What Mayor elect Barbara Lee plans to do in her first 100 days as Oakland's mayor
Progressive lawmaker and former congresswoman Barbara Lee won the Mayor's race in Oakland, ending months of uncertainty over who would take the reins following Mayor Sheng Thao's recall. So what's first on her agenda?
While many Oakland business leaders endorsed Barbara Lee's opponent in the mayoral race, they have begun lining up behind the next leader of the city in the hopes that she can solve some of Oakland's biggest issues.
Lee, a progressive lawmaker and longtime congresswoman, took an insurmountable lead in the election when results were released Friday, and her closest opponent, former City Council member Loren Taylor, formally conceded the race over the weekend. Lee's victory ends months of uncertainty surrounding the city since former Mayor Sheng Thao was recalled last year.
The leadership change comes at a critical time for Oakland — which faces a massive structural budget deficit and public safety concerns — and could offer some stability for its City Hall to tackle those issues.
Lee's platform centered on unifying the city behind a politician who has been representing the city in Congress for decades, while her opponent Taylor pushed to fix what he called a broken city government. Both candidates campaigned on similar issues, like increasing the number of police officers in the city and addressing the city's budget shortfall, but differed somewhat in their approach and their backers.
The former U.S. congresswoman was largely seen as a trusted voice that could help stabilize the city. She received endorsements and funding from high-profile groups and leaders including the Oakland Chamber of Commerce, labor unions, state legislators, four former Oakland mayors and seven of the eight members of the Oakland City Council.
Wealthy tech, finance and commercial real estate executives backed Taylor, who ran as a more moderate candidate and appealed to those who were frustrated with the city's crime and governance problems. Revitalize East Bay — a coalition for 'moderate, practical governance' — donated $67,000 to Taylor's campaign. The group is backed by commercial real estate, tech and high net worth individuals including Piedmont-based hedge fund manager Philip Dreyfuss, who funded Thao's recall.
Backers of Taylor who spoke with the Business Times Monday said they are glad to have a clear direction on where the city is going and expect Lee will engage with their community as part of a broad coalition that she plans to create in her first 100 days.
Empower Oakland, a volunteer-led civic group that endorsed Taylor, also noted Lee could leverage political relationships at the county and state levels, which could help the city land more funding and resources.
Other commercial real estate leaders noted that landing stable leadership and getting out of an election cycle will not only help boost Oakland's reputation and perception, but also align the efforts at City Hall toward a common goal.
'Oakland is a deeply divided City, and I answered the call to run, to unite our community—so that I can represent every voter, and we can all work together as One Oakland to solve our most pressing problems,' Lee said in a post to X Saturday, after Taylor conceded.
Her first 100 days
In her first 100 days, Lee said she plans to bring together Police Department leadership and representatives from all business corridors to coordinate and improve safety strategies, aggressively prosecute illegal dumping and secure Oakland's fair share of money from the county to address the homelessness crisis, per her website.
Lee said she also plans to convene the CEOs of the 10 largest Oakland employers to discuss public-private initiatives to improve Oakland's economy and increase public safety.
Similar models exist today with Oakland's Northlake initiative, a privately funded enhanced services district to boost public safety and activate an area of Uptown Oakland kick started by local commercial real estate executives.
Four of the city's biggest employers, PG&E, Blue Shield, Clorox and Kaiser Permanente, pooled together $10 million last year to bolster security near their offices, provide buddy escorts for their employees and offer employee safety training.
Lee's 100 day plan also calls for permit reform to reduce bureaucracy for small businesses and directing city council to pass a budget that prioritizes public safety and stabilizes the city's finances.
She also proposed some government accountability measures, like appointing a task force of League of Women Voters, ethics and good government experts to modernize Oakland's Charter. She's also suggested auditing city contracts to ensure public funds are being spent effectively by contractors and nonprofits.
Lee named the head of the Alameda Labor Council and the president of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce in her transition team, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.
Charlene Wang won the race for the District 2 Oakland City Council seat, which spans Chinatown, Jack London Square, and areas near Lake Merritt. Oakland voters also approved by 65% a measure that increased sales tax from 10.25% to 10.75% that is intended to ease the city's budget crisis.
Lee has spent 30 years in public office. She will replace interim Mayor Kevin Jenkins, who stepped in after Thao was recalled, and finish Thao's term through the end of 2026.
She could take office in mid to late May, after the final vote count is certified. She will be the first Black woman to serve as mayor of Oakland.
The largest accounting firms in the East Bay
East Bay client service professionals
Rank Prior Rank Business name/Prior rank
1
11
CBIZ Inc. & CBIZ CPAs
2
2
Armanino LLP
3
6
Withum View this list
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
33 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Video: Trump Sees 'Substantial Chance of Negotiations' With Iran
President Trump sees a 'substantial chance of negotiations' and will decide within two weeks whether the U.S. gets involved in the Israel-Iran conflict, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday. "Based on the fact that there is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks," Leavitt said, reading a statement from Trump. She declined to respond as to whether Trump would seek authority from Congress for any military action in Iran.
Politico
35 minutes ago
- Politico
White House floats a new funding trick — and GOP lawmakers grimace
Russ Vought's relationship with Republican appropriators was already strained. Then he started talking about pursuing the ultimate end-run around their funding power heading into the fall. The White House budget director has been persistently touting the virtues of 'pocket rescissions,' a tactic he has floated as a way to codify the spending cuts Elon Musk made while atop his Department of Government Efficiency initiative, and which the federal government's top watchdog says is illegal. On Capitol Hill, leading GOP appropriators see Vought's comments as another shot against them in an escalating battle with the Trump administration over Congress' 'power of the purse.' And they warn that the budget director's adversarial posture hinders their relationship with the White House as they work to head off a government shutdown in just over three months. 'Pocket rescissions are illegal, in my judgment,' Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said in a brief interview this week, 'and contradict the will of Congress and the constitutional authority of Congress to appropriate funds.' To hear Vought tell it, a 'pocket rescission' is a legitimate tool at the executive branch's disposal. In such a scenario, President Donald Trump would issue a formal request to claw back funding, similar to the $9.4 billion package he sent lawmakers this month to cancel congressionally approved funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid. But in this case, the memo would land on Capitol Hill less than 45 days before the new fiscal year is set to begin Oct. 1. By withholding the cash for that full timeframe — regardless of action by Congress — the White House would treat the funding as expired when the current fiscal year ends on Sept. 30. The dizzying ploy is another means toward the same goal Trump has been chasing since Inauguration Day: to spend less money than Congress has explicitly mandated in law. But the Government Accountability Office says the maneuver is unlawful, and the GOP lawmakers in charge of divvying up federal funding are wary that Vought is now talking about it in the open. 'I understand we want to use all the arrows in our quiver, and he wants to use all his,' Rep. David Joyce (R-Ohio), a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, said of Vought in an interview. 'But every time you pull out an arrow, you have to be ready for the consequences, right?' Joyce continued: 'It's going to change the course of conversations and how each side works toward coming to resolution going forward.' Vought declined last week to elaborate on his intentions, when pressed in person on Capitol Hill about his plans to use the ploy in the coming months. His office also did not return a request for comment. However, the budget director laid out a detailed argument for the maneuver on television earlier in the month — then mentioned it again as he left a meeting with Speaker Mike Johnson and then during a later hearing with House appropriators. 'The very Impoundment Control Act itself allows for a procedure called pocket rescissions, later in the year, to be able to bank some of these savings, without the bill actually being passed,' Vought said on CNN. 'It's a provision that has been rarely used. But it is there. And we intend to use all of these tools.' Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the Interior Department and the EPA, recently warned that the gambit is 'a bad idea' that 'undermines Congress' authority,' after saying last month that he thinks 'it's illegal' for a president to withhold funding lawmakers approved. But many top Republican appropriators — while scoffing at Vought's comments — aren't willing to engage in rhetorical arguments about the bounds of the president's spending power. 'Talking is one thing. We'll see if he actually does it,' Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the military, said about Vought's comments. 'He's got his ideas,' said Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), chair of the appropriations panel responsible for funding the departments of Transportation and Housing. 'I'd have some concerns about it,' said Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the departments of Education, Labor, and Health and Human Services — all targets of Trump's deepest funding cuts. Tension has been building for months between those Republican appropriators and Vought, who has a history of testing the limits of funding law: When he served in this same role during Trump's first administration, he froze aid to Ukraine in a move that helped set the stage for the president's first impeachment trial. Republican funding leaders are irked that the White House has yet to deliver a full budget request, which appropriators rely upon to write their dozen funding measures. Vought has already left open the door to withholding the new money if the administration doesn't agree with the spending priorities in the final bills. They also say the president's budget director and other Cabinet secretaries have withheld essential information about how they are using federal cash as the Trump administration fights off more than 100 legal challenges around the country. The suits are seeking to overturn the White House's freezing of billions of dollars Congress already approved for myriad programs and agencies. House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) issued a rare rebuke of Vought this spring for taking down the public website showing how agencies are expected to disburse federal dollars. But the Oklahoma Republican generally avoids any public criticism of the Trump administration and is not sounding off now about Vought's embrace of pocket rescissions. Cole said this month that he would 'look at each individual' request the White House sends to claw back funding, now that the House has passed the $9.4 billion package to nix money for foreign aid and public broadcasting. That package of funding cuts now sits in the Senate, where some top Republicans are interested in tweaking the plan to protect funding for preventing AIDS around the world and supporting PBS programming in their home states. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) suggested Vought's public comments about using pocket rescissions could be intended to encourage reluctant senators to clear it. 'Maybe that's the way to let members know: Vote for the ones he sends up,' Johnson said, noting that he would be 'totally supportive' of Vought using the tactic this fall. Another Senate fiscal hawk, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chair Rand Paul (R-Ky.), said he believes the law 'does allow for pocket rescissions.' 'I think the president should have more power not to spend money,' Paul told reporters last week. 'So if we have a way to reduce spending, by all means, we should use it.' No court has ruled on the president's power to cancel funding by sending Congress a request and then running out the clock at the end of the fiscal year. But GAO has twice weighed in. In 2018, the watchdog found that the law 'does not permit the withholding of funds through their date of expiration.' Vought, though, likes to cite an older GAO conclusion from 1975: It determined that Congress was unable to reject then-President Gerald Ford's requests to claw back funding 'in time to prevent the budget authority from lapsing.' Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump pivots to distractions as polls show collapsing support for his agenda
Trump pivots to distractions as polls show collapsing support for his agenda | Opinion Americans give Trump a failing grade on the budget, trade and immigration. That's tough to swallow for a politician who gauges everything on public perception. Show Caption Hide Caption 'No Kings' protests vastly outdraw Trump's military parade A stark contrast emerged in attendance between the Trump administration's Army birthday parade in Washington, DC, and the sweeping 'No Kings' protests held nationwide. unbranded - Newsworthy Recent polling data indicates that the majority of Americans disapprove of President Trump's budget bill, particularly its cuts to Medicaid. Trump's immigration policies, including increased ICE raids, are facing declining public support. The president's trade policies are also unpopular, with a majority of Americans disapproving of his approach. Trump's overall job approval rating has fallen since he took office, with more Americans disapproving than approving of his performance. Donald Trump's plan for his second term as president has been to run the table quickly to score one quick and big budget victory pushed through on artificial deadlines and whip the vote for Republican support in Congress. Trump paired that objective with two other staples of his reelection campaign – punishing America's allies with illogical trade wars and setting a historical record for the economy-disrupting mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. It's summer now, and the report card has arrived. Americans give Trump a failing grade on the budget, trade and immigration. That's tough to swallow for a politician who gauges everything on public perception. Trump, being Trump, is now pivoting to distractions, touting a military parade that flopped as an expensive boondoggle and then flipping from diplomacy with Iran to potentially ordering air strikes on that country. Take our poll: Should US go to war with Iran or support Israel from afar? | Opinion Americans disapprove of budget bill slashing Medicaid Let's start with Trump's budget, which Republican leaders in Congress call the "one big, beautiful bill" in honor of their continuing deference to whatever he wants and the dereliction of their duty to serve as a coequal branch of our government. The version that narrowly passed the House slashed federal safety net programs to boost tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Some senators, seeking to make things even better for the rich at the expense of the poor, want bigger cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and other programs. Opinion: Trump lied about the LA protests so you wouldn't see what he's really doing A batch of recent polls shows Americans reject that: A June 11 Quinnipiac University poll found that 53% of American voters oppose the budget bill, while 27% approve it. Nearly half of the voters polled said funding for Medicaid should go up, not down, while 40% said it should stay the same and just 10% wanted it cut. A June 16 Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that 50% of Americans think we spend too little on Medicaid, while 31% say we spend enough and just 18% say we spend too much. Forty-five percent of Americans think we should spend more on food and nutrition assistance, while 30% say we spend enough and 24% say we spend too much. A June 17 KFF Health Tracking Poll found that 64% of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Trump's budget bill, while 83% of them hold a favorable view of Medicaid. Republican support for the bill came in strong at 61% at first, but then dropped by 20 points when the Republicans polled heard details about how the legislation would force millions off their health care plans. Polling finds Americans disagree with Trump on immigration, economy, border security This much seems clear: The more Americans learn about Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the more they find it small-minded and ugly. That explains the artificial deadlines. Trump and his Republican allies in Congress want to wrap this up by July 4. But Republican infighting – moderates who fear it goes too far, far-righters who complain it doesn't go far enough – will make for a contentious Congress for at least the next two weeks. While we wait, Trump is seeing his support on immigration – once his strongest issue – melt away in the summer of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. The Quinnipiac University poll found 54% of the registered voters surveyed opposed his approach to immigration, while 43% approve and 3% had no opinion. Trump campaigned in 2024 on reviving America's economy. But his trade wars, which have hit our country's international allies just as hard or harder than our geopolitical foes, are unpopular. Quinnipiac found that just 38% approve of Trump's trade policy, while 57% disapprove and 6% had no opinion. The AP-NORC poll found that 32% of Americans think we spend too much on border security, while 37% think we spend the right amount and 29% think we spend too little. Trump's approval rating continues to tank. Does it matter? In this time of divisiveness, a majority of Americans can agree on one thing: Trump is disappointing them as president. Just 38% of the votes surveyed by Quinnipiac approve of Trump's job performance, while 54% disapprove. Opinion: Threats against judges nearly doubled under Trump. Republicans blame the victim. That tracks with a Pew Research Center poll released June 17, which found that 41% of those polled approve of Trump's performance while 58% disapprove. Pew noted that Trump has lost ground in his approval rating since he was sworn into office again on Jan. 20. Don't expect Trump to spend too much time worrying about what Americans tell pollsters. He has a long history of touting polls when they hold good news for him and dismissing them when they don't. He also suggested just before the 2024 election that releasing poll results he didn't like "should be illegal." Here's what you can expect: more distractions from Trump as the Republicans fights it out on which version of his budget bill passes or fails in Congress. If they listened to Americans, they would kill the bill and start from scratch. Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.
