The City Council gave initial approval to a plan by Councilmember Zac Unger that would raise the ceiling on daily penalties tenfold for owners who leave declared nuisances unfixed, with a final vote set for Nov. 10.
For 58 years, the most Oakland could charge the owner of a rotting vacant building, a front yard of junked cars leaking oil or a business that blasts music into the early morning hours was $1,000 a day. On Tuesday, the City Council voted to change that.
The council unanimously approved, on first reading, an ordinance by Councilmember Zac Unger, who represents North Oakland’s District 1, that raises the city’s maximum daily civil penalty to $2,500 for repeat or continuing violations. For properties the city has formally declared a public nuisance, and whose owners have received notice and a chance to fix the problem, the ceiling rises to $10,000 a day. Over a full year, that could add up to $3.65 million, The Oaklandside reported.
The measure, Legistar file 26-0818, amends Chapter 1.08 of the Oakland Municipal Code. Because it passed on first reading, it must return for a second vote, which the council agenda schedules for Nov. 10, according to The Bay Area Brief.
Who the higher fines are aimed at
Unger has framed the change as a deterrent, not a revenue measure. “Ideally, we would never have to impose these fines because merely the threat of this sort of enforcement would cause people to obey the rules that make our city livable,” he told The Oaklandside in an email.
On the dais, he argued that the 1968 figure had lost its force, and that some owners treat the current fine as “the cost of doing business.” He said the city would not pursue residents who leave a garbage bin at the curb for an extra couple of days or let a lawn grow out. “These are the people who get notice after notice after notice from the city, who know exactly what they’re doing,” he said. “This still allows these people to abate the problem in good faith.”
The ordinance changes only the dollar amounts. Property owners keep their existing right to appeal, and the city’s other enforcement procedures stay the same, Unger said.
The authority to go higher has existed for years. Oakland voters approved Measure RR in 2020, which allowed the city to raise fines above $1,000. That measure was written by Unger’s predecessor in District 1, Dan Kalb.
How Oakland compares with its neighbors
A report from Unger’s office comparing penalty ceilings across California found that Oakland has been near the bottom among big cities. San Francisco, according to the report, also caps its daily fine at $1,000. San Jose and San Diego charge substantially more, the report said, and Los Angeles can fine violators as much as $64,000 a day for a third offense, as summarized by The Oaklandside.
The comparison points to a regional split. San Francisco has kept the same $1,000 ceiling Oakland is leaving behind, while San Jose, the region’s largest city, has opted for steeper penalties. Oakland’s new $10,000 tier would put it closer to the South Bay than to its neighbor across the bay, at least on paper.
Whether the higher numbers translate into cleaner blocks depends on what happens after a fine is levied, and several council members said that is where Oakland has struggled.
Concerns on the dais
All of Unger’s colleagues voted for the plan, but several raised concerns along the way.
Councilmember Carroll Fife, whose District 3 includes West Oakland and downtown, said at a committee meeting the week before, “My district will love this.” She also warned that businesses that are themselves victims of graffiti and vandalism can be fined for failing to clean it up, and said some entertainment venues in West Oakland and downtown had complained that the city’s enforcement choices felt racially discriminatory. Unger responded that officers can use discretion in choosing whom to cite. “We just want to be as communicative with the public as possible,” Fife said. “This needs to be broadcast widely.”
Councilmember Noel Gallo, joined by several public commenters, argued that the size of the fine matters less than whether the city goes after violators and collects what they owe. “That’s why Oakland’s out of control,” he said. “We’re not enforcing the rules.”
Councilmember Ken Houston, who once ran Oakland’s Beautification Council, an organization that contracted with the city to clean streets, said the current approach was too weak. “This slap on the hand, it’s not working,” he said. “Me? I want to put people in jail for doing this.”
The staffing question
Unger defended the city’s code enforcement officers. “I have a lot of respect for our Code Enforcement Department,” he said. “They’re doing as much work as they can with a short staff. I believe in them as the experts on the ground.” He said he would support Houston’s proposal to budget for more enforcement officers in next year’s budget.
That pledge will be tested in Oakland’s next budget, which, like the last several, will be written under financial strain.
The fines also arrive amid a broader debate over how Oakland handles illegal dumping. After she was elected, Mayor Barbara Lee promised to work with the district attorney to prosecute dumpers. While she has raised money to clean and monitor dumping sites, it does not appear that anyone has been prosecuted, The Oaklandside reported.
What comes next
The ordinance still needs a second council vote on Nov. 10. The new figures are ceilings rather than set amounts, and the $10,000 tier applies only to declared nuisances whose owners have been given notice and a chance to fix them.
For residents who have watched the same boarded-up house or abandoned lot sit for years, the practical test will come over the next budget cycle: whether Oakland has enough inspectors to issue the notices that start the clock.
Desmond Akers covers the cities and counties of the greater Bay Area, from Oakland and San Jose to the Peninsula, the North Bay and the East Bay suburbs, for Around the Region. More from Desmond Akers
