During mayor Barbara Lee’s tenure to date, $27.2 million in city contracts were awarded with no council vote or prior public review
The city awarded approximately $61.2 million in contracts with no council vote or public review over the past three fiscal years, according to a city report released this week.1
The city’s own municipal code currently requires these contracts to be reported to the city council and the public every six months.2 City staff says the requirement is to report only every 12 months.3 Until this week, the city had not released a report in three years.
Each individual contract award came in below $250,000. Per city policy, contracts above $250,000 must be approved in advance by city council in a public meeting — where Oaklanders would get the chance to see and comment on them before they are signed.
Our review of the list of contracts shows several apparent instances in which multiple individual contracts that cumulatively exceeded the $250,000 threshold were awarded to the same vendor in a single fiscal year.
Under the current city charter, the chain of responsibility for these under-$250,000 contracts ends with mayor Barbara Lee.
Per the charter, the mayor appoints and supervises the city administrator, who serves “at the pleasure of the Mayor.” The city administrator then carries out the city’s day-to-day financial affairs, supervises the city’s finance director, executes contracts either directly or through their designee, and ensures that the council timely receives the required reports about them.4
Mayor Lee took office on May 20, 2025, pledging to govern with “transparency, accountability, and results.”5
In fairness, most of the three-year reporting lapse predates Lee’s tenure as mayor. However, since Lee took office as mayor, the city failed to honor its fall 2025 and spring 2026 targets for releasing this report to the public.67
Here we pause to note that it is unrealistic to expect the mayor to personally review every single small-dollar contract the city awards. However, it stands to reason that it ultimately is the mayor’s responsibility to manage her direct subordinate — the city administrator — to ensure that the city’s contracting processes are followed, contracts are awarded according to the city’s established policies and procedures, procurement controls are maintained, and the required transparency reports are timely produced.
Subscribe to Oakland Report (it’s free)
Don’t miss a beat. Oakland Report subscribers receive deep-dive analyses and updates on the government decisions that affect Oaklanders’ lives. We present the evidence we find — especially evidence that is overlooked, mischaracterized, or omitted elsewhere — and let our readers decide for themselves what to think about it.
A day late and a dollar short
Oakland Report examined the recently released report of the city’s contracts that were awarded without prior council authorization or public review. The report spans the past three fiscal years from 2023-24 to 2025-26.
By our count, the report lists 10 bid-waiver or sole-source awards, 126 contracts that were “piggybacked” on other governments’ contracts, and $31 million in awards over $50,000 with no procurement method listed.
Since mayor Lee took office 17 months ago, 167 contracts totaling $27.2 million were awarded under the city administrator’s authority with no council vote on the contracts themselves, according to the report (37 of them cite a council resolution for the underlying program). Of these 167 contracts, 48 totaling $5.0 million involved no Oakland public bid, three of them “no-bid” contracts that received a bid waiver; and another 50 totaling $11.3 million total list no procurement method.8
Nearly all of the under-$250,000 contracts over the past three years — totaling $61.2 million — were awarded during the tenure of former city administrator Jestin Johnson.
Former mayor Sheng Thao hired Johnson as city administrator in June 2023, a few months after she took office. After Thao was recalled by Oakland voters and Lee was elected to replace her, Lee kept Johnson on as city administrator.
Johnson served under mayor Lee for one year. He resigned in May 2026 after the release of text messages in which he made inappropriate comments about female employees. Lee named assistant city administrator Betsy Lake to replace him on an interim basis, and the council confirmed Lake as interim city administrator on July 7.
Former mayor Thao is now standing trial on federal bribery and corruption charges, to which she has pleaded not guilty. Johnson testified for the prosecution on Oct. 29.
Same vendor, same work, multiple contracts
Oakland Report examined all 730 line items in the list of contracts and calculated the annual cumulative totals awarded to each vendor. Our review showed seven vendors received cumulative annual contract awards in excess of $250,000 on nine separate occasions.
The cumulative $250,000 threshold appears to have been exceeded at least once in every fiscal year covered by the report.
The city staff report released with the list names only one vendor whose contracts exceed the threshold: CPS HR Consulting (a human resources consultant firm), and describes “three projects.”
The list attached to the staff report appears to show seven agreements to CPS HR totaling about $702,000. These include separate contracts for police lieutenant and sergeant examinations dated the same day (Jul. 1, 2025) for $45,950 and $44,000. Notably, those contracts’ amounts each fell below the $49,999 limit under which “informal” contract awards (i.e., without formal bids) may occur, per city policy.
APTIM Environmental (an environmental and infrastructure consulting firm) received two $249,000 grant-writing purchase orders dated Feb. 12 and 14, 2024, citing the same requisition number 202407950.
Avenu Insights & Analytics and MuniServices, which does business as Avenu MuniServices (a municipal tax and revenue consultant), received $600,000 dated within five months of FY 2023-24: a $250,000 city administrator’s office agreement and a $100,000 second amendment to a hotel tax audit contract, both dated July 1, 2023; and a $250,000 sugar-sweetened beverage tax engagement dated that December.
Fleetworks (a vehicle repair company) received two $250,000 contracts for rebuilding vehicle transmissions dated a month apart under one formally bid request for quotations.
Flo’s Friendly School Lunches (a food service caterer) was awarded $250,395 in two contracts dated five days apart.
Bright Research Group (an Oakland research and evaluation consultancy) was awarded $250,000 for the Oakland Fund for Children and Youth’s strategic plan, dated March 2024, and $225,000 for its “Phase III, IV,” dated that July; the fund’s oversight committee took up funding for those phases in October 2024.9
TruePoint Solutions (a government software implementation firm) received about $530,000 for Accela permitting work across three departments; the council’s 2021 authorization for Accela vendor contracts ran three years and appears to have lapsed before the date of the first award.10
None of the above appears to definitively establish intent to evade code requirements. The municipal code bars splitting only when the “sole purpose is to knowingly avoid the formal calling of bids,” but separately requires council approval once aggregated spending under a contract and its amendments exceeds the administrator’s limit.11
Regardless of intent or lack thereof, the data suggests that these clusters of previously unreported contracts warrant further scrutiny, a review of the requisition files, and an explanation to the city council and the public.
The city is required to disclose these contracts every six months. Until this week, it hadn’t done so in three years.
Oakland Report examined each line item in the list by its stated procurement method.
Hundreds of contracts involved no Oakland public bid. 252 of the contracts (totaling $7.1 million) were at or below $50,000, where no formal bid is required; 81 of these fell between $45,000 and $50,000. Another 126 (totaling $28.6 million) “piggybacked” on contracts other governments had bid.
For 173 of the contracts over $50,000, the report does not say how the contractor was chosen. Together these total $31 million, 35% of the dollars listed, and cite no solicitation, bid waiver, cooperative contract or council resolution. The municipal code requires formal advertised bids or requests for proposals above $50,000 unless bidding is waived.
Ten awards were made by bid waiver or sole source, including a $250,000 sole source purchase of sewer roach control chemicals and a $49,999 competitive bid waiver to the Beautification Council, the nonprofit councilmember Ken Houston ran until November 2024.12
The report’s numbers don’t reconcile with its own attachment. After removing 76 apparently duplicate entries, the line items still sum to about $87.7 million — $26.5 million more than the stated totals. The compliance certification names “FY 2022-23,” a year the report doesn’t cover.
In response to a committee question about the long delay, the finance director said the report ‘got overlooked’
Asked by committee chair Janani Ramachandran why the report was so late, procurement administrator Laura Gonzales-Woodward cited “a transition of leadership” in finance, and added that a scheduled June committee meeting was cancelled.
Ramachandran noted that the committee actually did hold meetings in June, stating “that cannot be the reason why it didn’t come for the last three years.”
Finance director Bradley Johnson said he could not speak to the 2023-24 report (he was appointed finance director in November 2025 after working as the city’s budget manager for the previous four years, and before that he worked for the city in other finance-related roles starting in 2010), but said that the 2024-25 report was delayed by budget rebalancing and “got overlooked.”
He added that the report is now “more complete” than prior reports, and now covers grant and cooperative agreements. Gonzales-Woodward (the finance staffer) and Johnson both said the report will come every fall going forward. (Note: this means annually, though the code appears to require these reports every six months.) He cautioned that the figures are “agreed contract award amounts. They aren’t spending amounts,” and that the city’s systems are “candidly not robust enough” to track spending against them.
During the committee discussion, chair Ramachandran said she could not tell “what is approved from council versus what is approved from the city administrator on their own.”
Council member Rowena Brown expressed concern that a group can get $250,000 more than once a year without council review, describing it as a “red flag.” Gonzales-Woodward said same-service awards over $250,000 go to the council.
However, the list of contracts in the report shows two finance department polling agreements with EMC Research (a public opinion polling and research firm): one for $200,000 dated March 2024 and one for $244,000 dated January 2026 — neither citing a council resolution.
When asked about the second, Bradley Johnson said nothing had been spent against the contract. However, per the municipal code’s rules on contract award limits (as opposed to spending), this appears to be a distinction without a difference.
Share this article
Other considerations
In fairness to the mayor, city council and city staff, we present the following additional considerations:
A description that omits a bid is not proof no bid occurred; many of the 173 unexplained awards, including 66 grants, may have been awarded after a competitive process.
Small purchases are exempt from formal bidding by design, though staff told the committee informal solicitations require at least three quotes, and piggybacking is lawful when the lead agency used a competitive process prior to awarding the contract.
Bradley Johnson said finance now sends departments back rather than “making exceptions.”
Fleetworks’ $500,000 was formally bid, and CPS HR’s recruitment agreement was council-authorized.13
The charter also makes the administrator “responsible to the Council,” and in July 2025 Ramachandran told a local media outlet the reports “may take more time to come forward.”
No vendor listed in the contracts report appears on the state labor commissioner’s debarment list.14
The list issued on October 27 was reviewed by a council committee, not the full council for a final vote. The council vote is scheduled November 10. It is possible the list could be refined, any errors corrected, and the report reissued before the council vote, after receiving the committee’s feedback.
Transparency delayed – and incomplete
The council’s finance and management committee reviewed the contract report on October 27. The committee forwarded it to the full council for review on November 10. The committee recommended that the report be placed under the “consent” section of the agenda, meaning that the council could vote on the item in a batch with multiple other agenda items.
The report was prepared by finance staff, signed by finance director Bradley Johnson (no relation to Jestin Johnson) and approved for committee review by interim city administrator Betsy Lake.
Oakland’s municipal code requires public disclosure of these contracts for each “preceding six-month period.” City staff say it is to be reported annually, which conflicts with the language in the municipal code.
Even with the claimed annual frequency, the city last presented a disclosure three years ago, in October 2023.15 The oldest has been due for more than two years.
The report fulfills a legal obligation the city missed for three years, under a chain of command that ends with the mayor. It tells the public the contracts Oakland awarded with no prior council or public review. However, the report doesn’t show what it spent – and for roughly a third of the money, it does not say how the contractor was chosen.
EDITORS’ NOTE
The contracting report reviewed in this analysis yields additional insights — more than space allows in a single article. Subscribe to Oakland Report (it’s free) to receive future updates in your inbox, and if you value our nonprofit work, please consider donating to become a supporting member.
Johnson, Bradley. "City administrator contract authority report, FY 2023-24, FY 2024-25, FY 2025-26." City of Oakland finance and management committee meeting, agenda item #3, Oct. 27, 2026. https://oakland.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=8201955&GUID=23EAB01B-E330-4AD0-B71D-0AA995BB88BD&Options=&Search=
City of Oakland. "Oakland Municipal Code §2.04.020.C (Authority of the City Administrator — Reports)." elaws code mirror, as amended by Ord. No. 13380, July 19, 2016, accessed Oct. 29, 2026. http://oakland-ca.elaws.us/code/coor_title2_ch2.04_arti_sec2.04.020. (The section calls for "a bi-annual report listing all purchases and contracts authorized by the City Administrator … during the preceding six-month period." The committee's pending list cites the section's pre-2016 numbering, §2.04.020.D.2.)
City of Oakland. "Finance & Management Committee Meeting Minutes, item 2, file #23-0188, Determination of Schedule of Outstanding Committee Items." Oakland Legistar, Mar. 28, 2023. https://oakland.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=M&ID=1085342&GUID=086925AF-F7E0-480B-BBA2-D3F91DCA5CE7
City of Oakland. “Charter of the City of Oakland, Article V (the city manager), sections 500, 501, 503 and 504(e), (h), (i).” GoCodebook code mirror, text as of Oct. 19, 2026, accessed Oct. 29, 2026. https://gocodebook.com/library/us/ca/oakland/charter/article-v-the-city-manager
City of Oakland. “Barbara Lee sworn in as Oakland’s 52nd mayor.” City of Oakland news release, May 22, 2025. https://www.oaklandca.gov/News-Releases/Barbara-Lee-Sworn-in-as-Oaklands-52nd-Mayor
Wolfe, Eli and Darwin Bondgraham. “What did Oakland buy last year? Much is a mystery.” The Oaklandside, Jul. 30, 2025. https://oaklandside.org/2025/07/30/oakland-city-administrator-contract-authority-reports-missing/
Wolfe, Eli. “Oakland fails again to publish contract transparency reports.” The Oaklandside, Jan. 7, 2026. https://oaklandside.org/2026/01/07/oakland-fails-again-to-publish-contract-transparency-reports/
City of Oakland. “Attachment A — City Administrator’s Office — Approved Contracts, July 2023 – June 2026.” Finance and Management Committee, file #27-0042, Sept. 10, 2026.
City of Oakland, Human Services Department. “Oakland Fund for Children and Youth Planning and Oversight Committee agenda packet, item 8: Approval of Funding for Bright Research Group – Strategic Plan Development for FY 2025-2028 Phases III & IV.” Oct. 16, 2024. https://www.oaklandca.gov/files/assets/city/v/2/public-meetings/oakland-fund-for-children-and-youth-planning-and-oversight-committee/2024/10-16-24-agenda-packet-with-supplements.pdf
City of Oakland. “Resolution No. 88563 C.M.S., contracts with Accela certified vendors for the Reimagining One Stop Permitting initiative.” Oakland City Council, file #21-0173, adopted Mar. 16, 2021. https://oakland.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4815333&GUID=8FBF3397-5E76-498B-99A8-789247DF6F02
City of Oakland. “Oakland Municipal Code, ch. 2.04 (Purchasing System), §§2.04.020, 2.04.030, 2.04.050, 2.04.051, 2.04.110.” elaws code mirror, accessed Oct. 29, 2026. http://oakland-ca.elaws.us/code/coor_title2_ch2.04_arti
Beautification Council. “IRS Form 990 filings, tax years 2021–2024.” ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, EIN 46-5475528, accessed Oct. 29, 2026. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/465475528
City of Oakland. "Resolution No. 90667 C.M.S., executive recruitment agreements." Oakland City Council, file #25-0479, Mar. 18, 2025. https://oakland.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?GUID=065552CB-05A6-44F2-A6F7-7D3BC63A305A&ID=1283868&Search=
California Department of Industrial Relations. “Debarments.” Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, list dated July 2025, accessed Oct. 29, 2026. https://dir.ca.gov/dlse/debar.html
Wolfe, Eli. “Why won’t Oakland release transparency reports about city contracts?” The Oaklandside, Jul. 29, 2026. https://oaklandside.org/2026/07/29/oakland-contracts-transparency-report-barbara-lee/
"By any means necessary...?"