Explaining Where Council Is and CSC Updates
This week we scrutinize the Cal Cities Conference, the CSC talks social justice in Hayward, and we summarize the dismal history of the CAP.
The Cal Cities Conference
City Council is almost entirely at the Cal Cities Annual Conference in Sacramento, so there wasn’t any Council meeting this week.
What Is This?
It’s an annual conference where California city governments can get together, hob nob, learn some things, and organize for statewide advocacy. Think of it as a City Government version of any conference you’ve ever been to. There’s vendors, there’s hotel receptions, there’s seminars, and doubtless a lot of rubbing shoulders.
On top of that, as members of Cal Cities, the City Council has a delegate that, presumably, gets to vote on advocacy issues and governance stuff that the organization does. We’re a part of the East Bay Division, which has its own governance structure, representation on large statewide committees, and gets to advocate for East Bay interests in the larger statewide group.
Bureaucracy on top of bureaucracy, basically. It’s committees all the way down.
Why Are They Going?
Lots of reasons. Some of them are doubtless political, as there’s gonna be a lot of other electeds there from across the state. In looking at the program (a real page turner, by the way), there is no shortage of receptions to attend. The East Bay Division met on Thursday Night from 5:30 to 7:00 on the Pool Deck of the Hyatt Regency Sacramento. Very snazzy.
At the same time, some of it is also for professional development. With topics ranging from “‘What the Bleep!’ Limits of Public Comment” to “Navigating the New State Housing Laws” to “Building Mobile Crisis Response Teams” to “Connecting With Your Community Through Human-Centered Communication” there’s some things that seem pretty interesting… well, to me, at least. Normal humans are probably bored just reading their titles.
Who’s Sponsoring It?
This is a question we should always ask ourselves. I know from my day job that conferences are always sponsored heavily by the vendors that you spend your money on because they want more of it. But this is elected government, so I think it’s worth taking a closer look at who’s spending big bucks to rub shoulders with electeds across the state.
Amazon is a top sponsor and they have a booth both for regular Amazon and AWS, which I know over half the internet relies on. Lots of Law Firms also gave big, which kind of makes sense as cities get sued a lot and need lawyers. Utilities spent big, as well: California Water Services and Southern California Edison gave big (though not PG&E, which is interesting). Enterprise spent big because they handle fleet acquisition. And a lot of building services companies, folks who do stuff like design climate control systems or design buildings because new buildings are big contracts. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians also sponsored heavily, since they have a casino and can do that kind of thing in this capitalist world we live in.
Arguably, the more interesting parts were the sponsors a step down who didn’t have to put up their logos. Trade groups like the American Beverage Association (soda bans), California Grocers Association (grocery stores are big business), Southern California Contractor’s Association (get those contracts), LECET Southwest (“build market share for…contractors”) and the Western States Petroleum Association (California’s cars need that gas). Telecommunications Companies (arguably all of them) also made a showing with AT&T, Charter Communications, Cox Communications, Crown Castle, and Comcast spending large. Kaiser Permanente is also on the list, with more law firms, and financial and “solutions” vendors vying for city contracts.
This matters because they wouldn’t spend the money if they didn’t get a return. Do I expect our Council to be brainwashed by these folks? No. But, it likely does change the tenor of the conversations away from being critical of the larger corporations and trade interests that are at odds with working residents. Since we don’t have piles of money to become “Premier Level Partners”, we have to keep our electeds acting in our best interests. And knowing who’s wooing them is a good first step.
Community Services Commission Meeting
The Community Services Commission (CSC) is one of the bigger resident-run commissions in the City. Politically, it’s secondary to the Planning Commission, but after the CSC drafted the Apology that the City adopted and issued in late 2021, it’s been flexing its muscles a bit more.
New Commissioners, New Energy
The CSC has been having issues getting enough people to show up to meetings to actually… do anything in recent months. To that end, 8 vacancies were filled at a prior council meeting and the new commissioners brought with them a new energy.
There have been some on City Council who have been critical of the new, more actively political role that the CSC has taken in recent years. The primary purpose the CSC exists is to do a bunch of legwork for Council on choosing how government funds are distributed to different nonprofits in the City. That all kicks off in December/January, so expect to hear more about that later. However, the final line in the Mission of the CSC By Laws gives it a really broad charge:
“Create and sustain an environment which will encourage and bring about mutual understanding and respect and to discourage and prevent any and all recognized discriminations…”
With that in mind, the CSC has gotten particularly active on matters of social justice, to the apparent annoyance of certain Councilmembers. They would, apparently, rather that the CSC develop relationships with local non-profits, despite the potential conflict of interest of developing relationships with the same folks who they’ll be disbursing funds to.
New CSC members seem to be drawn to that energy and want to expand on it. And I, for one, am definitely here for it.
Community Advisory Panel and the CSC
Okay, so this is going to take a little bit of explaining, so buckle in.
In 2018, the City and the Hayward Police Department (HPD) were really digging into the Community Policing model (they arguably still are) and decided to make a Community Advisory Panel (CAP). The CAP is a 12 member body appointed by the Mayor, City Manager, and Police Chief and their charge is to basically be an interface between the Chief and the community. The CAP is supposed to both let the Chief know what the community is feeling and also share out stuff to the community.
They finally got the CAP up and running in 2019ish, with 1 member who happened to be on the CSC and gave reports back. This modicum of transparency was very appreciated. After the pandemic, a lot of folks dropped off so that of the 12 members, there are now 5, we think. I say “we think” because the CAP meets in private, has no accountability to anyone other than the now-acting Chief, and nobody has heard a single report out from the CAP in years, if ever. Nobody knows what they’re up to, what they talk about, or what, if anything, has come from their involvement. For folks interested in open governance and accountability, it sure seems like a black box astroturfing campaign to give the illusion of community engagement without any of the actual work that really entails.
So the CSC has taken issue with the CAP recently and is looking to reform it. They’re asking for:
That the CAP be a Brown Act meeting body
That members of the CAP complete a Form 700 Statement of Economic Interest, as other members of City Boards and Commissioners complete
That interviews to fill CAP vacancies be public
That there be a designated seat on the CAP for a member of the CSC
That there be increased transparency and communication from the CAP to the broader community
Compared to what goes on now, that’s a pretty big change. The issue is that the CSC has no real power. It’s an advisory body to the City Council, which is the only body that can change CAP’s “Membership, Roles, and Responsibilities” document or really do anything about them.
They decided to get CAP members involved. A small group of CSC members reached out to CAP to try to have a meeting to talk about it all and, from what was reported at the CSC meeting, not a lot came from it. The one person who showed up didn’t seem to be able to answer any of the questions.
So the future plan is: have another meeting with CAP to hash it out, bring something back to the CSC to vote on, and then bring it to Council right afterward, maybe in November, to pressure them to do something. Keep your fingers crossed.
The City and Social Justice
Something that baffled new members of the CSC was that there is no commission or committee dedicated to social/racial justice in the City of Hayward. Assistant City Manager Regina Youngblood mentioned that some work has been done to try to embed a racial justice lens into all of the work that City Staff does, and I definitely commend that. It feels like the Ethnic Studies requirement for higher education: It’s great that we have the one class, but it should really be embedded in everything.
However, I also agree that there should be a body charged with taking a leadership role on these kinds of things so we don’t have to rely on happening to have one change agent in a position of power. Also, given the diversity of the people of Hayward, having community input and representation for initiatives would be huge (like, perhaps, mandating bilingualism in official communication). So when asked if we should embed social justice in everything or have a committee on it, I say: Why not both?