7 22-0079 Subject: Staffing For Town For All Program Implementation
From: Transportation Department
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution Authorizing, Subject To Fund Availability, The Addition Of The Following Permanent Positions To Support The Implementation Of Major Projects:
A. 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Transportation Manager; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Senior Transportation Planner; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Transportation Planner III; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Transportation Planner II; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Supervising Civil Engineer; Up To 3.00 Full Time Equivalent Civil Engineer; Up To 3.00 Full Time Equivalent Assistant Engineer II; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Project Manager I; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Program Analyst III; 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Accountant III In The Department Of Transportation; And
B. 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Business Analyst III And 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Administrative Analyst II Positions Shared Between The Department Of Transportation And Oakland Public Works
[TITLE CHANGE]
This is just a way to take federal infrastructure funds that could be used for projects for all of Oakland and fund a project for a rich developer. Please vote NO.
Please vote against this deceptively named "town for all" resolution, which is really just another way to throw money at Mr. Fisher et al. Improve all of Oakland, please, not just an expensive development for the wealthy.
This TOWN for All grift is just a way to sneak extra infrastructure improvements for Howard Terminal past Oakland residents. Improving access to the waterfront is important, which is why it is so insulting that this "TOWN for All" nonsense would only make those improvements in the Chinatown-Jack London-West Oakland area — precisely the area that would be affected by Howard Terminal. The area where these improvements are proposed is already the area with the most access to the waterfront. If this Council is going to take equity considerations seriously, it must target waterfront access improvements in areas where the waterfront is least accessible (East Oakland and far-West Oakland), not approve another giveaway to the Fishers.
Where is the equity evaluation that shows this is the priority for our tax dollars? Why is it appropriate to push through this through before the mid-cycle budget review when the cost of this can be compared to all the needs? We keep hearing that positions are vacant because human resources doesn't have capacity to do the work they need to do to fill open positions. Why would we add new positions now? This will not be value added in the goal to better our failing score of 33.5/100 on the 2018 Oakland Equity Report. If we're going to add a new department let's add a Department of Environmental Equity. Please Vote No!
This is just a way to take federal infrastructure funds that could be used for projects for all of Oakland and fund a project for a rich developer. Please vote NO.
Please vote against this deceptively named "town for all" resolution, which is really just another way to throw money at Mr. Fisher et al. Improve all of Oakland, please, not just an expensive development for the wealthy.
This TOWN for All grift is just a way to sneak extra infrastructure improvements for Howard Terminal past Oakland residents. Improving access to the waterfront is important, which is why it is so insulting that this "TOWN for All" nonsense would only make those improvements in the Chinatown-Jack London-West Oakland area — precisely the area that would be affected by Howard Terminal. The area where these improvements are proposed is already the area with the most access to the waterfront. If this Council is going to take equity considerations seriously, it must target waterfront access improvements in areas where the waterfront is least accessible (East Oakland and far-West Oakland), not approve another giveaway to the Fishers.
Where is the equity evaluation that shows this is the priority for our tax dollars? Why is it appropriate to push through this through before the mid-cycle budget review when the cost of this can be compared to all the needs? We keep hearing that positions are vacant because human resources doesn't have capacity to do the work they need to do to fill open positions. Why would we add new positions now? This will not be value added in the goal to better our failing score of 33.5/100 on the 2018 Oakland Equity Report. If we're going to add a new department let's add a Department of Environmental Equity. Please Vote No!