Ramachandran told KQED that since the meeting, she’s received a flurry of messages from constituents responding to what happened. She said that out of the hundreds of messages received from Oakland residents, “not a single email, not a single phone call, not a single DM, not a single text message” favors “anything less than the full fine” for Bernard.

Bernard and Warner declined KQED’s requests for interviews.

But during the April hearing, Bernard told the council that he and Warner did “everything in [their] willpower” to follow the law in the plan to develop the property. Ramachandran was not convinced.

“This was a knowing violation of our Tree Protection Ordinance and we need to comply with our existing law and fine him the amount as recommended by city staff,” she told KQED.

During the hearing, Councilmember Carroll Fife pushed back on whether the tree protection law was being enforced fairly.

Fife asked “why a Black man should be the first to receive consequences for things that white people have been doing for centuries,” referring to the region’s history of racial segregation based on legal measures, like redlining.

A property on Claremont Avenue across from Garber Park in Oakland on May 4, 2026. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)

Bernard is a Nigerian immigrant. Earlier, his partner Warner had alleged to the council that when they initially purchased the property, other residents in the neighborhood had made racist comments and threats to Bernard.

“I  did not want to bring up race, but goddamn it, it is a part of what we’re discussing,” Fife said, though she clarified that she did not agree with Bernard’s actions.

Fife was not available for comment before publication.

The April hearing drew over a dozen members of the public to the podium.

Among them was Saumitra Kelkar, a biologist and science educator, whose Instagram posts about the removals have garnered thousands of views. He said the native oak trees in the city’s hills create a unique microclimate that holds onto moisture and resists burning.

“This was a natural shaded fuel break, which was going to severely impede the ability of a wildfire to travel through that area,” Kelkar said. Now that the trees are gone, he said, it’s going to be“much easier for a much faster fire to burn much hotter, and cause a lot more destruction.”

Kelkar, who recalled coming to the location as a college student to forage for edible mushrooms and spot native wildlife like salamanders, said it was “gut-wrenching” to revisit the site in advance of the April hearing.

Councilmember Carroll Fife speaks during a press conference at Oakland City Hall in Oakland on Aug. 14, 2025, condemning President Trump’s recent remarks about Oakland. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)

”Even if Matthew Bernard is required to reforest that entire hillside, it’s going to take decades or centuries for the populations of [wildlife] to actually return,” he said.

The vote in April ended in a tie, with Ramachandran, Kevin Jenkins, Zac Unger and Charlene Wang supporting the resolution and Fife, Rowena Brown and Ken Houston voting against it.

Mayor Barbara Lee refused to break the tie. The council tried again later in the meeting to pass a reduced fine, and the vote failed.

Councilmember Noel Gallo was not present for the vote and was counted as a “no,” but he told KQED he plans to support the full fine Tuesday evening.

Ramachandran agreed that the situation and Oakland’s historical context presented racial equity issues.

“ We have a very racist history in the hills. I certainly would not have been able to be [a] councilmember of this district as of not that long ago,” she told KQED.

However, she said, the city council should uphold the law as it’s written, and she stands by her commitment to the full penalty.

Janani Ramachandran speaks with campaign organizers in Oakland on June 26, 2021. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)

“I’m Indian, my husband’s Nigerian, and our son is both,” Ramachandran continued. “And the three of us would not be able to live in my district at all, given the legacy of redlining. That doesn’t mean that we should give a pass to people that look like us.”

Ramachandran told KQED she’s considering revisions to the tree protections with the rest of the council — including a statute of limitations to help the city address violations in a timely way.

“ I really do think that city staff messed up and dropped the ball back in 2021 when they had first found out,” she said. “Right then and there, they should have issued this notice of violation and brought it to council and brought forward the charges.”