ACT
Alameda
Citizens
Task
Force
Vigilance,
Truth,
Civility
Dear
Mayor
Ashcraft,
Vice
Mayor
Vella
and
Council
Members
Knox-White,
Herrera
Spencer
and
Daysog:
Upon
reviewing
Item
5E
it
is
our
suggestion
that
this
matter
belongs
on
the
regular
agenda
rather
than
on
the
consent
agenda.
This
suggestion
is
based
on
the
following:
The
contract
with
SEED
which
is
under
consideration
is
projected
to
cost
the
citizens
of
Alameda
upwards
of
a
quarter
of
a
million
dollars.
And
if
for
this
reason
alone,
we
believe
that
the
contract
warrants
public
discussion
by
means
of
the
regular
agenda.
The
contracting
agency
apparently
intends
to
carry
out
a
number
of
surveys,
however,
it
isn’t
clear
to
what
extent
the
consultant
might
be
willing
to
first
review,
and
possibly
incorporate,
equity
studies
already
carried
out
by
various
City
agencies
or
departments
such
as
the
AUSD
and
Housing
Authority.
This
alone
could
possibly
save
time
and
expense
for
the
project.
The
consultant
intends
to
create,
or
have
the
City
Leaders
create
an
Equity
Working
Group
(EWG).
And
while
this
may
be
an
efficient
organization
to
effect
the
City’s
goals,
there
is
no
indication
that
the
deliberations
of
the
Group
will
be
held
in
view
of
the
public.
Nor
is
there
any
indication
that
members
of
the
public
will
be
permitted
to
participate
in
the
Group’s
deliberations
by
asking
clarifying
questions
and/or
making
constructive
suggestions.
This
latter
point
is
especially
significant
as
we
do
not
believe
that
being
privy
to
occasional
updates
and
reports
and
observing
occasional
public
presentations
are
sufficient
to
constitute
meaningful
public
participation.
Following
on
the
concept
of
public
participation,
the
consultant
has
made
no
reference
to
having
the
minutes
of
the
various
meetings,
the
documents
considered
by
the
Group,
or
the
work
product
of
the
consultant
and
the
Group.
We
are
also
concerned
that
the
concept
of
EQUITY
is
being
applied
to
only
select
groups
of
citizens
despite
the
consultant
having
indicated
in
his
Agreement
document
that:
“…
solely
targeted
strategies
,
such
as
racial
equity
,
focus
on
supporting
individuals
while
failing
to
transform
systems;
such
strategies
are
sometimes
criticized
for
unfairly
helping
one
group
over
another
and
can
be
viewed
as
preferential,
thus
seeding
hostility
and
resentment.”
In
this
regard,
we
believe
that
in
addition
to
the
groups
of
citizens
enumerated
by
the
consultant,
other
categories
such
as
ethnicity,
religion,
nationality
of
origin,
and
other
defined
categories
or
groups
should
be
specifically
included
in
any
agreement
signed
by
the
City.
In
summary,
we
propose
that:
1)
It
would
be
preferable
and
more
appropriate
for
Item
5E
to
be
discussed
as
part
of
the
Regular
Agenda
rather
than
the
Consent
Agenda.
2)
All
meetings
and
deliberations
held
by
any/all
groups
constituted
under
the
terms
of
the
Agreement
shall
be
open
to
the
public,
the
members
of
which
shall
be
afforded
the
opportunity
ask
clarifying
questions
and
offer
constructive
suggestions
which
shall
be
acknowledged
and
considered
by
the
group
conducting
the
meeting.
3)
In
addition
to
the
categories
or
groups
of
citizens
whose
issues
and
concerns
have
been
specifically
identified
by
the
consultant
as
deserving
of
special
attention
by
the
EWG,
we
propose
that
the
public
be
offered
the
opportunity
to
submit
additional
categories
for
inclusion.
Such
additional
categories
might
include
ethnicity,
religion,
and
nationality
of
origin
among
the
many
categories
and
groups
of
individuals
that
can
be
found
in
Alameda.
4)
Given
that
the
timeline
proposed
by
the
consultant
indicates
that
meetings
with
City
Executive
Team
and
formation
of
a
project
team
are
to
take
place
in
December
and
January
we
ask
that
the
City
Manager
clarify
whether
Staff
has
been
meeting
with
the
consultant
and
work
has
started
on
creation
of
a
project
team
already
and
whether
a
contract
has
already
been
signed
by
the
City.
We
want
to
stress
that
while
we
have
reservations
concerning
the
ability
of
a
group
of
6 or
even
60 being
able
to
equitably
establish
fair
and
evenhanded
rules
for
procedures
and
policies
impacting
the
70,000
plus
residents
of
Alameda
absent
open
and
robust
participation
of
the
entire
community
,
the
intention
of
this
communication
is
to
encourage
and
facilitate
the
creation
of
an
optimally
inclusive
and
open
process
for
the
purpose
of
optimizing
equity
for
all
of
Alameda’s
citizens
.
Sincerely,
Board
of
Directors
Alameda
Citizens
Task
Force