Attachment A: City of Oakland Data and Information
Oakland Measure A1 (MA1): Demographics of Workforce and Local/Small Local Businesses Table 1. City of Oakland Workers
Table 2. All Workers
Project Male % Female % African-
American
% Asian % Caucasian % Hispanic % Native
American
% Not-Specified/
Other
%
7th & Campbell 223 96% 9 4% 25 11% 7 3% 10 4% 120 52% 0 0% 70 30% Ancora Place 215 95% 12 5% 20 9% 1 0% 4 2% 133 59% 0 0% 69 30% Aurora Apartments (aka
MacArthur Apartments) 168 94% 11 6% 18 10% 2 1% 10 6% 121 68% 0 0% 28 16% Camino 23 150 96% 6 4% 20 13% 5 3% 6 4% 93 60% 1 1% 31 20% Casa Arabella 216 93% 16 7% 24 10% 17 7% 25 11% 146 63% 0 0% 20 9% Coliseum Connections 8 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 63% 0 0% 0 0% 3 38% Coliseum Place 175 95% 9 5% 8 4% 2 1% 26 14% 104 57% 0 0% 44 24% Estrella Vista - 3706 San Pablo,
Olympia Place 220 96% 10 4% 27 12% 5 2% 12 5% 157 68% 0 0% 29 13% Pablo) 177 97% 5 3% 14 8% 3 2% 19 10% 112 62% 0 0% 34 19% Nova Apartments (aka Oak Hill) 180 94% 11 6% 15 8% 2 1% 11 6% 124 65% 1 1% 38 20% Redwood Hill Townhomes 120 98% 2 2% 23 19% 7 6% 8 7% 76 62% 0 0% 8 7% West Grand & Brush 107 97% 3 3% 12 11% 6 5% 11 10% 63 57% 3 3% 15 14% Brooklyn Basin: Project 3 (Foon
Lok West) 273 96% 12 4% 31 11% 6 2% 25 9% 158 55% 0 0% 65 23% Fruitvale Transit Village II-B
(Casa Suenos) 276 95% 16 5% 40 14% 8 3% 18 6% 173 59% 0 0% 53 18% Total 2,508 95% 122 5% 277 11% 71 3% 190 7% 1,580 60% 5 0% 507 19% Under Construction
Completed Projects
Projects with a PLA
Project Male % Female % African-
American
% Asian % Caucasian % Hispanic % Native
American
% Not-Specified/
Other
%
7th & Campbell 1,185 98% 22 2% 39 3% 48 4% 108 9% 742 61% 2 0% 268 22% Ancora Place 1,091 98% 26 2% 30 3% 18 2% 110 10% 631 56% 3 0% 325 29% Aurora Apartments (aka
MacArthur Apartments) 849 97% 23 3% 32 4% 24 3% 116 13% 459 53% 0 0% 241 28% Camino 23 776 99% 10 1% 29 4% 24 3% 101 13% 374 48% 1 0% 257 33% Casa Arabella 805 96% 31 4% 35 4% 23 3% 186 22% 467 56% 0 0% 125 15% Coliseum Connections 65 97% 2 3% 1 1% 0 0% 16 24% 34 51% 1 1% 15 22% Coliseum Place 989 98% 18 2% 25 2% 17 2% 203 20% 557 55% 4 0% 201 20% Estrella Vista - 3706 San Pablo,
Olympia Place 1,321 99% 19 1% 49 4% 29 2% 178 13% 766 57% 3 0% 313 23% Monarch Homes (aka 3268 San
Pablo) 792 99% 10 1% 26 3% 18 2% 152 19% 446 56% 1 0% 159 20% Nova Apartments (aka Oak Hill) 816 98% 19 2% 24 3% 24 3% 105 13% 459 55% 1 0% 222 27% Redwood Hill Townhomes 664 99% 6 1% 41 6% 26 4% 94 14% 416 62% 1 0% 92 14% West Grand & Brush 487 99% 6 1% 18 4% 18 4% 82 17% 260 53% 3 1% 112 23% Brooklyn Basin: Project 3 (Foon
Lok West) 1,281 98% 20 2% 49 4% 51 4% 255 20% 676 52% 7 1% 263 20% Fruitvale Transit Village II-B
(Casa Suenos) 1,422 98% 31 2% 51 4% 71 5% 179 12% 783 54% 3 0% 366 25% Total 12,543 98% 243 2% 449 4% 391 3% 1,885 15% 7,070 55% 30 0% 2,959 23% Under Construction
Projects with a PLA
Table 3. Employee and Apprentice Hours
Project Total Employee
Hours
Oakland
Hours % Oakland Apprentice
Hours %
7th & Campbell 174,309.31 74,315.78 43% 25,044.24 14% Ancora Place 154,792.85 52,249.43 34% 16,498.88 11% Aurora Apartments (aka MacArthur Apartments) 90,811.90 38,146.77 42% 13,705.25 15% Camino 23 59,130.06 19,819.00 34% 7,191.20 12% Casa Arabella 176,017.58 66,875.83 38% 18,016.75 10% Coliseum Connections 2,340.61 241.95 10% - 0% Coliseum Place 133,298.35 47,228.92 35% 11,979.03 9% Estrella Vista - 3706 San Pablo, Olympia Place 218,491.14 71,509.22 33% 18,919.00 9% Monarch Homes (aka 3268 San Pablo) 94,241.15 34,172.40 36% 9,984.40 11% Nova Apartments (aka Oak Hill) 81,264.19 31,201.28 38% 10,643.02 13% Redwood Hill Townhomes 78,328.28 25,255.79 32% 10,475.75 13% West Grand & Brush 48,659.89 22,118.45 45% 5,126.50 11% Brooklyn Basin: Project 3 (Foon Lok West) 257,789.77 122,179.81 47% 35,951.05 14% Fruitvale Transit Village II-B (Casa Suenos) 294,751.38 117,726.73 40% 45,668.75 15% Total 1,864,226.46 723,041.36 39% 229,203.82 12% Completed Projects
Under Construction
Projects with a PLA
Table 4. Proposed Contracts by Completion Status, Use of PLA, and Contractors’ Race and Ethnicity
Project Type and Name
Hispanic African
American
Asian/Pacific
Islander
Completed Projects
7th & Campbell
Number of Contracts 10 1 9 3 44 57
Contract Amount (in $) $7,490,309 $506,260 $6,984,049 $4,399,445 $30,865,533 $42,755,287 Percent of Total Amount 17.5% 1.2% 16.3% 0.0% 10.3% 72.2% 100.0% Ancora Place
Number of Contracts 9 4 5 12 30 51
Contract Amount (in $) $4,510,152 $1,559,948 $2,950,204 $27,018,451 $19,217,758 $50,746,361 Percent of Total Amount 8.9% 3.1% 5.8% 0.0% 53.2% 37.9% 100.0% Aurora Apartments (aka MacArthur Apartments)
Number of Contracts 8 2 6 4 33 45
Contract Amount (in $) $2,307,663 $659,000 $1,648,663 $6,038,574 $13,841,756 $22,187,993 Percent of Total Amount 10.4% 3.0% 7.4% 0.0% 27.2% 62.4% 100.0% Camino 23
Number of Contracts 7 3 4 5 37 49
Contract Amount (in $) $2,323,730 $1,595,845 $727,885 $5,711,209 $7,594,092 $15,629,031 Percent of Total Amount 14.9% 10.2% 4.7% 0.0% 36.5% 48.6% 100.0% Casa Arabella
Number of Contracts 6 3 3 5 23 34
Contract Amount (in $) $5,444,243 $4,906,073 $538,170 $14,827,463 $19,315,834 $39,587,540 Percent of Total Amount 13.8% 12.4% 1.4% 0.0% 37.5% 48.8% 100.0% Coliseum Place
Number of Contracts 3 2 1 4 37 44
Contract Amount (in $) $2,237,003 $1,689,760 $547,243 $13,575,280 $18,592,685 $34,404,968 Percent of Total Amount 6.5% 4.9% 1.6% 0.0% 39.5% 54.0% 100.0% Estrella Vista (3706 San Pablo, Olympia Place)
Number of Contracts 4 1 2 1 7 30 41
Contract Amount (in $) $6,139,502 $5,121,772 $698,582 $319,148 $20,157,018 $19,826,781 $46,123,300 Percent of Total Amount 13.3% 11.1% 1.5% 0.7% 43.7% 43.0% 100.0% Monarch Homes (3268 San Pablo)
Number of Contracts 8 4 4 8 28 44
Contract Amount (in $) $4,772,539 $2,198,317 $2,574,222 $13,688,003 $5,151,189 $23,611,731 Percent of Total Amount 20.2% 9.3% 10.9% 0.0% 58.0% 21.8% 100.0% Nova Apartments (aka Oak Hill)
Number of Contracts 13 3 10 5 30 48
Contract Amount (in $) $2,595,305 $796,500 $1,798,805 $7,452,798 $14,462,019 $24,510,122 Percent of Total Amount 10.6% 3.2% 7.3% 0.0% 30.4% 59.0% 100.0% Redwood Hill Townhomes
Number of Contracts 1 1 5 23 29
Contract Amount (in $) $131,820 $131,820 $9,918,498 $4,949,682 $15,000,000 Percent of Total Amount 0.9% 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 66.1% 33.0% 100.0% Completed Projects: Number of Contracts 69 24 44 1 58 315 442 Completed Projects: Contract Amount (in $) $37,952,266 $19,165,295 $18,467,823 $319,148 $122,786,739 $153,817,328 $314,556,333 Completed Projects Percent of Amounts 12.1% 6.1% 5.9% 0.1% 39.0% 48.9% 100.0% Under Construction
West Grand & Brush
Number of Contracts 3 2 1 3 42 48
Contract Amount (in $) $859,134 $381,294 $477,840 $11,485,935 $23,433,843 $35,778,912 Percent of Total Amount 2.4% 1.1% 1.3% 0.0% 32.1% 65.5% 100.0% Under Construction: Number of Contracts 3 2 1 3 42 48
Under Construction: Contract Amount (in $) $859,134 $381,294 $477,840 $11,485,935 $23,433,843 $35,778,912 Under Construction: Percent of Amounts 2.4% 1.1% 1.3% 0.0% 32.1% 65.5% 100.0% Projects with a PLA
Brooklyn Basin: Project 3 (Foon Lok West)
Number of Contracts 5 3 2 8 47 60
Contract Amount (in $) $8,412,788 $6,801,162 $1,611,626 $31,112,024 $34,380,256 $73,905,068 Percent of Total Amount 11.4% 9.2% 2.2% 0.0% 42.1% 46.5% 100.0% Fruitvale Transit Village II-B (Casa Suenos)
Number of Contracts 1 1 5 39 45
Contract Amount (in $) $151,000 $151,000 $35,780,955 $58,505,453 $94,437,408 Percent of Total Amount 0.2% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 37.9% 62.0% 100.0% Projects with a PLA: Number of Contracts 6 3 3 13 86 105 Projects with a PLA: Contract Amount (in $) $8,563,788 $6,801,162 $1,762,626 $66,892,979 $92,885,709 $168,342,476 Projects with a PLA: Percent of Amounts 5.1% 4.0% 1.0% 0.0% 39.7% 55.2% 100.0% Total Number of Contracts 78 29 48 1 74 443 595
Total of All Contract Amounts $47,375,188 $26,347,751 $20,708,289 $319,148 $201,165,653 $270,136,880 $518,677,721 Percent of All Contract Amounts 9.1% 5.1% 4.0% 0.1% 38.8% 52.1% 100.0% BIPOC
BIPOC Total White Not Specified Total
Local and Small Local Business Enterprise (L/SLBE) Participation Data Available for Reporting
For this report, DWES visually inspected the files available to check the compliance measures previously reported, calculate the measures from the files available, and create a dataset that reported the demographic information about the contractors.
At the time of these 14 projects, DWES staff were not storing their files centrally in a shared drive or cloud storage location and could not locate the files for one project. Contractors typically send DWES email attachments. DWES Compliance Officers create Excel worksheets and write memoranda in Word to provide the contractor and city departments with their determinations.
Projects typically have dozens of contractors.
The amounts proposed for each contractors at the time of the compliance analysis, the amounts actually paid to each by the end of the contract, and the demographics of the contractors are not logged in a accessible data format.
Limitations of the Data Available
All the 13 projects for which DWES had files either had an issue of incomplete files or inaccurately calculated measures. The 14 projects in this report all proceeded to construction.
This means they passed the compliance analysis for the minimum required level of Local and Small Local Business participation. The minimum is typically 50% local and small local business participation (see definitions for formulas).
Incomplete Files: Seven projects did not have a signed Availability Analyses or Compliance Analysis in their file. While the compliance measure of “credited” participation (see definitions below) can be calculated from Excel worksheets that were available, the assessment of whether the minimum was met cannot be recreated without the signed memoranda, which would indicate whether the Availability Analysis found that a reduced minimum should apply.
In calculating the measures for two of the projects with incomplete files, the credited participation was less than 50%. This may mean the project should have had a determination of non-compliance or that the project passed compliance by having received a reduced minimum participation requirement.
To address the issue of incomplete files, DWES began tracking the analyses in a log and centralizing the storage of files in 2023. Inconsistent application of program Inaccurate Calculations: Six projects had Compliance Memoranda with inaccurate calculations.
The revised measures reported here are lower but still above the required minimum. The projects would still pass the compliance analysis, if correctly calculated at the time.
To address the issues of errors in calculation, DWES has been working on revising the Schedule R and staff templates for calculating compliance. The department will also explore developing electronic filing with its current software vendors.
Definitions
The attached table summarizes the information DWES found in the compliance analysis files.
Below are definitions of the fields (columns) used to describe the projects.
Date of Analysis
• “Calculated 7/15/2024”: DWES was unable to find the compliance analysis anc calculated the measures for compliance and the L/SLBE participation. • “Revised 7/15/2024”: DWES re-calculated the “credited” and “participation” measures for six (6) projects because the figures originally calculated were miscalculated.
Original Bid Amount (non-specialty): This is the total proposed amount of non-specialty work.
It is the denominator for the percentages for compliance and participation.
Minimum Requirements for Local Participation: “No Memo” is noted when staff were unable to find the Compliance Memo or the Availability Analysis memo. When there is no memo, DWES cannot confirm the project met the minimum participation after calculating the measures.
The minimum requirement is that 50% of the proposed contract dollars go to certified Local Business Enterprises (LBE). Small Local Business Enterprises (SLBE), and Very Small Local Business Enterprises (VSLBE). If the Availability Analysis found fewer than three (3) firms available, the minimum may be reduced to a percentage between 0% and 50%. If one firm is certified and available, the minimum is at least 20%.
The 50% minimum also requires that certified Small Local Business Enterprises (SLBE) dollars account for at least 25% of the proposed contract. This means that Certified Local Business Enterprises (LBE) counts for up to a maximum of 25%. Very Small Local Businesses (VSLBE) count for twice their actual percentage.
Credited L/SLBE is the percentage that determines whether the project passed the compliance analysis by meeting or exceeding the minimum required. It is calculated as follows:
• Credited = Maximum 25% for LBE + SLBE + (2x VSLBE) + Mentor-Protégé credit (if any).
• Mentor-Protégé is an addition to the credited participation for formal agreements. This interpretation of adding to the credited participation is under review.
L/SLBE Participation is the percentage of the original, non-specialty bid amount that was proposed to be paid to local, small local, and very small local businesses. It is the sum of the three types with no adjustments (e.g. doubling the VSLBE or adding extra credit for Mentor- Protégé).
• L/SLBE Participation = LBE + SLBE + VSLBE.
Minority-Owned Business Enterprise (MBE) and Woman-Owned Business Enterprise (WBE): Prime or general contractors submit “Schedule R” with a list of subcontractors and indicate the self-reported race and ethnicity of the owners, MBE, and WBE status. Since the information is optional, DWES does not reject the proposal for discrepancies between a racial and ethnic category checked for a subcontractor and an inconsistent choice of checking or not checking MBE.
Table 5. Compliance with Local/Small Local Business Participation by Project Completed Projects (No PLA)
Project
Name
Date of
Analysis
Prime
Contractor
Original Bid
Amount
(non-
specialty)
Minimum
Required
Credited
L/SLBE
L/SLBE
Participation
Mentor
Protege
MBE
(% of
dollars)
WBE
(% of
dollars
Notes
7th &
Campbell
*Calculated
7/15/24
Baines-
Nibbi JV
$42,755,288
33% 35.62% 27.94%
LBE: 2.51%
SLBE: 22.75%
VSLBE: 2.68%
5% 17.52% 3.43% *Calculated 7/15/24 from Signed
Excel worksheets (9/20/22).
Unsigned Availability Analysis
(12/10/21) set minimum at 33%.
No Compliance Memo found.
Ancora
Place
8/10/2022
*Revised
7/15/24
Cahill $50,746,361
41% 60.43%*
(Revised:
45.87%)
55.20%*
(Revised:
52.92%)
LBE: 44.33%
SLBE: 6.31%
VSBLE: 2.28%
10% 6.20%*
(Revised:
8.89%)
2.35% * Revised 7/15/24 recalculated
Compliance Memo (8/10/22).
*Credited: The VSLBE should be
doubled, not doubled twice. MP
should not be doubled.
*Total 55.20% should count
VSLBE once not twice.
Aurora
Apartments
(aka
MacArthur
Apartments
)
2/3/2020
*Revised
7/15/24*
Cahill $22,187,993 50% 51.47%*
(Revised:
50.23%)
35.08%*
(Revised:
38.28%)
LBE: 26.24%
SLBE: 8.85%
VSLBE: 3.19%
10% 9.46%*
(Revised:
10.40%)
0.03% *Revised 7/15/24 recalculated
Compliance Memo (2/3/20).
*LBE Max is 25%. Credited
51.47% should not count the full
26.24% LBE.
*Participation did not include
VSLBE.
Camino 23 *Calculated
7/15/24
Cahill $15,629,031 *No
Memos
43.19%
49.99%
LBE: 37.00%
SLBE: 12.80%
VSLBE: 0.19%
NA 14.87% 0.05% *Calculated 7/15/24 from
Unsigned Compliance Worksheet
9/24/18. No Compliance Memo
found.
Project
Name
Date of
Analysis
Prime
Contractor
Original Bid
Amount
(non-
specialty)
Minimum
Required
Credited
L/SLBE
L/SLBE
Participation
Mentor
Protege
MBE
(% of
dollars)
WBE
(% of
dollars
Notes
Casa
Arabella
(Fruitvale
Transit
Village IIA)
12/14/2017
*Revised
7/15/24
Branagh,
Inc.
$39,587,540 50% 52.51%*
(Revised:
50.80%)
51.21%
LBE: 26.71%
SLBE: 23.20%
VSLBE: 1.30%
NA 13.76%
0% *Revised 7/15/24 recalculated the
Compliance Memo (12/14/17).
*LBE Max is 25%. Credited
52.51% should not count the full
26.71% LBE.
Coliseum
Place
1/21/2020
*Revised
7/15/24
Nibbi $34,404,968 50% 56.94%*
(Revised:
51.99%)
54.84%*
(Revised:
44.84%)
LBE: 29.95%
SLBE: 12.79%
VSLBE:2.10%
10% 8.76%*
(Revised:
6.50%)
0%
*Revised 7/15/24 recalculated
Compliance Memo (1/21/20).
*LBE Max is 25%: Credited
56.94% should not count the full
29.95% LBE.
*Total L/SLBE should not count
the MP bonus.
Estrella
Vista
(3706 San
Pablo,
Olympia
Place)
*Calculated
7/15/24
J.H.
Fitzmaurice
$46,123,300 *No
Memos
53.26% 59.58%
LBE: 35.46%
SLBE: 19.98%
VSLBE: 4.14%
NA 13.31%
0% * Calculated 7/15/24 from
Unsigned Excel worksheet
6/25/20.
Monarch
Homes
(3268 San
Pablo)
*Calculated
7/15/24
Nibbi $23,611,731 *No Memo 50.03% 50.52%
LBE: 29.48%
SLBE: 17.06%
VSLBE: 3.98%
NA 20.21%
0%
*Calculated 7/15/24 from
unsigned Excel worksheets
8/7/2019. No Compliance Memo
found.
Nova
Apartment
(Oak Hill)
*Calculated
7/15/24
Cahill
Contractors
LLC
$24,510,122 *No
Memos
45.00%
41.58%
LBE: 29.09%
SLBE: 9.98%
VSLBE: 2.51%
5% 10.59% 0.02%
*Calculated from Signed Excel
PDF (1/31/20).
*Revised calculation of credited is
below 50% but cannot confirm
non-compliance without signed
memos.
Redwood
Hill Homes
4/18/2017
*Revised
7/15/24
J.H.
Fitzmaurice
$15,000,000 50% 67.00%*
(Revised:
50.73%)
67.00%
LBE: 41.28%
SLBE: 25.73%
NA 0.88% 0% *Revised 7/15/24 recalculated
Compliance Memo (4/18/17).
*LBE Max is 25%. Credited
67.00% should not count the full
41.28% LBE.
Under Construction (No PLA)
Project
Name
Date of
Analysis
Prime
Contractor
Original Bid
Amount
(non-
specialty)
Minimum
Required
Credited
L/SLBE
L/SLBE
Participation
Mentor
Protege
MBE
(% of
dollars)
WBE
(% of
dollars
Notes
West Grand
& Brush
*Calculated
7/15/24
Branagh,
Inc.
$35,778,912 36% 43.30% 44.13%
LBE: 28.59%
SLBE: 12.79%
VSLBE: 2.75%*
NA 2.40% 0% *Calculated 7/15/24 from the
Signed Excel worksheet
(7/12/22).
*Calculated Credited as 43.30%
on 7/15/24. Met 36% minimum
stated in Unsigned Availability
Memo (3/31/22) minimum.
*Total in Signed Excel should
include the VSLBE.
Projects with PLA
Project
Name
Date of
Analysis
Prime
Contractor
Original Bid
Amount
(non-
specialty)
Minimum
Required
Credited
L/SLBE
L/SLBE
Participation
Mentor
Protege
MBE
(% of
dollars)
WBE
(% of
dollars
Notes
Brooklyn
Basin
(Foon Lok
West)
11/9/2020
*Revised
7/15/24*
Nibbi $73,905,068 50% 58.48%*
(Revised:
50.21%)
53.48%
LBE: 33.27%
SLBE: 20.21%
VSLBE: 0%
5% 10.78%*
(Revised:
11.38%)
0.01% *Revised 7/15/25 recalculated
Compliance Memo (11/9/20).
*LBE Max is 25%: Credited
58.48% should not count the full
LBE 33.27%.
Fruitvale
Transit
Village IIB
(Casa
Suenos)
*Calculated
7/15/24
J.H.
Fitzmaurice
$94,437,408
*No
Memos
51.47% 53.72%
LBE: 37.25%
SLBE: 16.47%
10% 0.16% 0% * Calculated from Signed Excel
PDF (7/20/21) and Schedule R (
6/21/21). No Compliance Memo
found.
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR &
CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Edward D. Reiskin
City Administrator
SUBJECT: Status Update on Community
Workforce Agreement
DATE: December 27, 2022
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This memo provides an update on the status of negotiating a Community Workforce Agreement (CWA) for the City of Oakland’s public construction projects. 1 A CWA is commonly defined as
a project labor agreement (PLA) that includes provisions promoting local or disadvantaged hiring goals.
BACKGROUND AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
In 2018, City Council adopted a resolution (Resolution No. 87293 C.M.S. ) urging the initiation
of a process to negotiate a CWA “for the City’s large public works projects,” with such agreement “to ensure labor peace, provide quality, equitable employment, and training opportunities, and enhance the City’s local employment and local contracting programs.” The resolution also directed the City Administrator to undertake an equity impact analysis and community engagement process to develop recommendations regarding the terms of a CWA.
The results of community engagement processes were captured in a report from consultant Junious Williams
2. On October 5, 2021, the City Council received a report from the City’s Department of Race and Equity
3, providing a racial equity impact analysis regarding a potential CWA and including recommendations based in part on a report prepared by Estolano Advisors, funded by contributions from Alameda County Agencies, including the City of Oakland, and the San Francisco Foundation.
4 1 Negotiations and processes described in this memo concern terms of the City’s public construction projects , with construction contracts procured and administered by the City. They do not pertain to conditions attached to public funding for private construction projects, such as redevelopment projects or publicly- supported affordable housing projects built by private developers.
2 Report from Community Engagement Sessions for a Possible Community Workforce Agreement Ordinance for The City of Oakland; J unious Williams Consulting, Inc. 3 Inter-Agency Report on Project Labor Agreements and Equity Impact Analysis ; Department of Race and Equity 4 Improving the Effectiveness of Project Labor Agreements; Estolano Advisors DISTRIBUTION DATE: December 27, 2022
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Status Update on Community Workforce Agreement Date: December 27, 2022 Page 2
The Department of Race and Equity’s Racial Equity Impact Analysis recommended that the City pursue a PLA based on the following criteria:
• Set Data‑Driven Workforce Goals
• Establish Clear Responsibilities for Achieving Workforce Goals • Collect Data to Track Progress on Workforce Goals
• Enforce to Ensure Progress on Workforce Goals
• Support the Retention and Advancement of Diverse Workers • Coordinate Ongoing Support for Diverse Workers
• Collaborate on a Regional Level to Create a Diverse Workforce • A Substantial Carve Out for Non-Union Small/Local Businesses
At that meeting, the City Council directed staff to create a task force to address the inclusion of social and racial equity provisions in a possible community workforce agreement, using the recommendations of the Estolano Partners report as a basis for discussion; and creating a negotiating team and commence CWA negotiations with the Alameda County Building & Construction Trades Council.
The City Administrator’s Office subsequently retained Davillier-Sloan, Inc., a firm with experience in PLA and CWA negotiation and implementation, and initiated a task force on these topics. The City’s CWA Task Force met seven times from April through June 2022. The Task Force released a report in June 2022
5 capturing ideas presented by Task Force members
regarding approaches to maximize local employment and local business opportunities in the context of a CWA and including results of surveying task force members regarding options and possible CWA terms.
In developing its positions, the City negotiating team considered the achievements of the Regional Workforce Equity Agreement (RWEA)6 from Portland. The RWEA, executed by the City of Portland, Multnomah County, and Oregon Metro, was the product of a groundbreaking regional collaboration of public entities, equity advocates, and workforce advocates. It was the product of two years of negotiation and includes diversity hiring goals, enhanced flexibility for certified contractors, and cutting-edge procedures for pathways into apprenticeship programs.
For more information regarding the development of the RWEA, please refer to this website.
ADDITIONAL ITEMS TO CONSIDER
The City is also engaged with Mason Tillman Associates to conduct an update of the City’s 2019 Race and Gender Disparity Study
7 that will be completed in 2023. Staff recommends that the City not adopt any PLA that would require a substantive amendment to the City’s Local/Small Local Business Enterprise (L/SLBE) program until after the Disparity Study has been completed
5 City of Oakland CWA Task Force Report; Davillier-Sloan, Inc. 6 Regional Workforce Equity Agreement
7 2019 Race and Gender Disparity Study; Mason Tillman Associates
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Status Update on Community Workforce Agreement Date: December 27, 2022 Page 3
and the Council has been provided a comprehensive set of policy recommendations to consider from the Disparity Study to update the City’s L/SLBE Program.
STATUS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE ALAMEDA COUNTY BUILDING TRADES
COUNCIL
The City Administrator’s Office initiated CWA negotiations with the Alameda County Building & Construction Trades Council (the BTC) in July 2022. The City’s negotiating team included staff from the City Administrator’s Office, the Department of Workplace and Employment Standards, Oakland Public Works, and OakDOT Engineering Services. The City also retained experienced outside counsel, the Law Office of Julian Gross, engaged through the Office of the City Attorney.
The City held negotiation sessions with the BTC on July 13, August 3, August 23, September 8, September 22, October 4, October 17, November 4, November 29, and December 19.
Throughout these negotiations, the City has maintained the following items as top priorities:
• ensuring robust implementation of the City’s Local Employment Program; • ensuring robust implementation of the City’s Local and Small Local Business Enterprise Program;
• maximizing apprenticeship opportunities for Oakland workers beginning careers in the construction trades;
• protecting and promoting the City’s efforts to promote equity and diversity and avoiding race and gender discrimination in the City’s public construction programs; and
• requiring data be provided to the City to assess the impact of the PLA on local employment and local businesses and to determine if there are disparities in participation on the basis of race and/or gender.
In negotiating toward these priorities, the City team has reviewed and taken into account the prior City processes described above, including the Estolano Advisors report and the CWA Task Force report, and has also reviewed local and regional precedents and best practices.
This section was intentionally left blank.
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Status Update on Community Workforce Agreement Date: December 27, 2022 Page 4
CONCLUSION
The City negotiating team and the BTC have engaged in a robust and sustained discussion regarding these issues and all terms of a possible CWA. Attorney teams have been in contact as well. To date, however, we have not reached an agreement on a complete draft CWA that could be presented to the CWA Task Force and the public and City Council for consideration for possible approval. Negotiations are continuing, potentially resulting in public processes related to a CWA in early 2023.
Respectfully submitted,
EDWARD D. REISKIN
City Administrator
City Administrator’s Office