DOCSLIB.ORG

City Council Candidates

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City Council Candidates Oakland Youth Commission CITY OF OAKLAND 2014 GUIDE Voter Election Guide Ranked Choice OAKLAND, CA ELECTION NOVEMBER 4T H Voting Mayoral Youth Commission Candidates City Council 2014 Voter Guide Candidates OUSD School Board Candi- dates Mayoral Candidates 2014 Ken Houston Ballot Bryan Parker Measures Charles Williams Recommen- Hon. Libby Schaaf dations Hon. Courtney Ruby Proposition Mayor Jean Quan Recommen- dations Hon . Dan Siegal Nancy Sidebotham Eric Wilson Patrick McMcullough CONTENTS Jason Anderson Peter Y. Liu Joe Tuman Guides 3 Hon. Rebecca Kaplan Contents Saied Karamooz Ranked 4 Choice Voting Measures 6 and Propositions City Council Candidates District 2 District 4 District 6 Mayoral 12 Candidates Hon. Abel Guillen Hon. Annie Campbell Hon. Desley Brooks Andrew Park Washington James Moore City Council 26 Dana King Jill Broadhurst Michael Johnson Candidates Ken Maxey Paul Lim Shereda Nosakhare School Board 41 Kevin Blackburn Candidates Oakland Youth Commission 2014 Voter Election Guide OAKLAND, CA ELECTION NOVEMBER 4T H Youth Commission 2014 Voter Guide Oakland Ballot Measures Measure N Measure DD Measure Z Measure EE Measure CC Measure FF Alameda County Measure BB School Board Candidates District 2 District 4 District 6 Aimee Eng Hon. Annie Campbell Hon. Desley Brooks William Ghirardelli Washington James Moore Jill Broadhurst Michael Johnson Paul Lim Shereda Nosakhare P A G E 3 Youth Commission Voter Guide 2014 October October 2014, Dear Oakland Residents, The Youth Commission would like to present this voter guide to you in an effort to inform youth and youth advocates about the candidates and the Oakland Youth electoral process in this election. The Youth Commission would like to Commission thank all candidates who forwarded responses to our questionnaire. It is a true testament to their commitment to young people and lets us know they 150 Frank H Ogawa value the youth and our voice in this city. We have also included infor- Plaza, Oakland, CA 94612 mation explaining the Ranked Choice Voting process. Additionally, we in- cluded various civic engagement organizations and labor recommendations 510-238-3245 for the Oakland and Alameda County Ballot measures and California State propositions. Facebook: Oakland Youth Commission When your are voting, the Commission would like you to keep youth in the forefront of your mind. How will the candidates, propositions and measures youthcommission@ you vote for affect children and youth in the city of Oakland? Although oaklandnet.com many of our city’s young people cannot vote, please make your vote count for them by making a conscious vote that will protect our youth and ensure growth and prosperity for them. Young people are our chief economic asset, immense human capital, our most valuable resource, and are key agents for social change, economic de- velopment and spontaneous innovation. The capacity for progress in our city is based, among other elements, on our capacity to incorporate the contribu- tion of youth in the building of our city and by our ability to include them in the decision making process to whatever extent possible. This the Youth Commission’s contribution to the electoral process. Thank you, Oakland Youth Commission OAKLAND YOUTH COMMIS S I O N P A G E 4 Ranked Choice Voting What is Ranked-Choice Voting or Instant- Runoff Voting? Ranked-Choice Voting or "Instant Run-Off Voting," allows voters to rank up to three candidates, in order of preference, when marking their ballots. Ranked-choice voting eliminates the need for run-off elections, and is approved for use in Berkeley, Oakland and San Leandro. How are Ranked-Choice votes counted? With Ranked-Choice Voting, if a candidate receives a majority (50%+1) of the first-choice votes cast for that office, that candidate will be elected. However, if no candidate receives a majority of the first-choice votes cast, an elimination process begins. The candidate who received the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated. Next, each vote cast for that candidate will be transferred to the voter's next-ranked choice among the remaining candidates. This elimination process will contin- ue until one candidate receives a majority and is deemed the winner. If I really want my first-choice candidate to win, should I rank the candidate as my first, second and third choice? No. Ranking a candidate more than once does not benefit the candidate. If a voter ranks one can- didate as the voter's first, second and third choice, it is the same as if the voter leaves the second or third choice blank. In other words, if the candidate is eliminated that candidate is no longer eligible to receive second or third choice votes. OAKLAND YOUTH COMMIS S I O N P A G E 5 Ranked Choice Voting The Process The threshold needed to win is 5,001 votes (10,000/2 + 1 vote) Round 1 The first choice votes are counted. No candidate has received a majority of the votes cast Round 2 Because no candidate reached the threshold, the candidate with the fewest votes - Candidate E - is eliminat- ed and the votes cast for this candidate are reallocated to the voters' second choice candidates. The votes for Candidate E are redistributed and go to Candidate A and B in accordance with the voters' sec- ond choices. No candidate has a majority of the votes. Round 3 Candidate D now has the fewest votes and so is eliminated. Candidate D's ballots are redistributed, but 200 of the ballots did not have a next choice marked on the ballot and are set aside as `exhausted'. The other 1,200 votes get redistributed to the continuing candidates in accordance with the voters' next preferences. Candidate A now has a majority of the votes and so is the winner. League of Women Voters: http://www.lwvoakland.org/rankedexample.html OAKLAND YOUTH COMMIS S I O N P A G E 6 Ballot Measure Endorsements Alameda Alameda Oakland East Bay County County Youth Young Democratic Republican League of Women Measures Commission Democrats Party Party Voters of Oakland BB (Alameda) No Position Yes No Yes N No Position Yes Yes Yes Z Yes Yes Yes CC No Position Yes Yes Yes DD No Position Yes Yes EE No Position Yes Yes FF Yes Yes No Position National Women's Political Metropolitan Greater IFPTE Local SEIU Caucus Oakland Democratic Measures 21 1021 California Oakland Rising Club BB (Alameda) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N Yes Yes Yes No Position Z Yes Yes Yes No CC Yes Yes Yes DD No Yes Yes EE Yes Yes Yes FF Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes OAKLAND YOUTH COMMIS S I O N P A G E 7 State Proposition Endorsements Oakland East Bay California California Youth Young Democratic Republican Propositions Commission Democrats Party Party 1 No Position Yes Yes 2 No Position Yes Yes 45 No Position Yes No 46 No Position Neutral No 47 Yes Yes Yes No 48 No Position Yes Metropolitan Alameda League of Greater County Women Oakland Democratic Voters of Oakland Democratic Propositions Party California Rising Club 1 Neutral Neutral No 2 Yes No Yes 45 Yes Yes 46 No No No Position 47 Yes Yes Yes Yes 48 Yes No OAKLAND YOUTH COMMIS S I O N P A G E 8 Ballot Measures Measure Description BB Alameda County Transportation Commission Sales Tax, Measure BB If approved, Measure BB implements a 30 year Transportation Expenditure Plan. The meas- ure would renew the 0.5 percent transportation sales tax approved in 2000 and increase the tax by 0.5 percent. This would result in a 1 percent sales tax in the county dedicated to trans- portation expenses alone, which would expire in 2045 without voter renewal. The tax reve- nue from this tax is controlled by the Alameda County Transportation Commission. The 30 year plan proposes $7.8 billion in spending to improve and maintain transportation infrastructure and systems in the county. The two largest portions of the spending consist of $3.7 billion for public transit and para-transit and $2.34 billion for street repair. A somewhat controversial expenditure of $400 million would be earmarked for a BART extension to Liv- ermore. The priorities of the tax are to: expand mass transit, improve highway infrastructure, im- prove local streets and roads, improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, and expand special transportation for seniors and people with disabilities. A 2/3rds supermajority vote is required N Oakland Unified School District Parcel Tax, Measure N If approved, Measure N authorizes the district to impose for ten years an annual parcel tax of $120 per unit of property. The tax revenue would be earmarked for adding school pro- grams designed to prepare students for colleges and real-world jobs and reduced dropout rates. A 2/3rds supermajority vote is required Z City of Oakland Parcel Tax and Parking Tax, Measure Z A 2/3rds supermajority vote is required for the approval of Measure Z. If approved, Measure Z authorizes the city to renew for ten years a parcel tax ranging be- tween $51.09 and $99.77 per property unit depending on the type of parcel. It would also authorize the city to continue to impose a parking tax of 8.5 percent for ten years. These tax- es are accompanied by certain police staffing requirements that, if not met, compromise the city's authority to levy the taxes. The projected revenue from these two taxes combined over the ten-year life of Measure Z was estimated by city officials to be $277.2 million. Not counting the 3 percent required for oversight and evaluation and $2 million for fire services, the revenue from this tax will be split 60-40, with the larger portion going to police staffing, programs and services and the smaller portion going to community violence prevention/intervention programs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OAKLAND POLICE COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA June 27, 2019 6:30 PM City Council Chamber, 3Rd Floor 1 Frank H
    OAKLAND POLICE COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA June 27, 2019 6:30 PM City Council Chamber, 3rd Floor 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Oakland, CA 94612 I. Call to Order Chair Regina Jackson II. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum Chair Regina Jackson III. Welcome, Purpose, and Open Forum (2 minutes per speaker) Chair Regina Jackson will welcome and call public speakers. The purpose of the Oakland Police Commission is to oversee the Oakland Police Department's (OPD) policies, practices, and customs to meet or exceed national standards of constitutional policing, and to oversee the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA) which investigates police misconduct and recommends discipline. IV. Bey Case Review The Commission will present bids received for investigative services. The Commission may discuss the bids and may vote on further actions. This was discussed on 9.13.18, 10.11.18, 3.14.19, 4.11.19, 4.25.19, 5.9.19, and 6.13.19. (Attachment 4) a. Discussion b. Public Comment c. Action, if any V. Oakland City Charter Revisions The Commission will discuss and may take action on creating a process for the Commission to contribute to the drafting of the Measure LL “clean-up” measure for the March 2020 ballot. This effort is currently being undertaken by the Coalition for Police Accountability in collaboration with City Council President Rebecca Kaplan. A preliminary draft has been requested to be completed by the end of July, 2019. This is a new item. a. Discussion b. Public Comment c. Action, if any VI. CPRA Independent Audit Commissioned by the Oakland Police Commission The Commission will review a revised scope of services from the Mason Investigative Group, and may vote to approve the revised scope.
    [Show full text]
  • OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 79235 C. M
    OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 79235 c. M. H'fdTY CLLlO; ', L INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMEMBER 7~~\ $C64L, Y AV> j2-iyg~ RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 72727 C.M.S., WHICH IMPLEMENTED THE CITY OF OAKLAND'S COMMUNITY POLICING POLICY, TO PROVIDE A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WHEREAS, the people of Oakland require that their municipal government provide police services in the manner calculated to best insure public safety; and WHEREAS, for the last two decades cities and police departments across the Untied States have adopted strategies to reduce reliance on 911-response policing and instead utilize approaches known as "Community Oriented Policing," "Problem Oriented Policing," or "Community Policing;" and WHEREAS, the experience of the police departments which have adopted community policing strategy demonstrates the effectiveness of this approach in both reducing crime levels and increasing public sense of safety; and WHEREAS, the Oakland Police Department has been a pioneer in the development and utilization of community policing strategies through such programs as Beat Health, Neighborhood Watch, and Home Alert; and assuming a leadership role in comparable efforts by the Oakland Housing Authority; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 1996 the City Council of the City of Oakland passed Resolution No. 72727 to implement the community policing program in the City of Oakland and this Resolution was subsequently amended by Resolution No. 73185 C.M.S on December 17, 1996 and by Resolution No. 73916 C.M.S. on November 4, 1997; and
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of OAKLAND PUBLIC ETHICS COMMISSION One Frank Ogawa Plaza (City Hall) Special Commission Meeting Monday, July 31, 2017 Hearing Room 1 6:30 P.M
    CITY OF OAKLAND PUBLIC ETHICS COMMISSION One Frank Ogawa Plaza (City Hall) Special Commission Meeting Monday, July 31, 2017 Hearing Room 1 6:30 p.m. Commissioners: Marc Pilotin (Chair), Krisida Nishioka (Vice-Chair), Lisa Crowfoot, Dana King, Gail Kong, Jodie Smith, and Jonathan Stein Commission Staff: Whitney Barazoto, Executive Director; Milad Dalju, Deputy Director and Chief of Enforcement; Suzanne Doran, Lead Analyst – Civic Technology and Engagement; Jelani Killings, Ethics Analyst; Ana Lara-Franco, Commission Assistant; Simon Russell, Investigator City Attorney Staff: Trish Hynes, Deputy City Attorney SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 1. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum. 2. Staff and Commission Announcements. 3. Open Forum. CONSENT ITEMS1 4. Approval of Commission Meeting Draft Minutes. a. June 5, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes (Attachment 1 – Minutes) ACTION ITEMS 5. In the Matter of Lynette Gibson McElhaney (Case No. 15-07). Staff presents a report summarizing evidence that Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney committed the following violations of the Oakland Government Ethics Act: 1) solicited and accepted gifts valued at more than $50 from a source she knew, or had reason to know, was a restricted source, in violation of Section 2.25.060(C) of the Oakland Government Ethics Act; 2) made a governmental decision in which she had a disqualifying financial interest in violation of Section 2.25.040(A) of the Oakland Government Ethics Act, and; 3) failed to disclose the gifts she received from the restricted source on her annual statement of economic interests in violation of Section 2.25.040(B) of the Oakland Government Ethics Act. Staff recommends that the Commission refer this matter to an administrative hearing before a single Commissioner.
    [Show full text]
  • Find out If Your City Councilmember and OUSD Board Member Have Changed As Part of Oakland's Recent Redistricting. Your City C
    City of Oakland Presorted 250 Frank Ogawa Plaza First Class Mail Find out if your City Councilmember and OUSD Board Member Suite 3315 US Postage CITY OF OAKLAND Oakland, CA 94612 PAID Have Changed as Part of Oakland’s Recent Redistricting. Oakland, CA Permit No.2508 Every 10 years the City of Oakland reviews and revises City Council District boundaries, as mandated by the City Charter. The purpose of this Redistricting process is to equalize each district’s population according to U.S. Census OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL REDISTRICTING data. New City electoral district boundaries are drawn to address population changes over the past decade. Important information that may affect you… The Oakland City Council Districts also serve as the electoral districts for the Governing Board of the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD), commonly called the Board of Education. Any changes made to the Council Districts also change the boundaries for the areas represented by the elected members of the Board of Education. Look inside for changes to Electoral boundary changes do not impact school enrollment choices. City Councilmembers represent the interest City Council Districts. of the residents of their respective districts During the 2013 Redistricting process, the City of Oakland: when making city policy, giving general policy District changes may affect n Complied with the Federal Voting Rights Act; direction, voting on ordinances and resolutions electoral districts, n Balanced district populations; and adopting the City’s biennial budget. but do not affect school n Preserved communities of interest; To find out who represents you on the enrollment choices. n Followed visible natural and man-made geographical Oakland City Council, please use the City’s and topographical features; and online Council District Locator Tool at n Avoided displacing any incumbent City Councilmember or http://mapgis.oaklandnet.com/councildistricts/ OUSD board member from the district he or she was elected or call (510)444-CITY(2489).
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland City Council Candidate Questionnaire Thank You for Taking the Time to Complete the Oaklandside’S 2020 Election Questionnaire
    Gibson McElhaney Oakland City Council candidate questionnaire Thank you for taking the time to complete The Oaklandside’s 2020 election questionnaire. We understand we’re asking a lot of you and your time, but we feel that Oakland voters deserve to know as much as possible about each candidate’s views on major issues like housing affordability, homelessness, public safety, and more. We will be posting your answers to these questions on our website for our readers to see, and noting whether candidates chose not to respond. We are not endorsing anyone for office. We’d like to receive your answers by August 28. Please briefly answer each question below using no more than 200 words. Please be as specific as possible when discussing policy ideas ​ ​ or positions you’ve taken, or would take, on different issues. Our reporters will also follow up with you for a phone or Zoom interview at some point. Your name: Lynette Gibson McElhaney ​ City Council district seat you are running for: Oakland District 3 ​ We want to know more about you and the reasons you’re running for council: 1. Please list your age, education, any professional licenses or other relevant credentials, your current occupation, and your neighborhood of residence. Age: 52 Education: BA in Political Science from University of California Berkeley I am the current City Councilmember for District 3. I live in West Oakland. 2. Before running for City Council, how were you involved in local government? Have you served on any local boards or commissions? Prior to running for Council my involvement with local government was only as a taxpayer.
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland City Council
    OFRCE OF" TH£ CITY CURK OAKLAND 13 JUN 13 PM |:U6 ty Attorney's Office OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL Resolution No. C.M.S. INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMEMBERS LIBBY SCHAAF & DESLEY BROOKS A RESOLUTION DECLARING MONDAYS TO BE "MEATLESS MONDAYS" IN THE CITY OF OAKLAND WHEREAS, the City of Oakland is dedicated to the preservation of the environment and natural resources; and WHEREAS, the City of Oakland is committed to the well-being and good health of its citizens; and WHEREAS, in 2011, Oakland passed a landmark Energy and Climate Action Plan with the goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and WHEREAS, the United Nations recognizes that "Livestock are one of the most significant contributors to today's most serious environmental problems" and recommended individuals "replace meat with another source of protein" as a way to celebrate its World Water Day; and WHEREAS, recent studies and reports have demonstrated that we can lower our carbon footprint simply by reducing the amount of animal-based foods we eat; and WHEREAS, 42 percent of children in Oakland are ovenweight or obese and studies show that obese children tend to grow up to be obese adults, and those who are obese are at increased risk of developing many chronic diseases, including heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis, and many types of cancer; and WHEREAS, the economic costs associated with obesity in Alameda County are estimated at $1 billion; and WHEREAS, the American Dietetic Association recognizes that reduced meat consumption decreases the risk of various health
    [Show full text]
  • Black Panther Party: 1966-1982
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Departmental Papers (ASC) Annenberg School for Communication 1-1-2000 Black Panther Party: 1966-1982 Michael X. Delli Carpini University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers Part of the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation (OVERRIDE) Delli Carpini, M. X. (2000). Black panther party: 1966-1982. In I. Ness & J. Ciment (Eds.), The encyclopedia of third parties in America (pp. 190-197). Armonke, NY: Sharpe Reference. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/1 NOTE: At the time of publication, the author Michael X. Delli Carpini was affiliated with Columbia University. Currently January 2008, he is a faculty member of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/1 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Black Panther Party: 1966-1982 Abstract The Black Panther party was founded in Oakland, California, in 1966. From its beginnings as a local, community organization with a handful of members, it expanded into a national and international party. By 1980, however, the Black Panther party was once again mainly an Oakland-based organization, with no more than fifty active members. In 1982, the party came to an official end. Despite itselativ r ely short history, its modest membership, and its general eschewing of electoral politics, the Black Panther party was arguably the best known and most controversial of the black militant political organizations of the 1960s, with a legacy that continues to this day.
    [Show full text]
  • Law in the Service of the Public
    OAKLAND CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE Annual Report FISCAL YEAR 2018-2019 juslaw in thepro service ofpopulo the public Table of Contents Message from City Attorney Barbara J. Parker ............................................................1 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................2 Mission of the City Attorney’s Office .............................................................................3 Office Profile .....................................................................................................................5 Organizational Chart ........................................................................................................6 Financial Trends ...............................................................................................................8 Outside Counsel Costs ....................................................................................................9 Payments .........................................................................................................................12 Dollars Secured by City Attorney .................................................................................18 Divisions of the City Attorney’s Office .........................................................................23 Affirmative Litigation, Innovation & Enforcement Division ........................................32 Labor & Employment Division .......................................................................................39
    [Show full text]
  • A Downtown for Everyone Robert A
    REPORT SEPTEMBER 2015 A DOWNTOWN Shaping the future of FOR downtown Oakland EVERYONE Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary SPUR staff Egon Terplan, Project lead 6 Introduction Mohit Shewaramani, Oakland Fellow 9 How We Got Here Sarah Jo Szambelan, Research Manager Robert Ogilvie, Oakland Director 12 Today’s Opportunities and Challenges SPUR Oakland City Board 20 Our Vision: A Downtown for Everyone Robert A. Wilkins (project co-chair) Bill Stotler (project co-chair) 24 BIG IDEA 1 Tomiquia Moss (board chair) Grow 50,000 more jobs in downtown and create pathways to get Fred Blackwell people into them. Deborah Boyer 33 BIG IDEA 2 Anagha Dandekar Clifford Jose Corona Bring 25,000 more residents to downtown at a range of incomes, and Charmaine Curtis enable existing residents to remain. Paul Figueroa 37 BIG IDEA 3 Mike Ghielmetti Set clear and consistent rules for growth to make downtown a better Spencer Gillette place for everyone. Chris Iglesias Robert Joseph 44 BIG IDEA 4 Ken Lowney Create inviting public spaces and streets as part of an active public Christopher Lytle realm. Olis Simmons Joshua Simon 54 BIG IDEA 5 Resources and reviewers Make it easy to get to and around downtown through an expanded Anyka Barber, Alex Boyd, Anthony Bruzzone, Clarissa transportation network. Cabansagan, Dave Campbell, Jim Cunradi, John Dolby, 63 Big Ideas for the Future Margo Dunlap, Karen Engel, Sarah Filley, Rachel Flynn, Erin Ferguson, Sarah Fine, Aliza Gallo, Jennie Gerard, June 66 Plan of Action Grant, Savlan Hauser, Linda Hausrath, Zakiya Harris,
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland Permanent Access to Housing Strategy (Path)
    OAKLAND PERMANENT ACCESS TO HOUSING STRATEGY (PATH) A Companion to EveryOne Home: The Alameda Countywide Homeless and Special Needs Housing Plan Written and Prepared By Debbie Greiff, Debbie Greiff Consulting Kate Bristol, Kate Bristol Consulting TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 II. Background on PATH and EveryOne Home.......................................................... 1 III. The Challenge: Homelessness in Oakland............................................................ 3 A. Oakland’s Homeless and At­Risk Population ....................................................... 3 B. Housing Needs of Homeless and At­Risk People................................................. 5 IV. The Plan: Permanent Access to Housing Strategy.............................................. 7 A. Desired Results .................................................................................................... 7 B. Resources Needed to Realize Results................................................................. 8 C. Taking Action to Realize Results........................................................................ 10 Goal (P): Prevent Homelessness and Other Housing Crises ............................. 10 Goal (H): Increase Housing Opportunities for Targeted Populations.................. 13 Goal (S): Deliver Flexible Services to Support Stability and Independence ...... 16 Goal (M): Measure Success and Report Outcomes ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Case Study Report: Oakland International Airport Bart Connector
    MTI Working Paper Research Project 2503 Collaborative Funding to Facilitate Airport Ground Access CASE STUDY REPORT: OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BART CONNECTOR Geoffrey D. Gosling, Ph.D. Wenbin Wei, Ph.D. Dennis Freeman May 2012 A publication of Mineta Transportation Institute Created by Congress in 1991 College of Business San José State University San José, CA 95192-0219 ii Mineta Transportation Institute iii Copyright © 2012 by Mineta Transportation Institute All rights reserved Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2012938608 To order this publication, please contact: Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business San José State University San José, CA 95192-0219 Tel: (408) 924-7560 Fax: (408) 924-7565 Email: [email protected] transweb.sjsu.edu Mineta Transportation Institute iv Mineta Transportation Institute v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The case study documented in this report has been prepared as part of the Mineta Transportation Institute Research Project Collaborative Funding to Facilitate Airport Ground Access. The objectives of the research project include examining and documenting past experience with collaborative funding of airport ground access projects and the use of different funding sources to facilitate interconnectivity between transportation modes in order to improve airport ground access. The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the sponsors of the research, the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics and the Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI). The authors also thank MTI staff, including deputy executive director and research director Karen Philbrick, Ph.D.; director of communications and technology transfer Donna Maurillo; student research support assistant Joey Mercado; student publications assistant Sahil Rahimi; and webmaster Frances Cherman, who also provided editorial support.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Ethics Commission Pending Complaints
    Public Ethics Commission List of Pending Complaints Date Date of * † Case # Complainant Respondents Alleged Violation Status/Phase Priority Rec’d Alleged Viol 10/29/14 14-25 Scott Brizel, PSAI Realty 06/14 Alleges a violation of the Oakland Campaign Reform Act (OCRA) as Investigation 1 Julian Nadel Partners, LLC; PSAI a result of four contributions that total $2,800, over the $700 Realty Partners II, contribution limit, made to the Libby Schaaf for Oakland Mayor 2014 LLC; PSAI Realty committee. Partners CAC; Peter Sullivan Associates, Inc. 9/19/14 14-24 Ralph Kanz Susan Piper 4/3/14 Alleges respondent made contributions to City Council candidate Resolution 1 5/18/14 Anne Campbell-Washington while she was on the Oakland Unified School District Board, during the time the respondent was negotiating a contract with the Oakland Unified School District. 9/19/14 14-23 PEC-initiated/ Oakland Maritime 2013-2014 Alleges that businesses that were negotiating contracts with the Resolution 1 Anonymous Support Services, City made contributions to City Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan, Inc., Cypress who is also a candidate for elective office, during the time the Security, LLC contract was being considered by the City Council. 9/25/14 14-22 Ralph Kanz Oakland Unified 8/19/14 - Alleges violation of the Sunshine Ordinance and California Public Intake 2 School District present Records Act by the Oakland Unified School District in responding Rebecca Hopkins, to a public records request. Troy Flint 9/3/14 14-20 PEC-initiated Desley Brooks, 8/1/13 – Alleges failure to file OCRA Form 301 before accepting higher Resolution 1 Friends of Desley 7/20/14 contributions at the limit allowable for candidates who accept the Brooks voluntary expenditure ceilings per Form 301.
    [Show full text]