I oppose this measure because never in history has criminalizing the poor ever benefited anyone. I'd also like to add that the illegal dumping problem in Oakland is being attached to our homeless population which is disingenuous. The city needs to work on providing housing and resources for the homeless not punishment. I pay plenty in property taxes and I want to see my taxes used to help not harm.

STOP THE SWEEPS! As a D6 resident, I strongly oppose this measure to increase the suffering of our unhoused neighbors, friends, and family, instead of focusing the City’s energy and resources towards addressing the root causes of deep inequality. This is a distraction from solutions that will actually help Oakland communities thrive in safety and affordability in the long run, particularly from implementing Measure W funds that are already available. There’s no good future for any of us that is built on violently forcing the poor and working class further and further away from critical services, grocery stores, schools, and job opportunities. VOTE NO!

I support this action. I am a long time resident of Oakland and live in the Embarcadero area. This area is rampant with dumping, homeless encampments where they light fires and illegally inhabit land that does not belong to them, nor do they pay taxes. It is sad to see all the work all the cops are doing in the area to clean things up then days later right back to operating like a third world country. I agree that housing is needed but also many out there this is a choice. It' a choice to inhabit illegally, it's a choice to dump and trash surrounding areas and parks, and its been a choice by the city to do nothing to protect tax payers and people who actually lawfully live in this area. How many more resources, time and money is the city going to waste to do the same ring around the rosie on everything?

Our complex has had these people try to break in, steal packages, and assault people in the area. Yes, they are not well mentally but what about the people who pay taxes and live here. Don't we deserve to go walk down the street without being assaulted by them (and their pets who are offleash and have god know what diseases), don't we deserve to not have illegal drug/homeless activity in our neighborhood, don't streets deserve to be clean?

I support this - please clean up our area and please do not let people illegally inhabit, dumb, trash, light fires, and crime up our area.

I'm a D2 resident and I strongly oppose this action. We need to lead the way in providing shelters for our unhoused community members, not shoving them away. Sweeps are inherently violent, costly and needlessly shorten the lifespans. Let's create real solutions through providing affordable housing and shelters, not wasting tax dollars on a band-aid policy that keeps our people unhoused.

I’m a D2 resident and staunchly oppose the proposed action to adopt the 2025 EMP. The City and Councilmember Wang need to divert efforts to creating humane housing solutions for all. Existing conditions are unacceptable, but the 2025 EMP does not creat solutions and criminalizes people with no better options. Also, enacting this policy jeopardizes the City’s ability to access the County’s $1.4B in Measure W funds which would bring permanently affordable housing and services to the City.

Identify land for safe parking and housing interventions!

Work with community groups that have unhoused members!

Stop pretending like the county will pick up the slack if Oakland shirks it's responsibilities.

Stop fear mongering and asking why we can't push people out of town or out of sight the way wealthier cities do.

The status quo should upset you. The growing affordability crisis should scare you. AND you should do your job and build a better safety net for all poor and unhoused people in this city.

Vote no on EAP.

As a D2 resident it's clear to me that authorizing citation and towing of inhabited vehicles will directly harm unhoused residents who are already living in extreme precarity. Vehicle residents are often seniors, disabled people, and workers who have no other options. Towing someone’s only shelter and belongings is not a pathway to stability, it's a fast track to deeper homelessness.

The proposed policy also expands accelerated closure timelines, including for “sidewalk obstruction,” without ensuring truly accessible shelter options. Oakland’s current shelter capacity, accessibility, and safety are already insufficient. Offering a bed that is not ADA accessible, not trauma-informed, or not safe is not a meaningful offer.

We need policies rooted in housing, services, and harm reduction, not increased criminalization and displacement. Please retain the protections in the 2020 policy and reject provisions that punish people for being poor and unhoused. And please work with *ANY* of the people in this thread who are part of organizations that can introduce other more compassionate and effective measures to support our city and protect our unhoused neighbors.

I have worked with multiple community based groups like Wood St Commons, the Village, Homefulness, Roots Community Health, East Oakland Collective, the Brotherhood of Elders and architect Michael Pyatok on grassroots driven and evidence-based designs for emergency housing interventions. We have presented actual solutions which you can embrace as alternatives to draconian criminalization and dispossession.

Jonathan Russel of AC Health informed advocates that the county will not let Oakland make referrals to hundreds of treatment beds if the encampment team does not implement encampment resolution best practices. This means prioritizing connection to housing and services over criminalization and displacement. “Don’t just move people around, move them inside.” We can’t afford to lose access to these needed resources.

Identifying land for emergency housing 90 days after enforcement begins is totally ass-backward. If you give people a place to voluntarily locate to, you will not need these additional counter-productive enforcement measures.

Patricia Brooks and Council member Houston have been saying that the health and safety of the unhoused is the county’s responsibility. Neglecting our collective duty of care to the most marginalized and vulnerable is immoral and irresponsible. Stop passing the buck to the county, and do your part as a city by identifying land for county funded housing interventions so they can get off the ground.

We cannot exclude a minority population from California law. Laws are fair and just and created to create an even playing field for all of California residents to abide by.

The homeless are the gateway to any neighborhoods degradation, they litter, steal, create crime, deter business and erode the fundamentals of our society. They are unhoused so they have no ties to the community’s they leaching from, so have nothing to loose. By allowing them to live in mobile vehicles only enables them to continue their lawless activities. Ken Houston’s plan is what Oakland needs. We are not California’s shelter and dumping site for unwanted peoples.

By dismissing state and federal laws will open up Oakland to unnecessary future legal issues, something we don’t need in a time of budget failures. The unhoused need to be funneled into caregiving programs where they can be located and helped regularly. By allowing them to remain in their cars will allow them to continue migrating from one place to another, sustaining the current frustrating, money wasting issues we have with them now. They have to be grounded, given structure and proper support!

Do not adopt this legislation without giving oakland the teeth to force these people into proper care.

As a D2 resident and lifelong Oaklander, I oppose this cruel and ineffective strategy. This ordinance would waste our money, be needlessly cruel, and not solve any problems. There are already proven solutions to our homelessness crisis, so why the Council is even considering a strategy that would literally threaten our Measure W implementation funding is beyond me. Please vote NO on this cruel, stupid measure.

As a resident of D2, I oppose this resolution. This ordinance would cut into municipal services to criminalize unhoused Oaklanders and enable costly tows. It will worsen the budget crisis, funneling money to a corrupt tow yard, while failing to invest in real solutions. Oakland has only 1,300 shelter spots for 5,500 unhoused residents. Unless Oakland requires available accessible shelter prior to sweeps and helps move residents themselves, this will only worsen the crisis. Sweeps destroy homes, support networks, and livelihoods, making it harder for people to find permanent housing.

I SUPPORT the REPEAL of the 2020 Encampment Management Policy And ADOPTION of the 2025 Encampment Abatement Plan. . This EAP does NOT criminalize homelessness. Rather, it brings common sense solutions that the MAJORITY of very busy and hard working Oakland citizens want, in spite of a very vocal group MINORITY who who want to keep things as they are. Oakland has more shelters and services for the unhoused than any city in Alameda County; we crafted a new homeless strategy specifically for Measure W funds, using Mayor Lee’s political clout. We're top tier in the entire state when it comes to caring for the unhoused. Oakland voters reliably fund budgets for the unhoused. Vastly wealthier cities in Alameda County (budgets to city size) offer little to no services push unhoused folks out either by force or as a proxy to maintain housing values. Regardless our support for homelessness services and housing solutions, we are FED UP with Oakland shouldering the weight of the County's homelessness crisis. Why can't we keep streets and sidewalks clear and accessible? We are at our limit with encampments in parks; on our kids walk to school; with drug dealers in camps (shockingly defended by some homeless advocates) and the uncontrolled chaos in parks and public commons. Failure to adopt this resolution will leave Oakland as the ONLY city in the Bay Area to rationally deal with this crisis, causing a new influx of unhoused persons from other cities that have put a stop to abuses.

There are no people more vulnerable that people who literally have no way to shelter themselves. No one voluntarily chooses this lifestyle. The fact that this even exists in a society where people pay $7 for a coffee is inexcusable. The current Encampment Management Policy has many shortcomings but this new proposed policy does nothing to solve them and only serves to criminalize homelessness. Certainly housed residents have a legitimate desire for their neighborhoods to be free of non-traditional shelters, but people living in these circumstances need to be given options that preserve what little they have - their possessions, pets, and community - before their dwellings are destroyed.

Ken Houston's Encampment Abatement Policy is a deeply inhumane, flawed and ineffective policy that will result in deepening the crisis of homelessness in Oakland and Alameda County. This policy will lead to increased mortality and morbidity among Oaklanders experiencing homelessness. The main reason for this policy is for opportunistic and heartless City politicians, led by Ken Houston but certainly followed by other cowardly beholden council persons, to show their true colors to the Trump and Newsome Administrations and to "law and order" interests and to thus draw personal gain. We need to stand unified against this heartless and cruel policy which institutionalizes the brutal homeless sweeps that have devastated communities of people experiencing homelessness especially for the past year, but over the past many years in Oakland. Good-thinking people of Oakland need to soundly reject this policy and replace it with compassionate and humane policies that actually will improve everyone's lives, housed and homeless alike.

We need real solutions consistent with the Mayor’s strategy on homelessness.

The Mayor has created a new Office of Homelessness Solutions to implement a 5-point strategy to address homelessness. It does not include aggressively clearing encampments; it calls for deploying additional outreach workers “to connect people on the street to services, treatment, and documents needed for housing.” Those principles do not include sweeping encampments and disregarding the needs and dignity of unhoused people.

The City should focus on policies that create more safe parking sites and safe, structured spaces for unhoused people to live - with appropriate facilities and services - until we actually have sufficient permanent housing, including supportive housing, for all unhoused people.

The solution to homelessness is homes. It’s really that simple. Punitive enforcement actions without the guarantee of real referrals and alternatives is not a solution; it makes the problem worse.

The proposed EAP is not a solution; it only makes the problem worse.
-We understand that the current situation is not acceptable and that there are problems associated with some encampments. But this proposal is not a solution.
-This policy will just move people around from one location to another.
-The revised ordinance contains only vague language about making “reasonable efforts” to make shelter offers. This seems disingenuous particularly since the City has repeatedly acknowledged that there is not sufficient housing nor shelter to accommodate folks living on the street.
-Encampment “sweeps” or closures make it harder to assist unhoused people in securing housing or shelter, as it: disrupts their lives, causes them to lose important documents, damages trust, and makes it difficult for outreach workers to locate individuals they’ve been working with.
-How will this proposed “stepped up activity” be funded? The Oakland Department of Transportation has stated to the Council that it is already strained beyond capacity on towing vehicles. If this involves stepped up activity by Police, how will that be paid for?
-Enacting this policy could jeopardize the City’s ability to receive and use the County’s $1.4 billion in Measure W funds as City actions could be in conflict with Measure W policies.
-Measure W’s guiding principles call for “ensuring affected community members are at the table from planning through accountability”. They have had no role developing this policy.

I oppose this policy vehemently. It targets our most vulnerable population: over 72% are Black or Hispanic/Latino, and 80% have lived in Alameda county for over 10 years; over 60% are disabled and 25% elderly. Sweeps are eugenics and state violence disguised in policies such as this one, and this specific policy contradicts and undermines the work of the Mayor’s new Office of Homelessness Strategy by excluding it from the encampment team that it is supposed to oversee. There are other solutions that don't fall in line with Trump's agenda in criminalizing unhoused people and maintain Oakland's legacy of liberatory values and culture. There is an opportunity to adopt a public health and human rights approach that center the valuable expertise of people with lived experience in the design, implementation, and oversight of interim and permanent housing programs, as called for by the county Measure W framework. Additionally, this policy is being rushed to a vote after key council-members repeated violated transparency laws. I am a housed Oakland resident in District 2 and I specifically urge CM Charlene Wang and at-large CM Rowena Brown to uphold equity, democracy, and respect for all of our neighbor. There are real solutions other than the Encampment Abatement Policy that are less wasteful of taxpayer dollars and more impactful towards making lasting change.