Balancing Alameda County's $54 million budget shortfall
Is it over for the A's in Oakland? Renters are worried and the numbers show it; Campaign finance data update, plus that Wahab recall
COUNTY NEWS
ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
—BUDGET SEASON—Alameda County Administrator Susan Muranishi presented the Board of Supervisors a $4.1 billion fiscal year budget proposal on Tuesday that seeks to balance a $54 million shortfall.
—“The budget before you is an expression of the county’s values of equity, access, and fiscal stewardship,” Muranishi said.
—Despite the seemingly large budget shortfall, the number is actually quite manageable by county standards. Like in previous years, the proposed budget will likely avoid staffing and service cuts.
—In fact, the proposed budget’s $3.7 billion general fund includes an increase of $175 million, a five percent increase. Other budget highlights:
$885 million is proposed to be set aside for the county’s 260 Community-Based Organizations, a $58 million increase over last year. Funding for CBOs is roughly a quarter of the county’s entire budget.
The amount includes $96 million for the Alameda Health System.
Eligible CBO contracts would receive a 3.5 percent cost-of-living adjustment
$665 million is proposed for mental health services.
$47 million in Measure A1 Affordable Housing General Obligation Bond for affordable housing programs.
$40 million to the Office of Homeless Care and Coordination
$163 million to fund the In-Home Supportive Services program
$115 million to support Sheriff and Behavioral Health for Santa Rita Jail inmates.
To balance the $54 million shortfall, the proposed county budget includes departmental cuts to:
Public Protection: $20.8 million
General Government: $11.2 million
Health Care Services: $7.9 million
Public Assistance: $4.0 million
Various Countywide Strategies: $10.1 million
—While there were few excruciating budget decisions to be made during this budget season, Muranishi strongly hinted the future is very uncertain, even appearing to predict a recession on the horizon.
—Real estate transfers are down and the local commercial real estate market is in deep trouble. For example, Oakland’s commercial real estate vacancy rate is 20 percent. It was just seven percent pre-Covid.
—In addition, the county’s budget outlook isn’t as crystal clear as other years. “We usually load up the Christmas tree,” Supervisor Keith Carson said about this year’s budget process proceeding without having a complete grasp of revenues.
—This year is different because of the state’s decision to allow late tax returns due to the winter storms. A better sense of the whole budget pie won’t come until around October, Carson said.
—“When the state hiccups, we feel the cough.” Supervisor Nate Miley said of the state’s budget reverberating across the county.
—RENTAL HOUSING ORDS RETURN—The composition of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors switched last January from a pro-renter board to one that sided more closely with landlords. By March, the new board derailed a trio of rental protections for unincorporated Alameda County that had been vetted for nearly a year.
—New iterations of at least two of the three rental housing ordinances are set to return to the Board of Supervisors. Versions of the Rent Registry and Fair Chance ordinances is expected to come before the Board’s Unincorporated Services Committee later this month, said Alameda County Housing Director Michelle Starratt.
—The third proposed ordinance—Just Cause—is currently bogged down because of an court of appeals case involving a Pasadena rent control ballot measure approved by voters last year.
—Based on the votes and comments made by county supervisors last March, the Fair Chance ordinance has the best chance for board approval.
—WORRIED RENTERS—Alameda County’s Housing and Community Development Department is being inundated with calls and messages from renters worried about being evicted following the end of the county’s eviction moratorium last April.
—Inquiries to the department jumped dramatically in May, said Michelle Starratt, Alameda County’s housing director. Those numbers don’t include Oakland, Berkeley, and San Leandro, which still have eviction moratoriums on the books.
—By the end of August all three will have been rescinded. A further uptick in calls for help is expected starting in July and August, Starratt added.
CITY NEWS
UPROOTED IN OAKLAND
—ROUNDING THIRD—The A’s relocation to Las Vegas is nearly complete, at least, on the legislative side, after the Nevada State Assembly approved a bill that allocates at least $380 million in public funds for a ballpark on the Vegas Strip. The assembly voted, 25-15, on Wednesday. The Nevada state Senate approved the bill, 12-7, on Tuesday. Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, a big supporter of the project, is expected to sign the bill.
—Major League Baseball owners will then need to approve the relocation. It’s unclear whether the A’s will be required to pay a relocation fee to the league. The league’s owners are meeting in New York City this week.
—A reporter asked A’s owner John Fisher about the proposed move. Fisher told the reporter he had something to do, returned a few minutes later with a drink, and ducked back into the meeting without answering questions.
—GLIMMERS OF HOPE—Although the situation is indeed bleak for the A’s staying in Oakland, a few nagging questions remain. Will the owners, many of whom harbor distaste for Fisher out of the belief he consistently fails to invest in the franchise at the same time receiving millions in small market revenue-sharing, acquiesce so easily to his desire to relocate to Las Vegas?
—It remains uncertain Fisher has the requisite funding to actually finance a $1.1 billion ballpark. There are also some questions about whether Fisher’s main gambit is to “pump and dump” the franchise, meaning boost the team’s worth before putting it up for sale. But that might not necessarily mean the club stays in the East Bay.
—MAYOR RESPONDS—Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao issued a statement shortly after Wednesday’s vote in Nevada. Thao urged A’s ownership to seek an expansion team in Las Vegas and leave the A’s in Oakland. “The A’s have been part of Oakland for more than half a century, and they belong in this city.”
—MONEYBALL BILL—On Tuesday, East Bay Reps. Barbara Lee and Mark DeSaulnier introduced legislation in Congress that takes aim against Major League Baseball’s anti-trust exemption. The line of attack has been used against MLB for decades. Mostly it’s posturing and never moves much further than introduction.
—The threat, however, is often taken seriously by MLB and has derailed other relocation efforts. Lee/DeSaulnier’s bill, however, could have a bit more legs than others. MLB has in the past stated the anti-trust exemption helps stop franchises from relocating. If things play out as reported, MLB waiving relocation fees for the A’s move could be problematic for baseball’s owners.
ELECTION 2024
—MONEYBALL II—Large donations ahead of the March 2024 primary are still light as we head to mid-June. But the June 30 mid-year filing deadline is near and we’re seeing quite a few fundraisers and small house parties all over the county.
—Alameda County Supervisor Nate Miley, for example, had his big cowboy-themed fundraiser in Castro Valley last week. In addition, appointed Alameda County Supervisor Elisa Marquez has held several fundraisers in her district.
—There’s one entry of note below: the Committee to Support the Recall of Aisha Wahab raised another $5,000 this month. Remember, large donations are required to be publicly posted within a certain number of days.
—The contribution raises the recall’s publicly known amount of fundraising to $16,409. There’s chatter in south county that the recall effort has raised substantially more since last April, as in, hundreds of thousands.
—That’s difficult to believe unless there’s an unbelievable groundswell of small donors pitching into the uphill battle to recall Wahab. The apparent impetus for the recall is Wahab’s bill to prohibit discrimination in the state based on the caste system. Conservative Hindus strongly oppose the bill.
—CAMPAIGN FINANCE DATA—Below is Form 497 campaign contributions ($1,000 or more) filed June 1 through June 14:
ALAMEDA COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
—David Haubert (District 1), Fremont Chevrolet, $10,000 (May 31); California Apartment Association PAC, $5,000 (June 3); William Crotinger of Oakland, $5,000 (June 1).
STATE LEGISLATURE
STATE ASSEMBLY
—Mia Bonta (18th Assembly District), Bay Area Legislative Leaders PAC, $5,500 (June 6); ACME Player Services, LLC, $5,500, $4,200 (June 12).
—Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (16th Assembly District), California Credit Union League PAC, $5,500 (June 5).
—Liz Ortega (20th Assembly District), Northern California Carpenters Regional Council Small Contributor Committee, $10,900 (May 31); American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299 PAC, $5,500 (June 2).
—Alex Lee (24th Assembly District), Bay Area Legislative Leaders PAC, $5,500 (June 5).
STATE SENATE
—Committee to Support the Recall of Aisha Wahab, Meera Singh of San Jose, $5,000 (May 30).
—Nancy Skinner (State Treasurer 2026), Bay Area Legislative Leaders PAC, $5,100, $400 (June 6).
—Rhodesia Ransom (5th Senate District), Les Serpa of Tracy, $5,500, $5,500 (June 13).
