Oakland Green Party
The Oakland branch of the Alameda Green Party, the CAGreens and the GPUSA
contact@oaklandgreens.org (510) 866-7488  P.O. Box 20299, Oakland, CA 94620

For full results please visit the Alameda County web site

Measure H Fail: 13287 / 26.8% Yes votes ...... 36365 / 73.2% No votes

Measure I Fail: 19011 / 37.7% Yes votes ...... 31353 / 62.3% No votes

Measure J Fail: 22946 / 46.7% Yes votes ...... 26164 / 53.3% No votes

Oakland Greens say no on H and I, and abstain on J pdf version

City council has sent us three ballot measures to be voted on by mail by this Nov 15^th.

• Measure H, NO, a change in the city charter to take away the direct election of the city attorney
• Measure I, NO, a parcel tax on all units, rental and commercial
• Measure J, Abstain, the deferral of payments to an earlier pension fund system

• If you are not registered to vote, there is still time to do so
• The Green Party volunteers should have a voter registration card with them. 
• You may register to vote in any post office, the DMV and most county and city government offices.
• And on line at http://www.acgov.org/rov/registration.htm
• First day to mail sample ballots - Thursday, October 6, 2011
• Early Voting will begin on Monday, October 17, 2011
• Close of Voter Registration Period - Monday, October 31, 2011
• End of Voting -- All ballots must be received by Tuesday, November 15
  (so please mail it by Friday, November 11, or earlier!).

No to the City Council chosen City Attorney, Measure H

Oakland needs a City Attorney who answers to all of the people of Oakland and only to the people of Oakland. We need that City Attorney to serve as part of our municipal system of checks and balances, free from interference from either the Mayor or the City Council. If the City Attorney is at odds with our Mayor, our Council or our Administrators, he or she should be free to let the public know and act on the behalf of all Oakland residents.

The City Attorney should remain an elected position. The proposal before us is to have Council alone choose the City Attorney.  They are not proposing a system where the Mayor will propose a candidate City Attorney and the City Council will confirm or reject.  They are not proposing any independence or oversight role for the City Attorney.

We certainly could use some City Charter reform here in Oakland. What we need is MORE oversight, not less.  We do not need the City Council to have more unchecked authority. We need more of a system of checks and balances. We also do not need City Charter reforms that have more to do with the personalities of the recent office holders and little to do with principles and good government structures.
Vote NO on this measure and in 2012 vote for members of council who present clear ideas on charter reform.

No on the regressive Parcel Tax, Measure I

Oakland needs to reform its budget and set up a stable, reliable revenue stream. We need fair and predictable taxes and professional administration of our programs and spending.  We need a budget that will work in both up and down economic times. We need to have a clear plan on how we tax and spend in a boom and how we do it during a downturn.  We need to untangle the web of prior measures, multiple dedicated funding lines and algebraic formulas and have our budgeting free from hidden or little talked about political strings and deals. 

Nothing about this parcel tax will accomplish budget repair or reform. It is a one year partial fix that will leave us facing the same budget cut and/or revenue enhancement crisis.  This incomplete fix will take us 5 years to get free of.  There is no plan offered for what happens after this parcel tax runs out.  If we want to keep our libraries, work on community policing, fix our roads, we need to fix our budget taking in the big picture of how we raise funds, how we spend them and how we administer them. 
Please vote no on this tax and demand budget reform from all city council candidates at the next election.

Abstain on the deferred pension payments, Measure J

They City of Oakland should pay their employees in full on payday. Paid in full means: wages, taxes, benefits, insurance, and pension obligations. Measure J exists because that has not been done. What is being discussed are payments that we owe to a pension system that no longer is in use, but applies to many of the older employees of the Fire Department.

This measure gives us two bad choices. If we pass it we will defer payments again. Without Measure J, the city would be obligated to pay 45.6 Million Dollars next year. In the future, the City’s obligation to this fund is 494 Million Dollars.  The full funding deadline is July 1, 2026.  The city would like to spread this obligation over a longer period of time to lessen its annual payments.  This is all in the context of a budget crisis and continued high spending on private developers.

Oakland firefighters are for the measure.  They are reasonably worried about the City’s ability to meet future needs in these times of constant budget deficits.  SEIU Local 1021, which represents most Oakland employees, has taken a neutral position.  They recognize the budget problems, but they may be concerned about the precedent of delaying pension payments. The Oakland Greens agree with the SEIU Local 1021 neutral position.  This is but one more example of why we need a comprehensive budget reform, and we Greens will focus on bringing up constructive budget proposals.

Outreach Committee, contact Samsarah Morgan samsarahmail@aol.com

Steering Committee, contact Michael Rubin, RubinArnol@aol.com or Don Macleay don@oaklandgreens.org