City Government
Funds to Help Jobseekers Continue to Decline Under Libby Schaaf
Under Mayor Libby Schaaf’s administration, job training funds for unemployed adults and youth are continuing to be cut, raising questions about the mayor’s campaign promise for jobs for low-income, underserved communities.
A majority of the people served by Oakland’s programs – paid for by federal funds distributed by the state – are low-income youth, long-term unemployed and laid off workers, mostly African Americans and other people of color.
Since the 2014-2015 fiscal year, cuts to organizations directly serving low-income youth and adults in Oakland total approximately $1.065 million.
But at the same time, state Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) funding levels to the city have remained nearly the same.
According to many of the groups working with the unemployed, there is a direct link between the lack of resources to help people become employed and the displacement of African Americans from Oakland.
“The inability to see this connection between jobs and housing is a catastrophic failure of consciousness,” said a job program staff member who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Pastor Gerald Agee, past president of Pastors of Oakland, told the Post, “I think Mayor Schaaf is not in touch with all of Oakland – maybe some parts of Oakland but not all of the city – when it comes to the issue of jobs.”
Rev. Cheryl Ward of Liberation Ministries said, “I’ve tried to reach out to the mayor and hold a conversation with her about where things are going, but to no avail. I think she owes a conversation to the community.”
The Post reported last week that federal job funds for year-round youth job programs have been reduced from $1.1 million in 2015-2016 to $886,000 in 2016-2017, a cut of $164,000 or 16 percent.
Since July 2014, the cut has been 33 percent.
The cuts have been implemented even though federal funding has held nearly steady over the past few years, and the state has not yet released what the funding levels will be for 2016-2017, which begins July 1.
This money serves low-income young people who face additional barriers to employment, whether they are teen parents, on probation, homeless or in the foster care system.
The money is dispersed by the city to nonprofits that help youth with job preparation, gaining their high school diploma or other education credential and placing them in a job.
Responding to Post, the Mayor’s Office alleges there have not been cuts to youth programs.
“The Post was incorrect when it reported that this administration has made cuts to youth programs,” according to the Mayor Schaaf’s spokesperson Erica Derryck.
“No cuts have been made to youth programs, nor have any been made to direct services for jobless adults,” she said.
“In fact, the state has not yet announced WIOA funding allocations to the local areas for PY 2016-17. WIOA allocations are typically announced in early May.
“Any reported reductions included in funding level projections for PY 2016-17 are based on estimates, assumptions, and historical data of state funding, along with an abundance of caution around possible funding reductions in the form of rescissions and other across-the-board cost saving measures imposed by the federal government.
“Once the State announces the funding levels, the budget will be adjusted to reflect actual funding levels.”
However, the Workforce Investment Board’s publically published documents contradict the statements from the Mayor’s Office.
In the 2015-2016 budget, direct services provided by nonprofit agencies were cut by 15 percent for youth programs and as much as 24 percent for adult programs, according to the public documents.
In addition, city documents reveal the proposed RFP funding level for 2016-2017 further reduced the funds for youth and adult jobseekers by more than $560,000.
In the past, former Council President Pat Kernighan, along with a majority of council members, said it was time for the city to invest and “put some skin in the game” to assure a successful jobs program in Oakland.
Presently, the city takes about 30 percent of the federal funds for the city staff’s salaries.
Frank Tucker, president of the Bay Area 100 Black Men organization and former chair of the Oakland WIB, said, “The city qualifies for special funding by relying on the work of the non-profit community. And, isn’t it an irony for them to reduce funds to the very organizations that qualify Oakland to receive federal funds?”
“The city with its costly administration erred in taking over the system,” Tucker said. “We need to get closer to the streets and closer to the jobseekers.”
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of December 31, 2025 – January 6, 2026
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 31, 2025 – January 6, 2026
To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025
To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
Alameda County
Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition
In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”
By Post Staff
The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.
In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”
In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.
The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.
“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.
According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.
Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.
However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.
Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.
Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.
“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”
Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.
“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”
Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.
A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.
So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.
-
Bay Area3 weeks agoPost Salon to Discuss Proposal to Bring Costco to Oakland Community meeting to be held at City Hall, Thursday, Dec. 18
-
Activism3 weeks agoMayor Lee, City Leaders Announce $334 Million Bond Sale for Affordable Housing, Roads, Park Renovations, Libraries and Senior Centers
-
Activism4 weeks agoOakland Post: Week of December 10 – 16, 2025
-
Activism3 weeks agoOakland School Board Grapples with Potential $100 Million Shortfall Next Year
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks agoFayeth Gardens Holds 3rd Annual Kwanzaa Celebration at Hayward City Hall on Dec. 28
-
Activism3 weeks ago2025 in Review: Seven Questions for Black Women’s Think Tank Founder Kellie Todd Griffin
-
Advice3 weeks agoCOMMENTARY: If You Don’t Want Your ‘Black Card’ Revoked, Watch What You Bring to Holiday Dinners
-
Activism3 weeks agoAnn Lowe: The Quiet Genius of American Couture








