to protect us!
I oppose this in its current amorphous uncertainty. I do agree that fines need to be brought to current economic levels, but a master schedule of what the fines would be would be a whole lot more transparent. That has to be determined anyway, so fines can be applied in a just and equitable way. People would know what would replace the $1000 fine-fits-all. This is shrouded in mystery. We want to know what we are in for.