Candidates for Other Offices

SCHOOL BOARD DISTRICT 7 (Five candidates)

Kristina Molina Ben Tapscott

Occupation: Communications Coordinator Age: 45 Website: votekristinamolina.com I am a mother of four OUSD children, a youth mentor and activist in East Oakland for 25 years, providing full wrap-around public health, trauma relief, and educational resources to the most vulnerable women and children of East Oakland. Transparency, Teacher Attrition, and Restoration must be addressed for parents to see the budget allocation and how we can make more equitable decisions for all students and reduce teacher attrition and student recidivism. Occupation: Teacher, Administrator (retired) Age: 81 Website:

QUALIFICATIONS

coachtapscott.com I was an educator for forty-two years. My career included: sixteen years of teaching, six years as an administrator, and twenty years as a college professor, and a public school advocate for fiftyfour years; and attended board

TOP PRIORITIES

meetings. 1) Safety at all school sites during and after the pandemic, and a healthy school environment for students, teachers and staff. 2) Financial accountability and transparency. 3) Improve reading proficiency in preschool and grades 1st through 3rd.

Bronché Taylor Dr. Clifford Thompson

Occupation: Oakland PublicEducation Fund Age: 37 Website: Bronche4oakland.com

I’ve been a teacher, after school program coordinator, and community programs director and Vice Principal in OUSD. I have extensive experience in Oakland schools engaging with students, teachers, administrators, community and key stakeholders. Occupation: 5th Grade Teacher Age: 66 Website: clif4 oaklandschools.org

I’ve worked in the field of education for 40 years. I’ve been a teacher, assistant principal, principal, county coordinator of secondary school, and a college professor. I have two BAs, two MAs, and two doctorates. I understand teaching and learning.

1) Decrease academic achievement gaps in OUSD and provide quality education. 2) Elevate student leadership and the community school model. Create parent, student, teacher committees. 3) Innovate policies, procedures and curriculums after implementing a districtwide evaluation. My top three priorities will be academic excellence, equity, and fiscal management. This will bring all voices to the table, provide everyone the opportunity to be heard, while ensuring we have a financially sound board.

Victor Javier Valerio

Occupation: Transportation Project Engineer Age: 37 Website: valerioforoakland. nationbuilder.com

I work as a project engineer ensuring completion and functionality via engineering and management on projects. Also, being a commissioner for the Independent Citizen Bond Oversight Committee for Measures A, B, and J, I have experience in community engagement.

The school district needs:

1) Health and Safety Plan for emergencies; 2) increased student enrollment and revenue generation for fiscal solvency; 3) internal controls for best management practices on accountability, transparency and ethical oversight.

OTHER OFFICES

In this election, all Oakland voters will have these offices on their ballot:

U.S. President

U.S. House of Representatives, District 13

California Senate, District 9

Depending on where they live, some Oakland voters will have some of these offices on their ballot:

California Assembly, District 15

California Assembly, District 18

Alameda County Superior Court, Seat 2

AC Transit Director, Ward 2

AC Transit Director, At-Large

BART Director, District 7

Peralta Community College District Trustee, Area 1

You can learn more about the candidates for these offices at the Voter’s Edge California website (votersedge.org), which is produced by MapLight and the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund.

CITY OF OAKLAND MEASURE QQ

Youth Vote (requires over 50% “yes” votes to pass)

The way it is now: Oakland residents must be at least 18 years old to vote in elections.

What Measure QQ would do: Measure QQ would enable the City Council to pass a law lowering the voting age to 16 for Oakland school board elections only. The age for voting for all other elected offices would remain 18.

Financial effects: There would be no immediate financial effect. If the City Council passed a law to lower the voting age, it would cost between $7,000- $10,000 in years when school board elections are held, according to current estimates. However, actual costs would depend upon the terms and implementation of the law passed by the City Council.

People for Measure QQ say: • Measure QQ would allow the City Council to consider the benefits of allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in school board elections. • Lowering the voting age in school board elections would increase overall voter participation by helping young people set lifelong voting habits.

People against Measure QQ say: • People younger than 18 have little experience managing the complicated budgets and financing of the sort that • There are other ways to improve voter participation among young adults.

CITY OF OAKLAND MEASURE RR

Fine Limits (requires over 50% “yes” votes to pass)

The way it is now: The Oakland Municipal Code is a set of laws that are specific to Oakland. These laws are set by the Oakland City Council. People who break these laws can be fined. The Oakland City Charter sets a $1,000 maximum amount for these fines. The $1,000 limit has not been changed since 1968.

What Measure RR would do: Measure RR would remove the Charter language setting the $1,000 limit on these fines. The City Council would be able to set a new limit for these fines. The City Council would be required to hold a public hearing to set a new limit.

Financial effects: There would be no direct financial effects.

People for Measure RR say: • An updated fine limit is overdue since the $1,000 limit has not been changed since 1968. • Oakland needs to be able to set fines high enough to discourage people from breaking its laws such as those against illegal dumping.

People against Measure RR say: • Measure RR would allow Oakland to set school board directors will be considering.

unlimited fines.

CITY OF OAKLAND MEASURE S1

Police Commission (requires over 50% “yes” votes to pass)

The way it is now: In 2016, Oakland voters passed Measure LL, which created the Oakland Police Commission. The Commission reviews the policies and practices of the Oakland Police Department and can recommend changes. The Commission’s investigative body, the Community Police Review Agency, investigates police misconduct and recommends discipline. Since 2016, questions have arisen about the Commission’s authority to independently hire and fire staff, particularly its Inspector General and legal advisors to the Commission and the Agency.

What Measure S1 would do: Measure S1 would resolve questions about the Commission’s authority. It would establish an Office of Inspector General. It would confirm the Commission’s authority to independently hire and fire the Inspector General and legal advisors to the Commission and the Agency.

Financial effects: Measure S1 would authorize additional staffing, particularly the positions of legal advisors. The City Council is required to provide adequate funding for that staffing and the Commission’s operations in general. Those costs will appear in the City’s 2021-2023 budget.

People for Measure S1 say: • Measure S1 will allow the Oakland Police

Commission to staff positions that are critical to its effectiveness.

People against Measure S1 say: • No argument has been filed in opposition to

Measure S1.

LEARN MORE ABOUT OAKLAND BALLOT MEASURES Is your community group looking for unbiased information about Oakland ballot measures? Trained representatives of the League of Women Voters of Oakland are eager to speak to schools, churches, companies, neighborhood associations, and other groups. Presentations offer opposing points of view so that voters can make up their own minds. To inquire about a presentation, contact us at lwvvoterservice@gmail.com.

OUSD MEASURE Y

School Facilities Bond (requires over 55% “yes” votes to pass) The way it is now: The Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) needs money to repair and improve school facilities. The district estimates these repairs and improvements would cost about $3.4 billion, according to its Facilities Master Plan. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, OUSD needs money to upgrade classrooms and technology to provide for social distancing and online instruction. What Measure Y would do: Measure Y would allow OUSD to sell up to $735 million in bonds. By selling bonds, OUSD would get up to $735 million to spend on school facilities projects over several years. Some projects would be for specific schools. Other projects, such as repairing bathrooms and electrical systems, are needed at schools throughout the district. The school board’s facilities committee would decide when each project happens. A citizens’ oversight committee would review projects before and after they are undertaken to make sure money is used the way it’s supposed to be. Measure Y funds would be audited every year. Financial effects: To repay the bonds, OUSD would increase Oakland property taxes. The bonds would not be sold all at once, so taxes would not increase all at once. When all the bonds have been sold, property taxes would go up by about $60 per $100,000 of a property’s assessed value. This means that if the county assessor says a property is worth $300,000, the property owner will pay $180 in additional tax for Measure Y. The tax increase for Measure Y bonds would last until all the bonds are repaid, around the year 2049. OUSD has sold other bonds in the past, and those bonds will be repaid between 2025 and 2041. As bonds are repaid, taxes end, and total taxes go down that year. People for Measure Y say: • Measure Y will fund major repairs to fix deteriorating classrooms, bathrooms, plumbing, faulty electrical systems, air conditioning, and leaky roofs. • Measure Y will upgrade technology for distance learning and revamp classrooms and facilities to keep students and staff socially distanced during the pandemic. People against Measure Y say: • Bonds are a bad way to pay for school repairs. • Taxes are already too high.

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA MEASURE W

Alameda County Sales Tax

(requires over 50% “yes” votes to pass) The way it is now: Homelessness in Alameda County has doubled in the last four years. There are now about 8,000 homeless people in Alameda County.

Several funding sources pay for services to help people avoid or overcome homelessness. One of these sources is the county’s general fund.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has increased the need for services. The pandemic has also decreased the available funding to meet those needs.

The sales tax in most of Alameda County, including Oakland, is 9.25%.

What Measure W would do: Measure W would increase the sales tax in Alameda County by half a percent (0.5%) for the next 10 years. The tax would raise about $150 million every year.

Money from the tax would go into the general fund, where it could be used for any lawful purpose. The Alameda County Board of Supervisors has said that it would use the money to help the homeless by providing housing, mental health services, job training, and a social safety net.

A citizens’ oversight committee would review how the money gets spent.

Financial effects: The sales tax would increase to 9.75% in Oakland starting April 1, 2021 and ending March 31, 2031.

Alameda County would have an additional $150 million every year to spend on essential county services.

People for Measure W say: • Measure W will help people who are homeless as well as people who are at risk of becoming homeless, and expand shelter and street-based assistance. • The county must do all it can to reduce homelessness.

People against Measure W say: • Sales taxes put the biggest burden on individuals most affected by the current economic crisis. • The money from the sales tax could end up being spent on other things besides homelessness.

CALIFORNIA MEASURES

In this election, all Oakland voters will have these state propositions on their ballot:

Proposition 14 Stem Cell Research

Proposition 15 Commercial Property Taxes

Proposition 16 Public Agency Diversity

Proposition 17 Voting Rights for Former Prisoners

Proposition 18 Voting Rights for 17-Year-Olds

Proposition 19 Property Tax Rules

Proposition 20 Criminal Penalties and Parole

Proposition 21 Local Governments and Rent Control

Proposition 22 Rideshare/Delivery Drivers

Proposition 23 Kidney Dialysis Clinics

Proposition 24 Consumer Privacy Laws

Proposition 25 Replacing Cash Bail

You can learn more about these propositions with the California Easy Voter Guide (easyvoterguide.org), which is produced by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund and the California State Library.