DOCSLIB.ORG

April 20, 2016 Re: Funding Recommendation for OFCY 2016-20196 Grants

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Oakland Fund for Children and Youth

Meeting of the Planning and Oversight Committee (POC)

April 20th, 2016 – 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Oakland City Hall, Council Chambers

1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Oakland, CA 94612

AGENDA

1. Call to Order

Introductions &Announcements Agenda Review/Modifications

2. Open Forum for Youth and Parents of Young Children 3. Adoption of Prior Meeting Minutes from February 3rd 2016

action action

4. Adoption of POC Ad-Hoc Review Subcommittee OFCY Grant Funding
Recommendations for FY2016-2019

5. Administrative Matters

Appeals Process General Announcements Upcoming Meetings/ Scheduling

6. Open Forum 7. Adjournment

Public Comment: The POC welcomes you to its meetings and your interest is appreciated.



If you wish to speak before the POC, please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the staff of the POC. If you wish to speak on a matter not on the agenda, please sign up for Open Forum and wait for your name to be called. If you wish to speak on a matter on the agenda, please approach the Committee when called, give your name, and your comments.
Please be brief and limit your comments to the specific subject under discussion. Only matters within the POC’s jurisdiction may be addressed. Time limitations shall be at the discretion of the Chair.

In compliance with Oakland’s policy for people with chemical allergies, please refrain from wearing strongly scented products to meetings. In

compliance with the American Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in the meetings for the Oakland Fund for Children and Youth Planning & Oversight Committee, please contact the Oakland Fund for Children and Youth at 510-238-6379. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City of Oakland to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. If you have questions regarding this agenda or related materials, please contact our office at the number above.

MINUTES TO BE APPROVED
Oakland Fund for Children and Youth (OFCY)

Planning and Oversight Committee (POC) Meeting

Oakland City Hall, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Hearing Room 4, Oakland, CA 94612

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

  • Committee Members present:
  • Kathy Teng Dwyer, Steven Wirt, M Shawn Cunningham II, Julie

Waters, Gerald Williams, Kevin Wong, Ajani Torres-Cedillo, and Marcus Montague

Committee Members excused:

Committee Members absent:

Staff Members present:
Karen Lara, Isaac Ruelas, Bolor-Erdene-Erdenebat and Fred Price

Kisha Jackson and Jared Utley

Sandy Taylor, Michael Wetzel and Sachelle Heavens

  • 1.
  • Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m.

2.

3.
Open Forum There was one speaker who made comments.

Adoption of Prior Meeting Minutes from December 16, 2015 Ajani Torres Cedillo made a motion, seconded by Kevin Wong, to approve the meeting minutes from the December 16th POC meeting. The POC unanimously approved the minutes of the meeting.

  • 4.
  • Update on OFCY’s RFP

Sandy Taylor gave an overview regarding the approximately 150 OFCY RFP proposals received on January 14, 2016. Staff are in the process of completing hard copy reviews and audit reviews of proposals. OFCY allowed applicants in process of obtaining their audit financial statements to submit their records by the end of March rather than require proof of audit upon submission.

POC members and OFCY staff finalized general plans and membership for two committees to review proposal submissions: RFP Review Subcommittee, and RFP Appeal Subcommittee.

  • 5.
  • Process for Selection of the Independent Evaluator for FY2016-2017

Shawn Cunningham provided an update from the December 9, 2015 Evaluation Subcommittee meeting. Staff will develop and release a Request for Proposals in early 2016 for an independent evaluation team for the next fiscal year (FY2016-2017), which will begin with the new grant funding cycle.

MINUTES TO BE APPROVED
Oakland Fund for Children and Youth (OFCY)

Planning and Oversight Committee (POC) Meeting

Oakland City Hall, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Hearing Room 4, Oakland, CA 94612

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

  • 6.
  • Administrative Matters

Mike Wetzel reported that mid-year evaluation reports from Public Profit and SPR should be available in March or April 2016 for POC review.

There will not be a POC meeting in March due to the RFP proposal review process. The RFP Review subcommittee will meet on March 1 and March 17 privately to discuss proposal review followed by a public meeting near the end of March to discuss their findings. The next general POC meeting will be scheduled for April 6, 2016.

7. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:10pm.

City of Oakland, Human Services Department

Oakland Fund for Children and Youth

To:

Planning and Oversight Committee (POC), OFCY
From: Sandra Taylor, Manager,
OFCY Staff

Date: Re:

April 20, 2016 Funding Recommendation for OFCY 2016-20196 Grants

Action Requested: Funding Recommendations for FY2016-2019

The POC Ad Hoc Review Subcommittee forwards a recommendation for 145 program grants totaling $14.5 million for FY2016-2017, Year 1 of the OFCY 2016-2019 grant cycle. Funding is available to award 145 program grants across seven funding strategies to reach a projected 31,015 Oakland children and youth and 3,455 adults. A list of grants recommended by strategy is attached.

Revenue and Adjustments to Requested Amounts/Partial Awards:

The projected general fund purpose budget allocation for Kids First revenue for FY2016-17 is $14.5 million, and $13.08 million is available for grant awards from the new revenues. The total carryforward available from prior years through FY2014-2015 is $4.5 million, resulting in an additional amount available annually over the next three years of $1.5 million, and total projected funding of $14,580,066 available to support grant awards in 2016-2017.

OFCY Revenue and Funds Available for Grants FY2016-2017 Projected Kids First! revenues Allocation to grants

$14,534,485 $13,081,037 $1,499,029

$14,580,066
Prior Year Carry-forward Available Total Grant Funding Available

Carryforward from FY2015-2016 is not included in the amount above and is estimated to be between $1.0 and $1.5 million. Should annual revenues allocated to Kids First! Fund 1780 decline or increase in FY2017-2018 or FY2018-2019, grant amounts may be adjusted accordingly through the grant renewal and re-contracting process.

POC Ad-Hoc Review Subcommittee Action and Summary of Grants Recommended

The POC Ad-Hoc Review Sub-Committee held five (5) meetings from March 1st through April 7th to consider the recommendation of grants for the 2016-2019 grant cycle.

Page 1 of 8

During the first meeting the ad-hoc subcommittee received the list of the 237 applications that were submitted for the 2016-2019 OFCY grant cycle and reviewed the disqualifications. Ultimately, 224 proposals were forwarded for review, with 13 applications disqualified for not providing full information as required and stated in the Requests for Proposals.

The ad-hoc subcommittee hosted two meetings to receive briefings on the proposals and two meetings, which were open to the public, on March 31st and April 7th, to further review proposals and receive public input. All qualified proposals were reviewed based on the average reader score, ranked within each of the seven funding strategies. The Subcommittee considered the alignment of the proposals to the intention of the funding strategy; system partnerships; services to specific populations identified through the strategic planning process; costs of services and scope of services; contract compliance points assigned; past performance of current OFCY grantees; and geographic distribution and equity.

Demographics

The OFCY grants would serve a projected 31,015 children and youth in FY2016-2017, as initially proposed. While projections are as proposed and are subject to renegotiations, the following figures are a strong indication of the breadth and distribution of services to be funded.

Race/ Ethnicity

Middle East/North Africa
American Indian / Alaska
Native
Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Multi-Racial or Some Other

  • Asian
  • White

  • Biracial
  • Race

11617

37.5%

12419

40.0%

3354

10.8%

1031

3.3%

1345

4.3%

511

1.6%

383

1.2%

166

0.5%

189

0.6%

Location of Services

Service Site - District 1
Service Site - District 2
Service Site - District 3
Service Site - District 4
Service Site - District 5
Service Site - District 6
Service Site - District 7

Service Site - Outside Oakland

  • 22
  • 30
  • 62
  • 19
  • 42
  • 36
  • 50
  • 17

  • 7.9%
  • 10.8%
  • 22.3%
  • 6.8%
  • 15.1%
  • 12.9%
  • 18.0%
  • 6.1%

Gender

  • Female
  • Male
  • Transgender

100

0.3%

15361

49.5%

15554

50.1%

Age Group

  • 0-5 Ages
  • 6-10 Ages

8854

11-15 Ages

9121

16-20 Ages

  • 5331
  • 7709

  • 24.9%
  • 28.5%
  • 29.4%
  • 17.2%

Specific Populations

Unaccompanied
Homeless Youth
Minors
Children with Disabilities
Youth Exposed to
Violence

  • Foster Youth
  • LGBTQ Youth

1032

3.3%

690

2.2%

1522

4.9%

2734

8.8%

746

2.4%

14226

45.9%

Council District – Home Residence for Children & Youth to be Served

Page 2 of 8

Client Residence - Client Residence - Client Residence - Client Residence - Client Residence - Client Residence - Client Residence - Client Residence -

  • District 1
  • District 2
  • District 3
  • District 4
  • District 5
  • District 6
  • District 7
  • Total District

1862

6.0%

4248

13.7%

4171

13.4%

1767

5.7%

5233

16.9%

5217

16.8%

8517

27.5%

31015

100.0%

Demographic Changes

Programs are proposing to serve a similar number of children and youth in 2016-2017 compared to actual numbers served in 2014-2015, the most recently completed program year. Overall OFCY programs reported serving 32,374 children and youth in 2014-2015, with race, gender, and age information complete for approximately 94% the youth. Programs recommended for funding in 2016-2017 propose to reach 31,015 children and youth.

The proposed race and ethnicity of clients are similar to clients served in 2014-2015, is reflective of Oakland’s population, and indicates that programming is focusing on children and youth populations that participate in and benefit from services described in the 2016-2019 OFCY Strategic Plan.

The main shift in demographics projected compared to 2014-2015 programming is in the age range of children and youth proposed to be served. There is a growth in programming and

Page 3 of 8

projections for children 0-5 and an increase in programming for older youth 15-20, and a decline in number of children ages 11-15 projected to be served. Nevertheless, children and youth ages 11-15 remain the largest age range projected for services in 2016-2017.

Funding Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of the 145 programs identified by the ad-hoc RFP Review subcommittee for approval, for grants totaling $14,436,101 in FY2016-2017. Funding would increase to $14,611,101 in FY2017-2018 and FY2018-2019, with two grants increasing to their full request amount in 2017-2018 as the programs grow to scale.

#1: Early Childhood Mental Health Consultations

Providers of Mental Health and Developmental Consultations in Early Care and Education provide support to Early Childhood Educators and teachers at Head Start sites and OUSD Child Development Centers for providers to better meet the needs of the young children in their care. Early childhood mental health consultation consists of mental health professionals partnering with early care and education (ECE) professionals to promote the social and emotional well-being of young children through the delivery of trauma-informed and culturally relevant services and supports. The strategy will fund three lead agency providers and their subcontractors to deliver services reaching an estimated 2,622 children and 497 parents/ caregivers.

#2: Parent Support and Education

OFCY supports programs that are designed to meet the holistic needs of young children by building parenting skills and knowledge and providing services and supports in community locations that are accessible, safe, and desired by families. OFCY supports parent engagement, parent leadership, home visiting, and peer connection opportunities for parents to learn from and connect with other families in their communities, including Family Resource Centers and other programming in high-priority neighborhoods and school readiness, including summer pre-kindergarten and early literacy efforts. OFCY will expand programming to provide funding for fifteen lead agencies to host activities reaching an estimated 2,958 parents and 4,868 children.

#3: School Based After School

OFCY is continuing the existing school-based after school initiative to supports access to free or low-cost academic and enrichment after school programming at elementary and middle school sites. OFCY provides local match funding to deliver programming at school sites that receive state After School Education & Safety Program (ASES) funding and where at least half the students are eligible for free and/or reduced lunch (FRL) rates. Sixteen programs operating at school sites with very high FRL rates (85% and above) will receive additional supplemental funding to enhance programs with additional arts, literacy, gardening, and science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programming, expand capacity, or meet other site needs, including meeting the gap in service for K-2 students at the school site. OFCY funding will support programming at 41 elementary school and 19 middle school sites, providing a range of

Page 4 of 8

academic and enrichment activities in a high-quality, safe, and supportive environment for approximately 7,378 students.

#4: Student Engagement in Learning

OFCY is supporting programming designed to support children and youth’s attachment to

school and achievements in learning in coordination with the school site and school district. The strategy includes investments in culturally responsive and targeted models to meet the needs of specific populations, including youth who are at risk of not graduating or who are experiencing disparities in academic outcomes. OFCY funding will support ten lead agencies providing services that will reach a projected 3,732 students.

#5: Year Round Youth Development and Empowerment Programs

OFCY supports programs providing access to year-round activities that empower children and youth to develop leadership skills, build on their strengths, improve their connections to adults and peers, and contribute to their communities through arts, technology, entrepreneurship, sports, and other enrichment programming. Programs promote the social-emotional, cultural, physical, and cognitive development of young people. This strategy supports access to comprehensive services and trauma-informed supports that meet the needs of specific populations, such as LGBTQ youth, boys of color, unaccompanied minors, and youth exposed to violence. Thirty-three programs will be funded by OFCY to reach approximately 7,879 children and youth next year.

#6: Summer Youth Development and Empowerment Programs

OFCY supports summer programs that provide enrichment and academic opportunities for children and youth during the summer months to help them stay engaged in learning, retain academic skills and knowledge, develop their voice and leadership skills, and make meaningful contributions to their communities. Supported programming prevents children and youth from losing academic knowledge and skills over the summer and leaves them more prepared for a successful start to the new school year. OFCY funding will support 12 lead agencies providing services that will reach a projected 2,265 children and youth this summer.

#7: Career Awareness & Academic Support for Older Youth

This strategy supports programming that provides older youth (ages 15–20) with career awareness, exploration, and preparation within high-priority industries, as well as college and career advising and other academic supports to facilitate the transition to and persistence in college and to a career. The core activities supported by this strategy include the provision of academic support and career-development programming that builds on older youth’s strengths and interests, and supports programs that providing academic supports offered in tandem with career exposure/employability opportunities including reengagement programs that reach youth who are not currently enrolled in school or working. OFCY will support 12 agencies reaching 2,253 youth through the strategy, to increase the number of older Oakland youth receiving work experience and academic support.

Page 5 of 8

Additional Considerations

Due to the FY2015-2016 estimated revenue carryforward for grants, there is approximately

$300,000 in grant funding remaining available for the POC’s consideration for grant awards The

Ad-hoc POC Review Subcommittee requested that the following proposals for grant awards be brought to the POC for final consideration for funding.

Asian Pacific Environmental Network - AYPAL: Building API Community Power (Youth Development)

Funding recommendation of $75,000

AYPAL has been a long-time recipient of OFCY funding. The program has changed fiscal sponsors numerous times in the past few years and is proposing under a new fiscal sponsorship with APEN. However, the program provides a high overall level of service in the community and currently provides services to over 100 youth. The program provides leadership and community building activities specifically for East Asian and South East Asian youth, which are currently underrepresented in the proposed funding recommendations in Year Round Youth Development and Empowerment.

Beyond Emancipation - GROW

Funding recommendation of $100,000

GROW serves foster youth as they are transitioning to independence by providing culinary training and connections to employment experience with local restaurant partners. OFCY funding enabled the program to launch in 2013 and it has grown successfully over the three year funding, enabling it to become established. The program was successful in meeting enrollment and performance goals each year of OFCY funding. Partial funding of the requested $125,000 grant request would allow for the continuation of a successful program model in service to a vulnerable population.

Spanish Speaking Unity Council of Alameda County, Inc. - OYE (Career Awareness)

Funding consideration of $75,000

OYE is a currently funded OFCY program. The program has struggled to meet performance targets in year one and mid-way through year three. However, the Unity Council has new staff dedicated to the youth workforce programs and a strong community presence in the Fruitvale district. A reduced scope of work to focus the program to be highly successful in meeting performance targets for a smaller number of youth is proposed if recommended.

East Bay Spanish Speaking Citizens Foundation (SSCF) – LIBRE (Student Engagement in Learning)

Recommended publications
  • Oak023012.Pdf

    Oak023012.Pdf

    CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES v FOREWORD vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 What is the Urban Land Redevelopment Program? 1 1.2 How the ULR Program Can Assist You 1 2.0 OAKLAND RISK-BASED CORRECTIVE ACTION APPROACH 3 2.1 Understanding the Tiered RBCA Process 3 2.2 Qualifying for the Oakland RBCA Levels 5 2.3 Characterizing Your Site 7 2.3.1 Source Characterization 7 2.3.2 Identification of Potential Exposure Pathways and Receptors 7 2.3.3 Land Use Scenario 8 2.3.4 Soil Categorization 9 2.4 Reading the Oakland RBCA Look-up Tables 10 3.0 ESTABLISHING CORRECTIVE ACTION STANDARDS 13 3.1 Identifying the Lead Regulatory Agency 13 3.2 Undergoing the Tier 1 Process 14 3.3 Undergoing the Tier 2 Process 15 3.4 Undergoing the Tier 3 Process 15 4.0 PREPARING A CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN 17 4.1 Applying RBCA Levels 17 4.2 Using Containment Measures 17 4.3 Implementing Institutional Controls 18 4.4 Complying with Public Notification Requirements 19 5.0 OBTAINING REGULATORY SITE CLOSURE 21 5.1 Receiving a “No Further Action” Letter 21 5.2 Implementing a Risk Management Plan 21 APPENDICES 23 A. Agency Contacts 23 B. Schools and Community-Based Organizations 25 C. City of Oakland Permit Tracking 47 D. Exposure Assessment Worksheet 49 E. Tier 1 Risk-Based Screening Levels 51 F. Tier 2 Site-Specific Target Levels 63 G. Tier 3 Guidance 95 H. Example Oakland RBCA Cover Sheet 101 GLOSSARY OF TERMS 103 NOTES 107 OAKLAND URBAN LAND REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM iii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Tables 1.
  • City Council Agenda Reports

    City Council Agenda Reports

    DISTRIBUTION DATE: December 16, 2016 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & FROM: Sabrina B. Landreth CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: City Administrator’s Weekly Report DATE: December 16, 2016 _______ INFORMATION With the legislative recess, the next edition of the City Administrator’s Weekly Report will be published on January 6, 2017. Following are the key activities to be highlighted this week: Upcoming Holiday Closures – On Monday, December 26 and Monday, January 2, the City of Oakland’s administrative offices will be closed in observance of the Christmas Day holiday and the New Year’s Day holiday. While the City’s administrative employees are out of the office, if a situation arises that requires more staffing, the City has a plan in place to call in additional resources. Police, fire and emergency services are not affected during the holiday. To read the media release for specific service impacts, please visit http://www2.oaklandnet.com/w/OAK061925. Annual Holiday Food Drive – Through Friday, December 23, the City of Oakland is holding its Annual Holiday Food Drive. The Alameda County-Oakland Community Action Partnership (AC- OCAP), in partnership with Alameda County Community Food Bank, is coordinating the food drive. The Alameda County Community Food Bank serves one in five residents of Alameda County. The cost of living in the Bay Area has made it nearly impossible for many households to make ends meet. Children and seniors remain the most vulnerable to hunger in our community. Food collection barrels are in the lobbies at the following locations: City Hall, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza Wilson Building, 150 Frank H.
  • 2600 Telegraph Ave. MODIFIED MASSING - SUN / SHADOW STUDY Oakland, CA DATE: 11.07.2019 PROJECT NO.: 19015 A1 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

    2600 Telegraph Ave. MODIFIED MASSING - SUN / SHADOW STUDY Oakland, CA DATE: 11.07.2019 PROJECT NO.: 19015 A1 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

    2600 TELEGRAPH AVENUE PROJECT CEQA ANALYSIS Prepared for: City of Oakland Bureau of Planning 250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 2114 Oakland, California 94612 Prepared by: 1630 San Pablo Avenue Suite 300 Oakland, California 94612 JUNE 2020 Table of Contents SECTION PAGE NO. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................................................................................ 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 3 1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 General Plan Land Use and Transportation EIR ................................................................................... 5 1.2 General Plan Housing Element Update EIR and Addendum .............................................................. 6 1.3 Central District Urban Renewal Plan Amendments EIR ............................................................................. 7 1.4 Standard Conditions of Approval ........................................................................................................ 8 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 11 2.1 Project Location ..................................................................................................................................
  • Wildfire Prevention Planning DATE: September 14, 2020

    Wildfire Prevention Planning DATE: September 14, 2020

    DISTRIBUTION DATE: Sept. 15, 2020 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & FROM: Joe DeVries CITY COUNCIL Director, Interdepartmental Operations SUBJECT: Wildfire Prevention Planning DATE: September 14, 2020 City Administrator Date: Sep 15, 2020 Approval INFORMATION On November 19, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 87940 C.M.S., declaring Wildfire Prevention a top priority for the City of Oakland and requesting the City Administrator to present a comprehensive report to the Public Safety Committee (PSC) that addresses Oakland’s Wildfire Prevention Strategies within 180 days. The specific guidance in the resolution was as follow: Submit a Report That Addresses: 1) How City Departments Will Address Wildfire Prevention In Their Planning, Programs And Projects For Oakland’s Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), Including The Extent To Which The Strategies Will Involve Multi-Disciplinary And Multi- Agency Teams In The Development Of Pre-Fire Plans, 2) What Wildfire Prevention Plans Will Include Such As Home Hardening, Evacuation And Other Wildfire Prevention Strategies For Both Private And Public Properties, And Public Communication Strategies, Before, During And After A Wildfire Event, And 3) The Extent To Which Wildfire Prevention Will Be Addressed In The Next Updates To The City’s General Plan, Safety, Open Space, Hazard Mitigation Plans And Other Similar Plans. BACKGROUND / LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Wildfires are a natural part of California’s landscape and the potential risk of wildfires impacting communities in, and adjacent to, forested areas is at an all-time high. In the last few years, California has experienced the deadliest and most destructive wildfires in its history. Oakland’s history of wildfires is no secret in California, the Oakland firestorm of 1991 was one of the largest urban wildfires.
  • City of Oakland MEASURE Y EVALUATION 2008-2009

    City of Oakland MEASURE Y EVALUATION 2008-2009

    City of Oakland MEASURE Y EVALUATION 2008-2009 IndividualInitiative WideViolence Report Prevention Program Reports Acknowledgements We wish to express our appreciation for the contributions of all of the agencies, organizations and individuals who participated in the 2008-2009 evaluation of the City of Oakland’s Measure Y Violence Prevention and Public Safety Act. Thank you to the Violence Prevention Programs for your time and commitment to this evaluation. We have appreciated your thoughtful feedback and have benefited from your knowledge. Your cooperation and energy resulted in the collection of extensive data and allowed us to prepare this report. Moreover, our Evaluation Team has tremendous respect and admiration for your contribution to the health and wellbeing of the residents of Oakland, both young and old. Thank you also to the Oakland Police Department and all of its public safety officers for their support and cooperation during this evaluation. Essential to this effort was Deputy Chief David Kozicki, whose time and energy we appreciate. We acknowledge the invaluable contribution of Mark Min and the staff of CitySpan for creating and operating the Youth Services and Information System used by the Violence Prevention Programs. Thank you to the Oakland Unified School District, the Alameda County Probation Department and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for providing the evaluation team with the data necessary to measure outcomes for Measure Y participants. Our gratitude also goes to the staff of the Oakland City Administrator’s Office, and the City of Oakland Department of Human Services. A special thanks to Sara Bedford, Dyanna Christie and Priya Jagannathan at DHS who provided invaluable hands-on assistance to the VPP programs during this year.
  • Fiscal Year 2020-21 Master Fee Schedule

    Fiscal Year 2020-21 Master Fee Schedule

    CIT Y OF OA KLA ND C ALF ORNIA Fiscal Year 2020-21 Master Fee Schedule [Type text] CITY OF OAKLAND MASTER FEE SCHEDULE Effective: July 1, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Description and Process ..................................................................................................................... 1 FY 2019‐20 Master Fee Schedule Adopting Legislation (Ordinance No. 13599 CMS)............................... 2 Master Fee Schedule Department Contacts ........................................................................................ 5 Citywide Services ........................................................................................................................... A‐1 Duplication & Postage .................................................................................................................... A‐1 Credit Card Convenience ................................................................................................................ A‐1 Office of the City Administrator .......................................................................................................B‐1 Contract Compliance ...................................................................................................................... B‐1 Special Activities ............................................................................................................................ B‐1 Nuisance Enforcement Unit ........................................................................................................... B‐4 Animal Shelter
  • 4.0 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, And/Or Mitigation Measures 4.1 Land Use

    4.0 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, And/Or Mitigation Measures 4.1 Land Use

    4.0 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures 4.1 Land Use 4.1.1 Introduction to Analysis/Methodology Land use is broadly defined to encompass types of land use and land use mix, development patterns and activity centers, population and employment levels, growth potential and trends, local and regional land use policies, and other factors that influence corridor growth. The setting conditions and projections for the analysis are based on land use, development, employment, and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Alameda County. the Cities of Berkeley, Oakland, and San Leandro; the AC Transit East Bay BRT Project Land Use Report prepared in 2005 provided a land use database of existing conditions, which has been subsequently updated. The land use database and growth scenario were developed specifically for analysis of the proposed project and the database was divided into traffic analysis zones (TAZ) for use in the transportation modeling. As a result, for the purpose of land use analysis, the specific boundaries of the corridor subareas are defined by TAZ boundaries, which also correspond to Census Block Groups. The study area includes one-half mile on either side of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) alignment, which encompasses the average distance people are willing to walk to a transit stop For the purposes of this analysis, the corridor has been divided into eight subareas—the Berkeley subarea in the City of Berkeley; the North Oakland, Central Oakland, San Antonio, Fruitvale, Central East Oakland, and Elmhurst subareas in the City of Oakland; and the San Leandro subarea in the City of San Leandro.
  • Port of Oakland Standard Contract Provisions February 2015

    Port of Oakland Standard Contract Provisions February 2015

    Port of Oakland Standard Contract Provisions February 2015 PORT OF OAKLAND STANDARD CONTRACT PROVISIONS FEBRUARY 2015 PORT OF OAKLAND THE BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS ROOM 629 530 WATER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94607 Port of Oakland Standard Contract Provisions February 2015 Preface Pursuant to the Port of Oakland Purchasing Ordinance, the Port of Oakland Standard Contract Provisions (Standard Contract Provisions) is incorporated by reference into Project Manuals issued by the Port for public works construction projects. Modifications to the Standard Contract Provisions implemented since the most recent published edition of the Standard Contract Provisions, and any project-specific modifications to the Standard Contract Provisions (e.g., modifications to the General Conditions, deletion of OCIP-related documents for non-OCIP projects, etc.) will be included in Document 00800, Modifications to Standard Contract Provisions of the Project Manual. Knowledge of these Standard Contract Provisions and other contract requirements included in the project-specific Project Manual is essential for all contractors bidding and undertaking construction work for the Port of Oakland. Revision History: First Edition approved by Board of Port Commissioners on October 19, 2004 [Resolution No. 04298]. Second Edition approved by Board of Port Commissioners on November 17, 2009 [Resolution No. 09165]. Third Edition approved by Board of Port Commissioners on February 26, 2015 [Resolution No. 15-017]. Port of Oakland Standard Contract Provisions February 2015 DOCUMENT
  • The East Bay Hills Fire, Oakland-Berkeley, California

    The East Bay Hills Fire, Oakland-Berkeley, California

    U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series The East Bay Hills Fire Oakland-Berkeley, California USFA-TR-060/October 1991 U.S. Fire Administration Fire Investigations Program he U.S. Fire Administration develops reports on selected major fires throughout the country. The fires usually involve multiple deaths or a large loss of property. But the primary criterion T for deciding to do a report is whether it will result in significant “lessons learned.” In some cases these lessons bring to light new knowledge about fire--the effect of building construction or contents, human behavior in fire, etc. In other cases, the lessons are not new but are serious enough to highlight once again, with yet another fire tragedy report. In some cases, special reports are devel- oped to discuss events, drills, or new technologies which are of interest to the fire service. The reports are sent to fire magazines and are distributed at National and Regional fire meetings. The International Association of Fire Chiefs assists the USFA in disseminating the findings throughout the fire service. On a continuing basis the reports are available on request from the USFA; announce- ments of their availability are published widely in fire journals and newsletters. This body of work provides detailed information on the nature of the fire problem for policymakers who must decide on allocations of resources between fire and other pressing problems, and within the fire service to improve codes and code enforcement, training, public fire education, building technology, and other related areas. The Fire Administration, which has no regulatory authority, sends an experienced fire investigator into a community after a major incident only after having conferred with the local fire authorities to insure that the assistance and presence of the USFA would be supportive and would in no way interfere with any review of the incident they are themselves conducting.
  • City of Oakland Fire Chief

    City of Oakland Fire Chief

    CITY OF OAKLAND FIRE CHIEF THE CITY AND COMMUNITY OF OAKLAND for all city operations and is supported by two Assistant City Oakland is a dynamic city with 50 distinct and eclectic Administrators. The City Administrator has overall responsibility neighborhoods, 17 commercial districts, an increasingly for day-to-day administrative and fiscal operations of the City vibrant downtown, a strong economic base, world-class arts including hiring of Department Directors. and entertainment venues, superior cultural and recreational amenities, and a rich multicultural heritage. Oakland is the OAKLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT (OFD) eighth largest city in California with an estimated population of 429,082 (2018 U.S. Census Bureau). The city serves as the MISSION STATEMENT administrative seat of Alameda County and the center of The proud men and women of the Oakland Fire Department commerce and international trade for Northern California. (OFD) are committed to providing the highest quality and highest level of courteous and responsive services to the Oakland is one of the most diverse and ethnically integrated residents and visitors of Oakland. urban cities in the nation, with balanced representation from African-American, Latinx, Asian, and Caucasian residents, This mission is accomplished by implementing comprehensive speaking more than 125 languages and dialects, as well as strategies and training in fire prevention, fire suppression, having one of the country’s largest Lesbian Gay Bisexual emergency medical services, and all risk mitigation, Transgender Queer (LGBTQ) communities. Located on the including human-caused and natural disasters, emergency bay, six miles east of San Francisco, it encompasses 56 square preparedness, 9-1-1 services and community-based fire miles, with 19 miles of San Francisco Bay coastline to the west services.
  • THE OAKLAND MUNICIPAL CODE Prepared by The

    THE OAKLAND MUNICIPAL CODE Prepared by The

    THE OAKLAND MUNICIPAL CODE Prepared by the MUNICIPAL TECHNICAL ADVISORY SERVICE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE in cooperation with the TENNESSEE MUNICIPAL LEAGUE November 1999 Change 2, June 16, 2016 TOWN OF OAKLAND, TENNESSEE MAYOR Chris Goodman ALDERMEN Karl Chambliss Billy Ray Morris Kelly Rector Kenneth Carter CITY RECORDER Bob Petty ii PREFACE The Oakland Municipal Code contains the codification and revision of the ordinances of the Town of Oakland, Tennessee. By referring to the historical citation appearing at the end of each section, the user can determine the origin of each particular section. The absence of a historical citation means that the section was added by the codifier. The word "modified" in the historical citation indicates significant modification of the original ordinance. The code is arranged into titles, chapters, and sections. Related matter is kept together, so far as possible, within the same title. Each section number is complete within itself, containing the title number, the chapter number, and the section of the chapter of which it is a part. Specifically, the first digit, followed by a hyphen, identifies the title number. The second digit identifies the chapter number, and the last two digits identify the section number. For example, title 2, chapter 1, section 6, is designated as section 2-106. By utilizing the table of contents and the analysis preceding each title and chapter of the code, together with the cross references and explanations included as footnotes, the user should locate all the provisions in the code relating to any question that might arise.
  • L. Public Services and Facilities

    L. Public Services and Facilities

    IV. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures L. Public Services and Facilities This section describes existing public services and facilities at the Kaiser Permanente OMC project site and vicinity. It also analyzes the impact of the project on the delivery of public services, and possible adverse physical impacts to the environment that could result from a need to provide new or physically altered facilities, resulting from the project. The analysis reviews fire protection, emergency medical response, police services, public schools, parks and recreation facilities, and libraries, and potential impacts are identified, as necessary. Setting Police Protection Services Facilities and Staffing The Oakland Police Department provides police protection services throughout the city. The Police Department is headquartered at 455 7th Street in downtown Oakland, and there is one sub- station located at 2651 23rd Avenue. The Police Department is authorized for 739 full-time, sworn police officers and about 427 civilian (non-sworn) employees. Currently, there are 722 sworn police officers and a civilian staff of about 340 (Poulson, 2004). The ratio of police officers per 1,000 residents is approximately 1.8, based on the City’s population, as of January 1, 2004, of 411,609 from the California Department of Finance. The city of Oakland is divided into six geographic areas and 35 patrol beats. Each patrol beat generally includes an area with between 5,000 and 7,000 residents. A neighborhood services coordinator, a civilian employee that acts as the liaison between the community and the Police Department, is assigned to each patrol beat. The neighborhood services coordinator works with the community to set priorities and develop strategies to improve public safety and reduce crime.