Question 5: Should the City of Oakland require additional revenues from the Port and should it, in general, exercise greater control over Port operations? If so, how?

David Kakishiba

The City should exercise greater control over Port operations.  Our City Charter provides a mechanism for transferring revenue to the General Fund, but makes this the least priority, and allows the Port Commission the discretion to decide that the money is better left in reserve accounts for Port use.  Port activities bring in over $200 million in revenue, and several million dollars is sitting in reserve accounts.  The Commercial Real Estate Division of the Port has become seriously involved in city-building, as witnessed by the the WalMart development near the airport and Oak to Ninth waterfront project.  CRE is largely able to do this without the public planning, permitting, and participation processes that would be required for land not in the Port Area.

 There are three important issues that must be done to ensure that the Port is a public benefit to the City rather than to itself and private developers and businesses:

• The City must exert greater control over Port surplus revenue.
• The City must require the Port to get Planning Commission and City Council approval before disposing its real property to private interests.
• The City must investigate ways to be more involved in land use authority over the Port Area.

Shirley Gee

Yes, especially given that it "is" one of the City of Oakland 's departments. Yes, I think we should have greater control. If elected I will try to get a review of the pros and cons of putting the Port directly under the control of the City (like the rest of the departments) and if the benefits of having the Port under the City outweighs the Port's nearly autonomous standing now, I will work to get that formalized (via Charter Amendment, Measure, etc.).

It is time we re-visited this question especially in light of the expanded operation post-dredging and the growing impact of the Port's operation on the environment and the surrounding neighborhoods.

Todd Plate

Yes, I would like to see the City of Oakland increase its control over the Port. When you have a public agency, like the Port, that acts as a private enterprise its priorities may be different then other public agencies. If the City's priorities are more toward sustainable growth, and the Port wants larger scale development, then the City and the Port are going to be battling over the future of Oakland . At the end of the day, the City and all of its resources are accountable to the residents of the City and the residents should have the final say on where the City goes. The City Council needs to be the keeper of the residents trust and make sure that long term the residents interests are served.

Pat Kernighan

Currently, the Port of Oakland makes annual payments of approximately $12 million to the City of Oakland to “reimburse” the City for services such as police, fire and maintenance of Lake Merritt . I believe the City should negotiate for more “profit-sharing” with the City of Oakland to pay more of City services when the Port is profitable. However, in the last two years, the Port has had to lay off employees and cut expenses ( e.g. abandoning the new garage at the Airport) due to expensive infrastructure needs and its high debt load.

I do not believe that more Oakland City Hall “control” of the Port is either feasible or desirable. Early in Oakland ’s history, it was when the City Council controlled the waterfront areas that the city-hall politicians gifted the entire waterfront to one private person – Carpentier. It took nearly a half century for the State of California to regain the waterfront for the public shipping, trade, airport and waterfront access.

The State has granted back to the City the tidelands under trust that the City would operate these lands solely for shipping, airport, commercial, and public access purposes. Under the City Charter, the Port of Oakland is charged with managing the lands for these trust purposes. Development on Port property is governed by the General Plan of the City of Oakland . The Port of Oakland is the only Port that is operated by virtue of a local charter. (The Ports in Los Angeles , Long Beach , and San Diego are all controlled by state law).

In the 1920’s and the 1950’s, the voters of Oakland had the wisdom to pass City-Charter provisions that insulated Port operations from the public pressures and political influences at City Hall. These provisions are meant to give the Port the independence and freedom to manage the Port lands professionally and to remove it from City Hall pressures. I believe that we should be very careful before we unravel this historically-constructed balance.

Peggy Moore

The city of Oakland definitely needs to exercise more control over the Port.  We have a major economic engine in our city, but the money from the Port's profits are not being used to benefit the people of Oakland .  This is not only an issue of money, but also of obeying the law and having an open democracy.  The Port acts as if the laws of Oakland do not apply to it, and we all suffer as a result.  Even though the people of Oakland disapprove of WalMart's mistreatment of workers, the Port is working to help WalMart come to Oakland , without any of the voters, or even the officials we elect, having any say in the decision.  Even though Oakland has passed laws to limit billboards, the Port is planning for massive new billboards that violate our city's laws.  We need systematic change in the way Port decisions are made to make them more open and accountable.  We should consider going to voters with a ballot initiative to change the city charter.

Justin Horner

I believe the Port is a tremendous asset for Oakland . It's one of the largest ports in the United States andthe economic activity it generates contributes greatly to Oakland 's economy. I want to see the Port succeed and remain competitive against Los Angeles , Seattle , and Vancouver .

Having said that, it is essential to remember that the Port of Oakland is a public agency, and its operations should not only focus on the bottom line, but on the public interest, as well. It is because of the Port that we will have a Wal Mart out on Hegenberger that was permitted to come into our community without so much as a public hearing. It is on land recently owned by the Port that the Koi Nation casino is proposed to be located. The Port is currently negotiating a franchise agreement to place billboards near the Bay Bridge and on lands near our waterfront, even though the policy of the City Council for years has been to reduce the number of billboards in Oakland.

Since the Port has certain powers under the City Charter, all of these decisions were made without the say of elected officials.

I believe the City needs to have a bigger role in regulating development near the Port of Oakland . 81% of Oakland voters passed Measure DD which will commit $54 million towards building a trail and improving open space on the waterfront. Oaklanders did not vote for a waterfront of casinos and billboards.

I authored the report that has asked City staff to explore our ability to regulate billboards at the Port. I want to explore further how we can ensure the Port's land use decisions are consistent with a development vision set by elected representatives accountable to the people of Oakland , not political appointees.

The Port should also step forward and provide its share of services, particularly when they are the main beneficiaries. During the last budget, shortfalls forced the City Council to cut the fireboat. The City asked the Port to help cover the $2 million cost but they refused. Now, Oakland 's the only major port on the West Coast without a fireboat. How can we remain competitive and attract business to our Port without these basic protections? The Port's budget could easily pay for the fireboat (or half the fireboat) and their unwillingness to do so is troubling. I will pressure the Port to pay their fair share.

Aimee Allison

The City's relationship to the Port must change.  My greatest area of concern is with the Commercial Real Estate division's aggressive liquidation of Oakland 's greatest asset - the shoreline.  Unlike other divisions of the port that must include benefit agreements in their contracts, the commercial real estate division is exempt from requiring that job, affordable housing, and public open space are created for Oakland families.

Port-controlled properties are being sold to the highest bidder without regard to the community's Estuary Policy Plan which articulated a vision of a vibrant, accessible shoreline for all Oakland residents. Extending community benefits requirements to the Commercial Real Estate Division would have built in community benefits into the Oak to Ninth and Walmart development projects.  Instead, community activists are trying to influence developers from the outside without city or Port support. With political will and strong advocacy on the part of Oakland 's leaders, the Port will have a significant role in supporting and benefiting Oakland 's families.

That said, the City should explore ways to generate more revenue from Port Activities. The high cost of pollution from idling trucks at the port on our children's health (Oakland kids - including my seven year-old son - are six times more likely to have severe asthma and allergies) as well as destruction of our roads and other infrastructure in port-controlled areas justify higher revenue from the Port. We should closely examine other models - such as in Long Beach where the city realizes 10% of the port's revenue annually.

Pamela Drake

The Port is a department of the City and should be treated as such. While I agree in general that it should be run as a business, I think it should be a business that benefits Oaklanders. Right now a very small percentage of Port jobs go to Oaklanders. The Port should work with the City and labor unions to change that. Port projects that come out of redevelopment are treated as prize plums to port friends and contributors to machine politicians. Even contracts for security that affect the safety of everyone who lives in or flies out of Oakland , are given based on cozy relationships with big contributors. At one time, the Port did give millions to maintain City police services (according to OCO). Since they are in the City and a department of the City, they should be governed by the City in terms of land use and basic needs. The real problem, however, lies in the redevelopment giveaways.

Visit: www.greatergrandlake.org