REPORT SECTION: "OAKLAND’S POTHOLES: A BUMPY ROAD AND INADEQUATE OVERSIGHT" TABLE 1: Grand Jury Findings
Grand Jury Finding City’s Response (Agree/Disagree) Explanation (if applicable) Finding 25-1: Potholes and
other street pavement failures
have been a prevalent problem
in the City of Oakland for many
years.
Agree with the finding While potholes and pavement
degradation are an ongoing challenge
faced by all large urban jurisdictions, the
City continues to apply industry best
practices in maintenance prioritization
and public safety risk mitigation.
Finding 25-2: The City of
Oakland needed to repair over
53,000 potholes or similar
pavement failures in the most
recent 2023-2024 Fiscal Year.
Agree with the finding While potholes and pavement
degradation are an ongoing challenge
faced by all large urban jurisdictions, the
City continues to apply industry best
practices in maintenance prioritization
and public safety risk mitigation.
Finding 25-3: Historically,
liability claims and lawsuits
from potholes and pavement
failure have cost the City of
Oakland millions of dollars.
Agree with the finding While potholes and pavement
degradation are an ongoing challenge
faced by all large urban jurisdictions, the
City continues to apply industry best
practices in maintenance prioritization
and public safety risk mitigation.
Finding 25-4: Complete
repaving of streets costs the
City of Oakland approximately
$1 million per mile.
Disagree partially with the finding This figure is a rounded estimate that is helpful for the general public to
understand the relative cost of
pavement rehabilitation. The true cost
per mile would depend on the number
of travel lanes on a roadway, the type of
pavement treatment, and other work
that may be required, such as
improvements to existing non-compliant
curb ramps. As of summer 2025, local
streets pavement rehabilitation projects
(two travel lanes, mill and overlay
ATTACHMENT B
treatment, and significant curb ramp
improvements) are costing
approximately $1.3M per mile.
Finding 25-5: The City of
Oakland has not met its goals
for significant repaving under
its 2022 Five-Year Paving Plan
(5YP), with no foreseeable date
for completion.
Disagree partially with the finding The City continues to advance the goals of the Five-Year Paving Plan (5YP)
consistent with available funding and
operational capacity. Fluctuations in
bond market timing and project delivery
resources have affected the phasing
schedule, but the City remains
committed to plan completion.
Finding 25-6: Without money
from the sale of authorized
Measure U bonds, the City of
Oakland will not be able to
undertake significant additional
street repaving.
Agree with the finding The City is currently preparing to issue the next tranche of Measure U bonds in
November or December 2025. The City
continues to explore all eligible funding
sources, including state and federal
transportation programs, to supplement
bond proceeds.
Finding 25-7: High employee
vacancy rates and the delays in
approval of hiring slowed the
City of Oakland’s in-house
street repaving and repairs.
Agree with the finding The City Administrator’s Office is committed to working with the Human
Resources Management Department
and Oakland Department of
Transportation to prioritize hiring critical
positions, including Maintenance
Workers and related classifications,
which perform in-house street repaving
and repairs. The City acknowledges
staffing challenges affecting multiple
municipal functions, including public
works and transportation.
Finding 25-8: The City of
Oakland’s Local Business
Enterprise and Small Local
Business Enterprise programs
Partially agree with the finding The City acknowledges its Local and Small Local Business Enterprise
programs influence bid participation,
however, these programs are legally
limit the competition for
Oakland’s Department of
Transportation contracts for
paving and street work, causing
Oakland to not receive multiple
bids, which could result in
lower costs.
mandated equity tools designed to
expand contracting opportunities for
Oakland-based firms. The City
continually reviews program design to
balance inclusion and competition
Finding 25-9: The City of
Oakland’s Department of
Transportation lacks adequate
control over change orders on
paving and street projects,
including failure to first identify
approved funding.
Disagree with the finding The City maintains and enforces detailed change order procedures that include
multi-level fiscal and managerial review
consistent with the City Charter and
industry standards. All funding sources
are confirmed prior to authorization.
Finding 25-10: The City of
Oakland has not conducted any
audits under Measure KK or
Measure U, as required by the
measures.
Disagree with the finding
The City’s annual financial audits
conducted by external auditors have
included all Measure KK and Measure U
funds as part of the City’s
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
In addition, the City is initiating a stand-
alone, measure-specific audit to
enhance transparency.
Finding 25-11: The City of
Oakland’s I-Bond Oversight
Committee has not met
regularly since at least
December 2022, as required.
Disagree with the finding The Committee met on April 25, 2025.
Neither the measure language nor
implementing ordinance prescribes a
fixed meeting frequency, but staff will
continue to encourage regular
convening.
Finding 25-12: The City of
Oakland (Mayor) has failed to
fill the current vacancies on the
I-Bond Oversight Committee.
Partially disagree with the finding Since taking office in May 2025, the Mayor has been working to fill all board
and commission vacancies inherited
from the previous administration,
including the I-Bond Oversight
Committee.
Finding 25-13: The I-Bond
Oversight Committee has not
provided regular or annual
reports on Measure KK to the
Oakland City Council since
September 2022, nor on
Measure U since its approval in
November 2022.
Agree with the finding
The Finance Department will coordinate
with the departments that oversee the
operations under the Bond, to ensure a
report is produced and presented to the
Committee as soon as practicable.
Finding 25-14: The website for
the City of Oakland’s I-Bond
Oversight Committee lacks
complete information including
most committee reports, and
not all agendas, minutes, or
recordings.
Agree with the finding
In addition to filling current vacancies,
the Mayor and City Administration are
reviewing the staffing for the I-Bond
Oversight Committee to ensure it has
adequate administrative support.
Finding 25-15: The City of
Oakland’s I-Bond Oversight
Committee failed to conduct a
self-evaluation, as required by
its bylaws.
Agree with the finding
City staff are developing a structured
meeting calendar and reporting
framework, including self-evaluations, to
facilitate the Committee’s effective
operation in compliance with its bylaws.
Finding 25-16: The City of
Oakland has failed to ensure
that the I-Bond Oversight
Committee has been fulfilling
its duties, including meeting
regularly, reporting as needed,
and conducting self-evaluations
as required.
Agree with the finding
As noted above, City staff are
developing a structured meeting
calendar and reporting framework,
including self-evaluations, to facilitate
the Committee’s effective operation in
compliance with its bylaws.
TABLE 2: GRAND JURY RECOMMENATIONS
Grand Jury Recommendation City’s Response Action Plan and Responsible Parties/Depts
Timeline/ Target Date
Recommendation 25-1: The City of
Oakland must make hiring of
Department of Transportation
positions a priority to ensure paving
and pothole/street repairs continue,
making certain that any
departmental approval delays be
addressed.
Implementation will occur
subject to collective
bargaining requirements, civil
service rules, and available
budget authority.
Oakland faces high priority
vacancies across all
departments, including the
Department of Transportation.
The City Administrator’s Office
works with relevant
departments, including Human
Resources, to prioritize
citywide hiring needs.
Recommendation 25-2: The City of
Oakland/Oakland Department of
Transportation must complete
implementation of the new change
order control process from its
change order manual.
Existing controls already meet
applicable administrative and
fiscal standards; therefore,
additional implementation is
not warranted at this time.
The City will continue periodic
review to ensure process
effectiveness.
Existing change order
procedures employ multiple
levels of project controls and
are similar for both OakDOT
and OPW construction
contracts.
Recommendation 25-3: The City of
Oakland/Oakland Department of
Transportation must ensure that all
change orders identify funding prior
to approval for any street paving or
other road repair project.
Existing controls already meet
applicable administrative and
fiscal standards; therefore,
additional implementation is
not warranted at this time.
The City will continue periodic
review to ensure process
effectiveness.
Existing change order
procedures employ multiple
levels of project controls and
are similar for both OakDOT
and OPW construction
contracts.
Recommendation 25-4: The City of
Oakland (Mayor) must promptly fill
all vacancies on the I-Bond
Oversight Committee.
Appointments are expected to
be completed in accordance
with standard commission
The Mayor’s Office is working
to fill all board and commission
vacancies inherited from the
previous administration,
vetting and Council
confirmation timelines.
including the I-Bond Oversight
Committee.
Recommendation 25-5: The City of
Oakland must ensure that an audit
of Measure KK’s expenditures is
immediately conducted and
reported to the city council.
The City will coordinate with
its external auditor to ensure
that dedicated Measure KK
and Measure U audits are
incorporated into the FY 2024-
25 audit cycle in accordance
with professional auditing
standards.”
In addition, see the City
Auditor’s Response to the
Grand Jury Report
(Attachment C).
The expenditure of Measure U
and KK have been audited as a
component to the City’s
overall Financial Audit.
However, the City has agreed
to conduct a specific measure
financial audit and has
included funds for this purpose
in the recently approved
external audit contract. The
financial audit will be
conducted will be conducted in
conjunction with FY 2024-25
year-end closing.
Financial audits related to FY
2024-25 will likely be heard
early in Calendar Year 2026.
Recommendation 25-6: The City of
Oakland must ensure that an
external independent audit of
Measure U’s expenditures is
immediately conducted.
The City will coordinate with
its external auditor to ensure
that dedicated Measure KK
and Measure U audits are
incorporated into the FY 2024-
25 audit cycle in accordance
with professional auditing
standards.”
The expenditure of Measure U
and KK have been audited as a
component to the City’s
overall Financial Audit.
However, the City has agreed
to conduct a specific measure
financial audit and has
included funds for this purpose
in the recently approved
external audit contract. The
financial audit will be
conducted in conjunction with
FY 2024-25 year-end closing.
Financial audits related to FY
2024-25 will likely be heard
early in Calendar Year 2026.
Recommendation 25-7: The City of
Oakland must take a more proactive
role in the status of the I-Bond
City staff are developing a
structured meeting calendar
and reporting framework to
Staff are working on a plan to
develop consistent meetings
and work product for
Staff are planning to ask the
Committee to convene in the
Oversight Committee, ensuring they
meet regularly and perform their
oversight duties.
facilitate the Committee’s
effective operation in
compliance with its bylaws.
consideration by the I-Bond
Oversight Committee.
first quarter (Q1) of calendar
year 2026.
Recommendation 25-8: The City of
Oakland must ensure that the I-
Bond Oversight Committee website
is complete and transparent, and
includes all committee reports,
agendas, minutes, and recordings,
as well as all Measure KK reports
from Oakland’s Finance
Department.
Website updates will be
completed consistent with the
City’s records retention and
accessibility standards.
Staff are working to update the
I-Bond Oversight Committee
website.
Staff plan to complete such
updates in advance of the
Committee’s Q1 calendar year
2026 meeting.
REPORT SECTION: “OAKLAND'S POOR STEWARDSHIP OF MEASURE Q JEOPARDIZES ITS EFFECTIVENESS” TABLE 3: Grand Jury Findings
Grand Jury Finding City’s Response
(Agree/Disagree)
Explanation (if applicable
Finding 25-17: The Oakland
City Council added the
“extreme fiscal necessity”
clause to Measure Q without
open discussion and public
debate.
Disagree with the finding Measure Q ballot measure was discussed by the City Council at open public meeting prior to placement on the ballot.
Finding 25-18: The Measure Q
ballot language passed by
voters in March 2020 did not
define what constitutes an
extreme fiscal necessity.
Agree with the finding
Finding 25-19: The declaration
of extreme fiscal necessity
allowed the Oakland City
Council to divert funds
intended for additional park
services
Agree with the finding As approved by the voters, Measure Q provides that the City Council may suspend the maintenance of effort
provisions within the measure by resolution in order to meet urgent and changing needs in the event of extreme
fiscal necessity.
T
he declaration of an event of extreme fiscal necessity is adopted by resolution at an open and noticed meeting of the City Council.
The extreme fiscal necessity declaration specifically allows Oakland City Council to use funds intended for additional park services to instead fund existing park services.
Finding 25-20: In its last
disclosure of the maintenance
of effort calculations, the City
of Oakland reported a
Agree with the finding
decrease in Measure Q funding
for new park services from 45%
to 32%.
Finding 25-21: To date,
community park stakeholders
and Oakland city staff still do
not agree on a definition of
“extreme fiscal necessity.”
Agree with the finding In July 2024, the Oakland City Council adopted Resolution No. 90327 CMS which, among other things, sought to
clarify the definition of extreme fiscal necessity. The City has met and will continue to meet with stakeholders on
this issue.
Finding 25-22: Measure Q
requires biennial reports, and
the Oakland City Auditor did
not conduct the second
biennial audit covering FY
2022-2023 and FY 2023-2024.
See the City Auditor’s
Response to the Grand Jury
Report (Attachment C)
Finding 25-23: Measure Q was
not included in the Oakland
City Auditor’s FY 2024-2025
workplan.
See the City Auditor’s
Response to the Grand Jury
Report (Attachment C)
Finding 25-24: As
recommended and funded in
Measure Q, no independent
financial audit has been
conducted.
Partially Disagree with the
finding
Section 5.C of the Act states that “An independent audit may be performed annually...” (underlining added). Prior to FY 2025 the City elected not to conduct an independent audit of Measure Q as (1) the City Auditor’s mandated
biennial audit was anticipated to provide more meaningful input for policymakers and (2) Measure Q expenditures are audited as part of the annual citywide audit. More
recently the City agreed to conduct a financial audit of Measure Q and has included funds for this purpose in the recently approved external audit contract.
Finding 25-25: Oakland’s Parks
and Recreation Advisory
Commission complies with the
reporting requirements in
Ordinance No. 13622 (an
Agree with the finding
ordinance updating the duties
of the commission).
Finding 25-26: Oakland’s
Commission on Homelessness
has not met its oversight
mandate of Measure Q
including the preparation of
annual reports as required by
Ordinance No. 13584 (an
ordinance updating the duties
of the commission).
Agree with the finding Measure Q provides: “The City Council shall assign to one or more existing Boards or Commissions, the responsibility for citizen oversight of the measure. The Board or
Commission or Boards and Commissions shall review
reports related to the expenditure of revenue collected by the City from the special tax imposed by this Ordinance and provide reports to the City Council when requested,…” [emphasis added]. The only mandatory annual report that applies to the Commission without a specific request is the requirement that the Commission publish an annual report regarding how and to what extent the City Council and
Mayor have implemented the Chapter (Vacant Property
Tax Chapter 4.56)
Finding 25-27: The City of
Oakland has not prepared
annual reports documenting
revenues, expenditures and
the status of projects funded
by Measure Q as required by
California Government Code
50075.3.
Agree with the finding The City’s Quarterly Revenues and Expenditures reports and other financial documents include details on the status of revenues, expenditures and projects funded by Measure Q. In addition, the Finance Department will provide a
standalone report regarding the expenditures from
Measure Q and other local measures in order to
communicate compliance with CA Government Code
50075.3. The first report will be published in February or March 2026.
Finding 25-28: It is difficult to
observe Oakland’s Parks and
Recreation Advisory
Commission meetings
recorded on Zoom due to poor
broadcast capabilities. (The
Commission on Homelessness
meetings recorded on KTOP
are broadcast with better
video and audio than PRAC
meetings.)
Partially agree with the
finding
Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC)
meetings are held at the Lakeside Park Garden Center at 666 Bellevue Avenue in Oakland and may be attended by
the public in-person or online via Zoom webinar. The
recordings of each meeting, as well as meeting minutes, are subsequently uploaded to the PRAC’s website. Staff
acknowledge that factors such as the meeting room’s
acoustics and recording equipment used can impact the
quality of the meeting recording’s sound and the City will explore options to address these factors and improve the quality of recordings.
TABLE 4: Grand Jury Recommendations
Grand Jury Recommendation City’s Response Action Plan and Responsible Parties/Depts
Timeline/ Target Date
Recommendation 25-9: The Oakland
City Council should hold public
hearings prior to declaring an
extreme fiscal necessity to allow
transparency and public debate.
The recommendation will
not be implemented.
When necessary, the declaration
of extreme fiscal necessity is
adopted by Council resolution at
an open and noticed meeting of
the City Council and, as such, is
subject to public comment.
Any future consideration of a
declaration of extreme fiscal
necessity will comply with the
City’s existing noticing
requirements under the Brown
Act and the City’s Sunshine
Ordinance. Public comment will
be heard and received as legally
required.
The next time where such
declaration could be issued
or renewed is in May or June
of 2026.
Recommendation 25-10: The City of
Oakland should develop maintenance
of effort metrics and calculations that
The recommendation has
been implemented.
The City will continue to report
reconciliation against the
maintenance of effort
The City includes
reconciliation against the
maintenance of effort
are published and available to the
public for Measure Q and other
applicable tax measures.
The City of Oakland
publishes reconciliation
against the maintenance of
effort requirements for Local
Measures including Measure
Q in the Biennial Budget
Books, most recently the
Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-27
Budget Book. The
maintenance of effort
requirements for Measure Q
stipulate that for as long as
the parcel tax is in effect, the
City must maintain service
levels at the equivalent or
greater than the service
levels as to those provided in
the FY 2019-21 Adopted
Policy Budget for FY 2019-20.
Per the Parks Measure Q
language, "The City Council
may temporarily suspend
the provision of Section 4 by
resolution to meet urgent
and changing needs in the
event of extreme fiscal
necessity".
requirements for Measure Q and
other Local Measures.
requirements for Local
Measures in each Biennial
Budget Book, which is
published every two years.
The next reconciliation will
be included in the FY 2027-
29 Biennial Budget.
Recommendation 25-11: The
Oakland City Auditor’s workplan for
FY 2025-2026 must include the
required second audit covering FY
2022-2023, FY 2023-2024, and FY
2024-2025.
See the City Auditor’s
Response to the Grand Jury
Report (Attachment C)
Recommendation 25-12: The
Oakland City Auditor’s workplans
beyond FY 2025-2026 must include
biennial audits in workplans for the
life of Measure Q until FY 2039-2040,
as required by Measure Q.
See the City Auditor’s
Response to the Grand Jury
Report (Attachment C)
Recommendation 25-13: The City of
Oakland should conduct the
recommended independent financial
audit of Measure Q within the next
six months, with funding allowed by
the measure.
The recommendation has
not yet been implemented.
The City has agreed to conduct a
financial audit of Measure Q and
has included funds for this
purpose in the recently approved
external audit contract
The financial audit will be
conducted will be conducted in
conjunction with FY 2024-25
year-end closing.
Financial audits related to FY
2024-25 will likely be heard
early in calendar year 2026.
Recommendation 25-14: To comply
with state requirements for special
parcel tax measures and to provide
transparency to voters, the Oakland
City Council must ensure that annual
reports documenting revenues,
expenditures, and the status of
projects are completed in a timely
manner.
The recommendation will be
implemented.
The Finance Department will
provide a standalone report
regarding the expenditures from
Measure Q and other local
measures in order to
communicate compliance with
CA Government Code 50075.3.
The first report will be
published in February or
March 2026.
Recommendation 25-15: The
Oakland City Council must ensure
that the Commission on
Homelessness complies with its
The recommendation will be
implemented.
The Ordinance provides,
“Additionally, the Commission
shall be requested to publish
reports regarding the following:…
information, if available,
Measure Q oversight responsibilities
as required by city ordinances.
concerning the impacts of
programs funded by the Vacant
Property Tax (2018 Measure W)
and 2020 Measure Q
homelessness funds subject to
Commission oversight on the
occurrence of homelessness and
illegal dumping in the City.”
The Commission has formed an
ad hoc committee for the
purpose of preparing its
mandatory annual report and is
coordinating with City staff to
schedule the report to a future
meeting.
Recommendation 25-16: In addition
to Zoom, Oakland’s Parks and
Recreation Advisory Commission
meetings should be conducted at city
hall, and broadcast and recorded on
KTOP.
The recommendation will
not be implemented.
Unlike other boards and
commissions, Oakland Municipal
Code 2.20.160B requires certain
boards, commissions, and other
local bodies to make visual and
audio recordings of every open
meeting, while others are
required to audio tape each open
meeting and may make a visual
recording. The enabling
legislation which established the
PRAC does not require its
meetings to be broadcast live on
KTOP. Currently, there are over
30 active boards and
commissions in the City and due
to limited staffing and scheduling
constraints, KTOP does not have
the capacity to broadcast all
board and commission meetings
and therefore must prioritize
those with legislative
requirements. Members of the
public may continue to attend
meetings in person at the
Lakeside Park Garden Center at
666 Bellevue Avenue in Oakland
in addition to online via Zoom
webinar. The recordings of each
meeting, as well as meeting
minutes, are uploaded to the
PRAC’s website after each
meeting.
REPORT SECTION: “ADDING INSULT TO INJURY: OAKLAND ISSUES PARKING TICKETS TO STOLEN VEHICLES” TABLE 5: Grand Jury Findings
Grand Jury Finding City’s Response (Agree/Disagree) Explanation (if applicable) Finding 25-29: City of Oakland
parking control technicians
have the technology on their
existing handheld devices that
enables them to search some
vehicle databases.
Agree with the finding
Finding 25-30: The City of
Oakland will save staff time
and taxpayer dollars by
avoiding issuing and
ultimately dismissing tickets
on illegally parked stolen
vehicles.
Partially agrees with the finding As noted in response to Finding 25-32 below, almost all citations issued by
OakDOT are to vehicles that are not
stolen. According to staff’s assessment,
the cost to procure and implement a
new system as well as execute a
memorandum of understanding with
the California Department of Justice as
required by law, outweigh the benefits
of pursuing a solution to an issue that
occurs in less than 1% of cases.
Finding 25-31: When a ticket
is issued to a parked stolen
vehicle, victims of crime suffer
additional hardship by
needing to take affirmative
steps to dismiss a parking
ticket.
Agree with the finding The City will review its citation appeals/dismissal process to identify
and implement changes which help to
simplify the process and make it as
accessible as possible.
Finding 25-32: DMV provides
information on stolen vehicles
to OakDOT and any OakDOT
staff can be trained to access
Partially disagree with the finding 99.8% of the time, OakDOT is issuing citations to vehicles that are not stolen.
This is already taking place and is one of
the reasons why there are so few
citations issued to stolen vehicles. It is
this information without
involving OPD or DOJ.
impractical for OakDOT Parking
technicians to crosscheck every single
license plate with the DMV database
before issuing a citation.
TABLE 6: Grand Jury Recommendations
Grand Jury Recommendation City’s Response Action Plan and Responsible Parties/Depts
Timeline/ Target Date
Recommendation 25-17: The City of
Oakland must implement technology
to avoid issuing parking tickets to
vehicles that have been reported as
stolen to law enforcement.
The recommendation will
not be implemented.
Although OakDOT is procuring a
next generation citation
management system, its
implementation alone does not
give the City access to stolen
vehicle data. A special
arrangement between OakDOT,
OPD and the California Dept. of
Justice (CA DOJ) would be
required (subject to City Council
approval) to grant OakDOT staff
access to CA DOJ stolen vehicle
data. Currently, this is only being
done by the Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
and San Francisco Metropolitan
Transportation Agency; no other
agency in California sources DOJ
data to personnel outside of law
enforcement agencies. As noted
above, the cost and level of
effort required to pursue a
formal memorandum of
The new citation
management system
contract is expected to be
implemented in the first
quarter (Q1) of 2026.
Currently there is no
timeline/target date for
establishing an OPD/CA
DOJ/OakDOT MOU.
understanding (MOU) with CA
DOJ exceed the benefits of
pursuing a solution to address an
issue that occurs in less than 1%
of cases. According to staff’s
assessment, executing an MOU
would ultimately cost the City
hundreds of thousands in hours
of staff and attorney time
required to meet and negotiate
terms with CA DOJ, prepare all
required documentation (subject
to City Attorney review), and
bring the proposed MOU to the
Oakland City Council for
approval. Should the City Council
decide to exercise its authority to
direct staff to renegotiate or
amend certain aspects of the
MOU, this would further extend
the timeline and costs associated
with this process. Inter-agency
agreements typically take about
six months, at minimum, to
negotiate and execute.
Recommendation 25-18: The City of
Oakland must ensure that any new
technology implemented to identify
stolen vehicles is updated at least
daily.
The recommendation will
not be implemented.
The next generation citation
management OakDOT is
currently procuring is capable of
sharing daily updated data,
however for the reasons detailed
above, the City does not plan to
pursue a memorandum of
understanding with CA DOJ.
Recommendation 25-19: All City of
Oakland Department of
Transportation parking enforcement
staff should be trained on the use of
stolen vehicle databases available
from the CA Department of Motor
Vehicles.
The recommendation has
been partially implemented.
Parking Enforcement Technicians
are trained to assess illegally
parked vehicles and report
egregious violations which may
include evidence such as a
jacked-out ignition, open door
and/or running but unoccupied
vehicle which indicate that the
vehicle may be stolen. Parking
Enforcement Technicians are
expected to contact the Parking
Enforcement (PE) Dispatcher to
verify whether or not the vehicle
is stolen. It is the PE Dispatcher
who should be trained on the
DMV database, not all PE
technicians. The PE Dispatch
function was suspended in
January; efforts are underway to
restore that function, but no
specific timeframe is currently
available.
REPORT SECTION: “OAKLAND’S WILDFIRE PREPAREDNESS: GOOD VEGETATION MANAGEMENT, BUT EMERGENCY ACCESS NEEDS IMPROVEMENT”
TABLE 7: Grand Jury Findings
Grand Jury Finding City’s Response (Agree/Disagree) Explanation (if applicable) Finding 25-33: The Oakland
Fire Department has met its
goal of conducting annual
wildfire inspections of
virtually all private
properties in the Oakland
Hills area designated as the
Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone.
Agree with the finding In the Very High Fire Hazard Severity zone of the Oakland Hills, Fire Prevention Bureau (FPB)
Fire Code Inspectors carry out Vegetation
Management inspections, while engine
company personnel inspect residential
lots. Annually, they conduct approx. 25,000
inspections. The City’s recent adoption of its
Vegetation Management Plan will assist in
inspections and management of public
property as well, while also making the City
available for additional funding for these
services through both Measure MM and
outside grants, which will contribute to
vegetation management on and near private
properties as well.
Finding 25-34: The Oakland
Fire Department’s annual
wildfire prevention
inspections of private
properties in the Oakland
Hills finds a high level of
compliance on the part of
property owners.
Agree with the finding The robust inspection program coupled with effective community outreach efforts results in
compliance rates that exceed 90%. Currently
(2025), FPB's compliance rate is 93%.
Finding 25-35: For city-
owned properties, the
Oakland City Council does
not presently allocate
sufficient resources for
Agree with the finding In May 2024, the Oakland City Council formally adopted a 10-year Vegetation Management
Plan (VMP). In November 2024, residents in the
Oakland Hills voted overwhelmingly in favor of
passing a special wildfire prevention tax
vegetation management to
remove or mitigate fire
risks.
(Measure MM) to generate nearly $3 million
annually to fund critical annual work included
in the VMP for the next 20 years. This work
includes managing fuel loads and vegetation on
City-owned properties and along roadways and
medians. As such, the City has recently added
these successful efforts to increase funding that
will significantly increase City resources to
address additional vegetation management and
the mitigation of fire risks.
Finding 25-36: At the time
of this report, the Oakland
City Council has not yet
developed an
implementation plan for
Measure MM, although the
measure becomes effective
on July 1, 2025.
Disagree with the finding Measure MM provides that the Ordinance shall go into effect ten (10) days after the vote is
declared by the City Council. The City Council
adopted the resolution declaring the results of
the November 4, 2024 election, including the
vote on Measure MM, on December 17, 2024
and Measure MM became effective ten (10)
days thereafter.
The Wildfire Prevention Commission was
established by the Oakland City Council on June
3 rd, 2025, to provide for the required public
oversight and meet the statutory requirements
of Measure MM.
Measure MM provides that the special tax will
be levied beginning in the fiscal year 2025-
2026, which commenced on July 1, 2025.
Implementation funding for expected revenues
from Measure MM are included in the Oakland
Fiscal Year 2025-2027 Budget, adopted by
Council on June 11, 2025 and which is now
currently in effect.
Commission members for the Wildfire
Prevention Commission were appointed by
Mayor Barbara Lee and confirmed by the City
Council on July 15, 2025.
Finding 25-37: Oakland’s
Department of
Transportation lacks
adequate enforcement of
parking restrictions in the
Oakland Hills which hinders
the ability of emergency
services to navigate narrow
streets to ensure a timely
response to emergencies.
Disagree with the finding OakDOT Parking Enforcement (PE) has the resources to patrol beats throughout the City,
including in the Oakland Hills neighborhoods.
Parking Control Technicians (PCT) do spot
checks and respond to requests for
enforcement from the community. On red flag
days, special patrols are sent to enforce any
violations found on the network of narrow
streets in the hills that have been improved
with “no parking anytime” regulations. As part
of the City's Fiscal Year 2025-2027 Budget,
additional PE staff will be added to the swing
and graveyard shifts in the first quarter (Q1) of
calendar year 2026, giving OakDOT the capacity
to patrol the Oakland Hills regularly night and
day as needed to promote compliance.
Finding 25-38: The Oakland
City Council has not done an
adequate job of educating
Oakland Hills residents
about emergency
evacuation routes.
Partially disagree with the finding
given the City Council and City
Staff consistently educate the
public on this topic, although
there is always opportunities to
enhance this education. The City
(i.e. the City Administrator and/or
any City Department or
subdivision under their purview)
may coordinate with the Council
Offices to share educational
resources and training
opportunities with residents, but
educating Oakland Hills residents
The City disagrees that the Oakland City Council
has not done an adequate job of educating the
Oakland Hills residents about emergency
evacuation routes. The City Council and staff
have thoroughly discussed the topic of
evacuation routes at several hearings involving
the Oakland Hills and approval of the following
City legislation, including the adoption of: (1)
the Vegetation Management Plan, (2) the City’s
S-9 Combining Zone (an area where access is
restricted by narrow roadways and lack of
multiple ingress and egress points) and (3) the
ADU legislation, which restricts certain ADUs on
properties within the City’s S-9 Combining
about emergency evacuation
routes is primarily the
responsibility of the City and
Oakland Fire Department. That
stated, the Council still routinely
discusses the issue when the
Oakland Hills area is discussed at
Council meetings.
Zone. While more work is needed to
consistently and effectively educate residents
in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(VHFHSZ) about emergency evacuation routes,
the topic of evacuation routes in the Oakland
Hills is routinely a consideration when the City
Council considers the approval of legislation
impacting the Oakland Hills. In addition, the
Oakland Fire Department (OFD) and Emergency
Management Services Division (EMSD) have
initiated outreach efforts in FY 2024 and FY
2025 to date including: community meetings,
21 Personal Emergency Preparedness (PEP)
Trainings, and 10 outreach events. Finally, the
City has developed a public-facing webpage on
evacuation routes and preparedness, entitled
“Evacuations and Knowing Where to Go,”
which informs the public of the most feasible
evacuation routes through “Know Your Zone”
(a mapping software) and other publicly
available information. Please refer to the
following link:
https://www.oaklandca.gov/Public-Safety-
Streets/Ready-Oakland/Stay-
Informed/Evacuations-and-Knowing-Where-to-
Go.
While the City Council and City staff are always
looking for new ways to educate the public and
develop creative ways to address fire danger
and education of evacuation routes, both the
Council and staff ensure that it remains an
often discussed topic when engaging the public
on issues impacting the Oakland Hills areas.
Finding 25-39: Public
education about evacuation
routes, and availability of
emergency warning systems
(such as AC Alert), are
critical to improving public
safety in Oakland, especially
in areas with high wildfire
risk.
Agree with the finding The City agrees that public education paired with strong, layered notifications such as AC
Alert, Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA), and
other systems is critical to public safety. Since
2020, EMSD has conducted an aggressive public
education campaign for AC Alert and other
notification systems. To date, Opt-In sign-ups
have increased by 45 percent. In addition, as
discussed, the City maintains a webpage that
educates the public as to the zone where their
residence or place of business is located, along
with the most appropriate evacuation route.
Please refer to the following link:
https://www.oaklandca.gov/Public-Safety-
Streets/Ready-Oakland/Stay-
Informed/Evacuations-and-Knowing-Where-to-
Go.
TABLE 8: GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATIONS
Grand Jury Recommendation City’s Response Action Plan and Responsible Parties/Depts
Timeline/ Target Date
Recommendation 25-20: The
Oakland Fire Department must
monitor the vegetation
management inspection process
to ensure that all private and
public areas remain in full
compliance with applicable fire
safety regulations.
The recommendation has
been implemented
A QA/QC Process has been put in place
that includes core sampling of field
inspections for review by Fire Prevention
Bureau (FPB) staff and Battalion
Chiefs. Work is currently underway to
utilize Accela to automate the
assignment process and thus, prevent
gaps and oversights that can occur with
a manual process.
Recommendation 25-21: Within
six months, the Oakland City
Council must review the progress
of the new Measure MM
oversight commission in order to
ensure that it is in compliance
with the requirements of Measure
MM, operating with full
transparency, and fulfilling its
purpose under Measure MM as
intended.
The recommendation has
been implemented
The oversight body, the Wildfire
Prevention Commission, held its initial
meeting on August 27th, 2025, and has
established a monthly meeting schedule
to perform its role.
Recommendation 25-22: Within
six months, the Oakland City
Council should make public its
plans for the use of additional
Measure MM funding to inspect
and prioritize vegetation
management.
The recommendation will
be implemented, but not
within six months
As part of the next budget development
process for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026
Midcycle Budget, the City will include
recommendations to the City Council for
the proposed use of additional Measure
MM funding.
June 2026
Recommendation 25-23:
Oakland’s Department of
Transportation must enforce
parking restrictions in the areas
covered by Measure MM at all
times to ensure emergency
vehicles have full access to all
roads.
The recommendation has
been partially implemented
and will be fully
implemented by Spring,
2026.
OakDOT's Parking Enforcement is
currently resourced to provide
enforcement services throughout the
city during most hours of the day with
daytime, evening and graveyard shifts.
This capacity is limited evenings and
overnight. However, City Council
approved additional staffing resources
that will come online in the spring of
2026 that will give PE the ability to
enforce parking regulations during all
shifts, including a supervisor resource
dedicated to the evening shift and rover
technicians on the graveyard shift.
Spring 2026
Recommendation 25-24: The
Oakland City Council should
To clarify, the Oakland
Municipal Code (OMC)
Since 2015, OakDOT and OFD have
collaborated to establish a protocol for
This work is always
underway and ongoing as
evaluate limiting parking to one
side of the street in the Oakland
Hills areas with a high fire risk
where narrow roadways impede
emergency vehicle ingress or
resident egress, taking into
consideration risk assessment and
community consultation.
includes provisions which
authorize the City Council,
or City staff, to establish
“no parking” zones. The
City Council can adopt
resolutions to designate
“no parking” (OMC
10.28.250), or, for narrow
streets the City Traffic
Engineer can designate
these streets as “no
parking” (10.28.080).
The recommendation has
not yet been implemented,
but will be implemented in
the future.
The City recognizes the
importance of maintaining
emergency access in
narrow, high-risk fire
zones, such as in the S-9
Combining Zone, and
supports evaluating parking
restrictions where roadway
width and topography
create access constraints.
fire engine companies and community
members to work directly with City
planners to address ingress and egress
issues that impede emergency response
and access. OFD will continue to work
with OakDOT, the Planning and Building
Department, the community, and
elected officials to understand existing
parking conditions and development
constraints on proposed evacuation
routes and identify opportunities to
prioritize parking restrictions and restrict
development where
appropriate. Community engagement
for this work is resource-intensive as
there can be strong resistance from
some residents to parking restrictions.
part of OFD's, OakDOT’s,
and the Oakland Planning
and Building
Department’s evacuation
planning efforts. The
City’s Wildfire Prevention
Working Group routinely
meets to develop
additional policies to
address fire risk and
evacuation route
education.
Recommendation 25-25: The
Oakland City Council must
implement or expand public
education programs to inform
residents about emergency
evacuation routes, fire safety
The City of Oakland
recognizes the importance
of robust public education
to ensure community
readiness in wildfire-prone
areas. In June 2021, the
The OFD Emergency Management
Services Division (EMSD) has been
working with the community and
stakeholders to update the evacuation
routes through a rigorous community
engagement process. The updated
Finalize evacuation
routes: calendar year
(CY) 2026
Increase outreach: CY
2026 and ongoing since
procedures, and communication
tools, such as AC Alert.
City of Oakland in
coordination with Alameda
County, implemented
Genasys Protect along with
a public education
campaign to educate
residents on emergency
evacuations and the
importance of knowing
your evacuation zone. OFD
Emergency Management
Services Division (EMSD)
EMSD has been working on
updating evacuation routes
in High and Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones.
routes will be posted on the City website
at the following
link: https://www.oaklandca.gov/Public-
Safety-Streets/Ready-Oakland/Stay-
Informed/Evacuations-and-Knowing-
Where-to-Go
EMSD will also lead efforts to expand
public education programs, focusing on
residents in the Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).
Additionally, EMSD will continue to
educate Oakland residents through
Personal Emergency Preparedness
training, with a plan to increase offerings
in 2026.
the education efforts
never cease.