Oakland, California

California voters will decide in November whether to lift a 1988 ban that bars the state and most local governments from using public funds to finance political campaigns. Proposition 4 would authorize the state and most localities to establish public campaign financing systems for state and local races, similar to programs already used by seven charter cities including San Francisco, Berkeley and Oakland. Candidates would need to meet qualifying criteria, such as securing small-dollar donors or accepting spending caps, to receive funding as grants, matching funds or vouchers.

Supporters, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, the state Democratic Party and good-government groups, argue public financing counters the influence of big private money and could broaden the pool of candidates. Opponents, including Republican lawmakers and some newspaper editorial boards, say taxpayers shouldn't subsidize campaigns and criticize the measure for lacking enforcement specifics, since it exempts the state's campaign finance watchdog from overseeing local programs. Voters rejected similar measures in 2000 and 2010, and recent polling shows continued public skepticism toward Prop. 4.

Jury selection began this week in the federal corruption trial of former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, her partner Andre Jones, and recycling contractor executives David Duong and Andy Duong. Prosecutors allege the four, along with political operative Mario Juarez, orchestrated a scheme in which the Duongs financed a $75,000 campaign mailer to help elect Thao in 2022 and arranged a lucrative no-show job for Jones at Evolutionary Homes, a startup housing company. In return, Thao allegedly promised to steer city contracts to the Duongs' firm, California Waste Solutions, extend its recycling contract, and help the housing company secure a deal to sell units to the city.

All four defendants face bribery and honest services fraud conspiracy charges, with maximum sentences up to 20 years. They have pleaded not guilty. Juarez has already pleaded guilty and is expected to testify as the prosecution's star witness, along with former San Leandro councilman Bryan Azevedo, who also pleaded guilty. The case follows FBI raids in June 2024 and Thao's recall by Oakland voters that November. Prosecutors expect to present their case through mid-November.

An opinion essay by historian Teal Arcadi, adapted from his new book "Concrete Leviathan," revisits Syracuse's role as a national testing ground for infrastructure policy. In the 1940s, Fortune magazine chose Syracuse as a model mid-sized city for postwar planning, work that helped justify demolishing the historically Black 15th Ward to build Interstate 81 — part of a nationwide pattern in which highway construction displaced roughly 1 million Americans, disproportionately from poor and nonwhite neighborhoods.

Decades later, Syracuse became a model again, this time for repair: the city's decision to remove the aging I-81 viaduct and replace it with a "community grid" has inspired similar highway-removal efforts in cities including Oakland, Tulsa and Buffalo. Arcadi argues the project's success in righting past wrongs remains uncertain, warning that gentrification could overtake efforts to rebuild a mixed-income community. He proposes a federal "Community Equity Protection Bureau," modeled on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to give residents real democratic input into future infrastructure decisions.

Oakland County, Michigan commissioners unanimously approved a roughly $1.2 billion Fiscal Year 2027 budget on Thursday night, following tense exchanges over whether the county should explicitly fund assistance for immigrants affected by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The budget, about $70 million more than the prior year's due to inflation and higher projected revenue, closely mirrors County Executive Dave Coulter's July proposal, with additions for homelessness, human trafficking prevention and crisis response.

Commissioner Charlie Cavell proposed amendments totaling up to $900,000 for legal aid and food assistance for immigrant families and contributions to the county's Rx Kids program; commissioners rejected the first two, drawing boos from audience members who accused the panel of discrimination. Finance chair Gwen Markham defended the process as open and collaborative, while Cavell and Commissioner Kristen Nelson, who don't caucus with Democrats, argued they were excluded from committee negotiations. The final budget includes funds for emergency winter housing, legal aid for families, maternal and mental health care, and human trafficking prevention, but no funding specifically designated for immigrant legal or food assistance.

California legislators quietly inserted $1.3 billion in earmarks into this year's state budget, funding projects from a Santa Barbara college gym renovation to a Marin County farmers market and a minor league baseball stadium in San Jose. The money, allocated through Assembly Bill 113, was added just days before the legislative session ended, with lawmakers keeping their individual requests confidential until after passage.

An analysis found more than 40% of the funds went to nonprofits, with Los Angeles and Santa Barbara counties—home to top Democratic leaders—receiving outsized shares, while many Republican-represented rural counties got little or nothing. Beneficiaries ranged from arts groups and museums to a mixed martial arts fighters' retirement fund and nonprofits with ties to Governor Gavin Newsom. Critics, including nonprofit advocates and taxpayer groups, say the closed-door process rewards political relationships over need, especially as the state confronts federal healthcare funding cuts. Legislative leaders defend the practice as a way to address urgent local needs efficiently, though even some lawmakers acknowledge the lack of transparency is problematic.

Political strategist Khalil Thompson, co-founder of Win With Black Men, hosted a discussion at Philly Cuts barbershop in West Philadelphia to explore why some Black men shifted toward Donald Trump in 2024 rather than backing Kamala Harris. About one-quarter of Black men supported Trump last year, up from 12% in 2020, according to AP VoteCast. The two-hour conversation drew local politicians, union leaders, and residents, and grew heated at times as attendees debated Trump's relationship with Black culture, racism, and disillusionment with both parties. Harris had visited the same barbershop nine days before losing the election.

Attendees agreed on the need for greater government investment in Black communities, better educational opportunities, and paths to economic independence, while voicing distrust of political institutions across party lines. Pollster Terrance Woodbury noted stark economic disparities, including higher Black male unemployment and far lower median family wealth compared to white families, as context for the political divide. Strategists say Black men, despite being a small share of the electorate, could prove decisive in close races, and several potential 2028 Democratic candidates are already seeking guidance on outreach to this bloc, particularly ahead of the South Carolina primary.

Contra Costa County supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to adopt a policy restricting county cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, aligning the county with other Bay Area jurisdictions. The policy bars county resources from being used to assist federal immigration operations unless a judicial warrant is presented, and directs staff to route enforcement requests to legal counsel or designated officials. It largely follows a model policy released by state Attorney General Rob Bonta under Senate Bill 580, which requires local governments to adopt similar protections by the start of 2027.

Debate centered on whether to enact the protections as a policy or a stronger ordinance; an ordinance motion failed on a split vote, with supporters arguing it would offer more durable protection and opponents favoring a policy's faster implementation and easier amendment. Other Bay Area counties, cities, and a school district already have comparable measures in place. County employees who violate the policy face disciplinary action.