East Bay Insiders just published the Alameda County Ballot Watchdog Committee’s review of November measures, and Oakland’s Measure EE got the worst score of the entire county: 1.8 out of 5. The committee does not take sides on policy. It only grades whether the ballot summary is accurate, impartial, and informative. EE failed. They said it crams too many changes into one question, uses vague language about “additional provisions,” and never explains the financial consequences. That is not an accident. Measure EE rewrites the city charter so the mayor becomes CEO with a veto over laws and a line-item veto over the budget. It also hands the Public Ethics Commission power to reset elected pay. The City Auditor’s impartial analysis puts the annual cost at $2 million to $2.6 million, with council raises estimated at $36,000 to $108,000 each. None of that is clear on the ballot. Barbara Lee broke a 4-4 council tie to put this on the ballot for the office she holds. The official argument against it, signed by Loren Taylor and others, already called it a power grab. Now the neutral ballot watchdogs are saying the language itself hides what voters are actually approving. When City Hall writes a ballot question that scores a 1.8, the safest vote is no. Do not hand Barbara Lee more power. Vote NO on Measure EE. Ballots are already out. OaklandPowerGrab.com – at Oakland, CA

NBC Bay Area just ran a 36-second explainer on Oakland’s Measure EE. Here is what they did not have time to say. On November 3 a simple majority can lock a new system into the city charter. The mayor becomes CEO, gets a veto over laws, and gets a line-item veto over the budget. One person can zero out a park, a street, or a neighborhood project. It takes six of eight council votes to undo it. The City Auditor’s impartial analysis says the package costs $2 million to $2.6 million a year, mostly because the Public Ethics Commission would reset elected pay, with council raises estimated at $36,000 to $108,000 each. Barbara Lee is the one selling this. She convened the working group, she and Council President Kevin Jenkins wrote the plan, and she broke a 4-4 council tie to put it on the ballot for the office she holds and is running to keep. Councilmembers Zac Unger, Janani Ramachandran, Noel Gallo, and Ken Houston voted no. The official argument against it, signed by Loren Taylor, Budget Advisory Commission member Ben Gould, Pam Drake, and Naomi Schiff, calls it a power grab. Their words: it makes government less transparent, increases the risk of corruption, and drives gridlock. A future mayor could appoint unqualified friends to department jobs. And it hands councilmembers massive pay raises while asking them to do less. Nate Miley, Nancy Nadel, and former Ethics Commission chair Ralph Kanz are on the no side too. – at Oakland, CA

Oaklandside just laid out what Measure EE actually does, and it is worse than the slogan. On November 3, a simple majority can rewrite Oakland’s charter and make the mayor the city’s CEO. That means a veto over laws and a line-item veto over the budget. One person can zero out a park, a street, or a neighborhood project. It takes six of eight council votes to undo it. The City Auditor says the package costs $2 million to $2.6 million a year, mostly because the Public Ethics Commission would reset elected pay, with council raises estimated at $36,000 to $108,000 each. Barbara Lee is the one selling this. She convened the working group, she and Council President Kevin Jenkins wrote the plan, and she broke a 4-4 council tie to put it on the ballot for the office she holds and is running to keep. The official argument against it, signed by Loren Taylor, Budget Advisory Commission member Ben Gould, Pam Drake, and Naomi Schiff, calls it a power grab. Their words, not mine: it makes government less transparent, increases the risk of corruption, and drives gridlock. A future mayor could appoint unqualified friends to department jobs. A veto lets one office block what a council majority already passed. And it hands councilmembers massive pay raises while asking them to do less. Nate Miley, Nancy Nadel, former Ethics Commission chair Ralph Kanz, James Vann, and Sharon Rose are on the no side too. The yes side is Lee, Libby Schaaf, and the people who already run City Hall. This is not reform. It is a permanent charter veto, a pay reset, and a tie-breaking vote cast by the person who benefits. Vote NO on Measure EE by November 3. – at Oakland, CA

🚨 ALERT: Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee just voted to give herself a veto power over the entire city, and most people still do not know it is on the November ballot. Here is what happened in plain English. City Council was deadlocked 4 to 4 on a proposal to rewrite Oakland’s charter and turn the mayor into the city’s CEO. That job would come with the power to kill laws and erase budget lines the 80-year-old mayor does or her handlers do not like. It would take six of eight councilmembers to undo it. Barbara Lee broke the tie. She cast the deciding vote to put that power in front of voters while she is sitting in the office that would receive it, and while she is running to keep that office. This is the same Barbara Lee who accepted $67,950 from the Duong crime family now at the center of Oakland’s federal corruption case. The same mayor who stood with Sheng Thao (now facing 95 years), told voters a recall would be undemocratic, and watched the city remove Thao anyway. The same politician who parked basement rental income in a relative’s trust for 14 years while giving speeches about housing as a human right. The same former member of Congress who flew family on lobbyist-funded luxury trips with her husband to the German alps, then came home and asked Oakland for more taxes. The same City Hall that lost the Raiders, the Warriors, and the A’s, then posted about an ultimate frisbee championship. The same week Oakland saw a repeat stabber stab 4 more people and light someone’s home on fire, she put out a proclamation for Natural Mai Tai Day. Voters already rejected the June tax she was made to champion. There answer is not to earn back trust. There answer is veto power. If she cannot deliver clean streets, working basics, and a budget people believe in with the power she already has, Oakland should not hand her more. Vote NO on Measure EE by November 3. – at Oakland, CA

Oakland Measure EE is Barbara Lee’s power grab. Measure EE rewrites the City Charter so one mayor can veto Council legislation, line-item veto the budget, and take control of city departments. Your district representative can fight for a street, a park, or a neighborhood project. Under EE, the mayor can zero it out. Stopping her takes six of eight votes. Three allies and the rest of the Council becomes what Zac Unger already called it: a punching bag. The same measure writes politicians a raise. Council pay is $114,678. Measure EE forces them full-time, then lets the Public Ethics Commission benchmark salaries against cities like Los Angeles at about $245,000. That is a path to a 125% pay hike. The City Auditor put the first-year cost at $2.0 to $2.6 million. Oakland is already staring at a $115 to $135 million annual shortfall through 2030. Lee’s working group designed the version that gives the mayor the most power. The Council tied 4-4. She broke the tie herself and put her own expansion of power on the same ballot where she is running to keep the job. She does not deserve more of it. Under this mayor, Oakland lost the last of its major sports teams and now gets Instagram posts about an ultimate frisbee squad. The airport keeps losing real airlines while City Hall celebrates Frontier. Institutions like Home of Chicken and Waffles close and she shows up for the photo. Crime hits parks and homes while proclamations go out for National Mai Tai Day. That is the record. Measure EE would lock more power into that office for every mayor after her. This is not reform. It is veto power plus a pay raise, sold as accountability. Vote NO on Measure EE.