But at the start of the session, Council President Kevin Jenkins announced the delay, explaining that state and county funding Oakland relies on could be lost if the plan is approved in its current form.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think it\u2019s imperative that we as a city keep funding,\u201d Jenkins said.<\/p>\n
The council chambers \u2014 packed with members of the public hoping to weigh in on the legislation \u2014 fell silent. Two councilmembers looked at each other and shrugged. Others took out their phones and dashed off texts.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The author of the proposal, Houston, appeared as surprised as anyone.<\/p>\n
\u201cCan you give me a reason why it\u2019s being pulled?\u201d he asked Jenkins.<\/p>\n
Jenkins said the state was concerned that the policy bans homeless people from living in too many parts of the city. \u201cWe are a very urban city, so where people can go when they are unsheltered is something that we\u2019re going to have to work on,\u201d said Jenkins. He said the council could return to it in January.<\/p>\n
Jenkins then assured Houston that the public could still share comments.<\/p>\n
And weigh in the public did.<\/p>\n
Dozens of speakers lined up in person and on Zoom, almost everyone criticizing the policy and imploring the council to \u201cstart from scratch.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI wish you guys wouldn\u2019t think we\u2019re criminals,\u201d said an unhoused woman who goes by Alley Cat. Raised in Oakland, she said she works two jobs but still hasn\u2019t been able to afford more than an RV to live in since she lost her housing.<\/p>\n
\u201cI run from the city of Oakland in my RV so they don\u2019t destroy it,\u201d she said, tearing up. \u201cWe don\u2019t even know we can speak at these things \u2014\u00a0you don\u2019t reach out to us.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
State leaders say concerns they raised months ago remain the same<\/p>\n
On Monday, the California Interagency Council on Homelessness<\/a>\u2019 Executive Director Meghan Marshall wrote to the city administrator and other officials, expressing concerns with Houston\u2019s encampment proposal. Her organization did the same in August.<\/p>\n The feedback, which City Administrator Jestin Johnson shared with the council on Monday over email, centered on the designation, in Houston\u2019s proposal, of \u201chigh-sensitivity\u201d and \u201clow-sensitivity\u201d zones in Oakland. A carryover from the city\u2019s current encampment policy<\/a>, these designations determine which areas the city will target for homeless camp closures or leave alone.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe definition of \u2018high-sensitivity areas\u2019 is still so broad, that, in practice, it appears to classify nearly the entire city as high-sensitivity,\u201d Marshall wrote in her email, which was shared with The Oaklandside by the city. \u201cAs written, it is difficult to determine where Oaklanders experiencing homelessness can exist in the City without being subject to enforcement under this policy.\u201d<\/p>\n Because of this, Marshall said, \u201cwe cannot assess how the policy\u2026aligns with State funding requirements.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n A map attached to Houston\u2019s proposal does, in fact, label almost all of Oakland \u2014 save for small areas of the East Oakland and West Oakland flats \u2014 \u201chigh-sensitivity,\u201d or subject to more aggressive closures of camps.\u00a0<\/p>\n This is not new in Houston\u2019s proposal. The city\u2019s existing rules do the same \u2014 and have long received criticism for this from homeless people and advocates. The difference is that the current policy still prevents closures in high-sensitivity zones if there\u2019s no other shelter available for the residents to move to. Houston\u2019s plan would still instruct the city to offer shelter, but not make it a requirement before closure.<\/p>\n Under Houston\u2019s changes, the city administration would come back to the council within 90 days, proposing city property that could be converted into shelter or additional low-sensitivity zones.<\/p>\n Houston took out some of the bite \u2014 but not all \u2014 from his new rules<\/p>\n When Houston and his co-author, Jenkin\u2019s chief of staff Patricia Brooks, first introduced their ideas for changing Oakland\u2019s approach to homelessness in September, they drew heavy attention. Over the course of a seven-hour council committee meeting that month, dozens of community members excoriated Houston and his supporters for \u201ccriminalizing\u201d homeless people, and several councilmembers also grilled him about his plan, skeptical of its impacts.\u00a0<\/p>\n A number of other people, though, came to the meeting to thank Houston and Brooks for taking a significant swing at the crisis.<\/p>\n That meeting ended in ambiguity<\/a>, with several councilmembers telling Houston they\u2019d only support his plan with major amendments.\u00a0<\/p>\n This week, Houston returned with an updated policy<\/a>. It appears that he and Brooks made an effort to tone down some of the more controversial language while maintaining the meat of the proposal.<\/p>\n Houston\u2019s previous plan undid the key city requirement to offer shelter to all residents of an encampment before it\u2019s shut down. For years, that has meant the city cannot close a camp if there are no beds available for the people living there.<\/p>\n The updated proposal still removes the shelter requirement. However, it now encourages the city to try to find alternative homes for people in camps.<\/p>\n Generally, Oakland will \u201cmake every reasonable effort to provide offers to all affected\u201d residents, or let them move to a low-sensitivity location if no shelter is available, it says. It spells out the process for identifying and offering shelter spots.<\/p>\n However, in cases where closures are prompted by \u201curgent health and safety conditions,\u201d or because of \u201creencampment\u201d after a closure, there are no such requirements. \u201cDepending on the situation, such efforts may not be feasible, and in no case will emergency or urgent closures be delayed for shelter unavailability,\u201d Houston\u2019s new rules say.<\/p>\n The new proposal keeps another core piece of Oakland\u2019s current encampment policy, which says, \u201cThe city will not cite or arrest any individual solely for camping, or otherwise for the status of being homeless.\u201d In September, Houston had proposed striking this prohibition, allowing arrests of campers<\/a>, but he\u2019s now walked that back.<\/p>\n As was the case in September, Houston\u2019s latest proposal excludes vehicle homes from the definition of homelessness. That means the city would have more leeway to tow RV encampments and car dwellings than to remove tent communities. The new policy says those city workers \u201cshould consider\u201d calling the encampment team to come offer the person living in a vehicle some other type of shelter before towing, but it doesn\u2019t require it.<\/p>\n![\"EAP](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/EAP-map.jpg\")
Most of the city \u2014 colored black on this map \u2014 would be considered \u201chigh-sensitivity,\u201d or off-limits for encampments, under Councilmember Ken Houston\u2019s plan. The state raised concerns about the minimal permitted areas (in white). Credit: City of Oakland<\/p>\n![\"Batman](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Batman-at-City-Council.jpg\")
A speaker dressed as Batman was among dozens of community members who criticized Houston\u2019s encampment plan Tuesday. Credit: Natalie Orenstein\/The Oaklandside<\/p>\n