Read the eight-minute call in full: the recalls of mayor Sheng Thao and Pamela Price, a call with the mayor about buying modular housing units, an invitation to a yacht party, and more.
Indefensible. It is unfathomable that some of these folks continue to have supporters today.
Because Oakland is currently at a critical juncture, this is one of the most important documents in Oakland history for it reveals how policies and actions are dictated.
Also, a reminder that Barbara Lee requested Oakland to not recall Sheng.
Oakland voters live in a delusional bubble, where they CON themselves into believing that multicultural festivals and creative cuisines create some wonderful experience - as their city drowns in debt, crime, graffiti, homelessness, incompetence, and retail closures.
I just remembered that former city administrator Jestin Johnson resigned due to 'unprofessional text messages' and Barbara Lee accepted his resignation.
What message will Barbara deliver to the "More bitches, bring 'em all here" council member?
Thank you Oakland Report. This is a major step to clean up the corruption in Oakland. This is why I need to be the next Mayor of Oakland. I am free of all this. Mindy Pechenuk, for Oakland Mayor 2026
So what does this mean? It MEANS stop voting in Democrats. Democrats are the enemy of Oakland. What it MEANS is to vote in Republicans, libertarians and independents.
Another possibility is that the “more bitches” exchange was a hip-hop reference or riff.
Omarion’s 2015 song “I’m Up,” featuring Kid Ink and French Montana, uses the line “Bring more bitches.” There is also a Bay Area example. Too $hort, ALLBLACK and Husalah’s 2020 track “Eighty-Four Biarritz” uses “need more bitches.”
That makes the sequence in the call worth noting. Duong says “more bitches,” and the councilmember immediately answers, “More bitches. Bring ’em all here.”
The transcript does not establish that either man was quoting a song. It could simply be slang. But the wording is close enough that I’d want to hear the original audio before dismissing the possibility. If there was a recognizable cadence or delivery, the recording could tell us something the transcript cannot.
Hi M. -- Thank you for your comments. Neither the Omarion song nor the Too Short/Husalah song have a call-and-response cadence that matches the exchange in the transcription.
“What this city needs is a good 5-cent cigar!” No, what it needs is a strong, principled leader like Mindy P for Mayor, to sweep clean the “progressive” (regressive) power structure, along with a city council slate of similar common sense and tough (vigilante, if necessary) minded Oaklanders. Sixty years of racial identity socialism, corruption, and incompetence has virtually destroyed this one vibrant city.
I keep coming back to whether there are enough clues in this transcript to narrow the unidentified councilmember, even though there is not enough to identify that person as a fact.
The conversation makes me think the speaker was probably male. Duong and the councilmember repeatedly use “bro” and “brother,” the councilmember refers to “my girlfriend,” and there is the “bring bitches to Oakland” exchange. None of those clues proves gender. Taken together, though, I think a male speaker is a reasonable working hypothesis.
If that hypothesis is right, the male councilmembers serving at the time were Noel Gallo, Dan Kalb and Kevin Jenkins. Gallo stands out to me because the unidentified speaker talks specifically about an RV policy, getting RVs “out of the way,” expected opposition from activists, and finding business owners willing to speak about the impact. Gallo had previously sponsored Oakland measures dealing specifically with RV and oversized-vehicle parking. That is a circumstantial match, not an identification.
There is another piece that I think deserves scrutiny. None of those three men is named in the article or transcript, while other Oakland council figures are discussed by name or are readily identifiable from context. The participant in this call is instead labeled only as “OAKLAND CITY COUNCILMEMBER.”
That does not tell us why the identity was withheld. But given that this was an uncharged local official participating directly in a recorded conversation introduced in a federal criminal case, I think it is reasonable to ask whether the government had an investigative or evidentiary reason for keeping the name out of the public exhibit. That is only a hypothesis. I have not seen anything establishing that this councilmember was a target or subject of an investigation.
Have you checked January 2024 calendars, Sacramento travel or meetings, contemporaneous RV-policy drafts, or other filings that describe this unidentified official? Those records seem much more likely to resolve the question than trying to identify someone from the tone of the conversation alone.
For now, Gallo is simply the strongest circumstantial fit I see. I would not treat that as evidence that he was the speaker, and certainly not as evidence that he was under investigation or committed wrongdoing.
M. -- Thank you for your comment. You and other readers may want to refer to the article's footnote #6, which links to a news report about the trial's witness list.
Kevin Jenkins is openly identified in the government’s evidence. The exhibit list includes “Sheng Thao, Kevin Jenkins messages” as Exhibit 87, and another entry is an “Andy Duong email re Jenkins event.” Jenkins is also named as a prospective government witness. So whatever the explanation is for anonymizing the councilmember in the January 2024 recording, the government is clearly not trying to conceal Jenkins’s connection to the defendants or the case generally.
The timing around the January call is also notable. The government’s exhibit list includes a January 19, 2024 meeting with Julie and Chris Wedge, both associated with Evolutionary Homes. That is the same date as the recorded call with the unnamed councilmember. Oaklandside reports that prosecutors characterize that call as including Andy Duong tying his family’s position on the recalls to continued progress toward an Evolutionary Homes purchase. That puts the conversation in the middle of active Evolutionary Homes activity, rather than leaving it as an isolated political conversation.
There is also broader context for why recordings from Andy Duong’s phone may matter. Oaklandside reports that prosecutors allege Duong recorded city employees and officials hoping to obtain material that could be used for potential blackmail. They also say Mario Juarez is expected to testify that Duong told him he regularly made surreptitious recordings of politicians in compromising situations. That is the government’s allegation and anticipated testimony, not a finding that every recording served that purpose. But it makes the existence of an anonymously attributed recording with a sitting councilmember more significant than it would be standing alone.
The exhibit list may eventually provide another way into this. It contains a run of generic recordings from Andy Duong’s phone and separately lists his call log as Exhibit 562. If those exhibits become publicly accessible during trial, they may answer questions that the transcript itself does not.
Outstanding journalism….. anyone smell a Pulitzer here?
For 60 years Oakland voters have elected corrupt and incompetent idiots to govern them. I guess that makes the citizens themselves - the idiots.
Indefensible. It is unfathomable that some of these folks continue to have supporters today.
Because Oakland is currently at a critical juncture, this is one of the most important documents in Oakland history for it reveals how policies and actions are dictated.
Also, a reminder that Barbara Lee requested Oakland to not recall Sheng.
Oakland voters live in a delusional bubble, where they CON themselves into believing that multicultural festivals and creative cuisines create some wonderful experience - as their city drowns in debt, crime, graffiti, homelessness, incompetence, and retail closures.
Thank you for the outstanding investigative journalism that Oakland sorely needs! This type of reporting is exactly why I’m a paid subscriber.
I just remembered that former city administrator Jestin Johnson resigned due to 'unprofessional text messages' and Barbara Lee accepted his resignation.
What message will Barbara deliver to the "More bitches, bring 'em all here" council member?
That we even have to discuss the rap RANTINGS of supposedly serious public servants and their partners - is indictment enough.
Thank you Oakland Report. This is a major step to clean up the corruption in Oakland. This is why I need to be the next Mayor of Oakland. I am free of all this. Mindy Pechenuk, for Oakland Mayor 2026
We’re With You Wendy!
- Oakland
So what does this mean? It MEANS stop voting in Democrats. Democrats are the enemy of Oakland. What it MEANS is to vote in Republicans, libertarians and independents.
SIXTY years of failure is ENOUGH.
Another possibility is that the “more bitches” exchange was a hip-hop reference or riff.
Omarion’s 2015 song “I’m Up,” featuring Kid Ink and French Montana, uses the line “Bring more bitches.” There is also a Bay Area example. Too $hort, ALLBLACK and Husalah’s 2020 track “Eighty-Four Biarritz” uses “need more bitches.”
That makes the sequence in the call worth noting. Duong says “more bitches,” and the councilmember immediately answers, “More bitches. Bring ’em all here.”
The transcript does not establish that either man was quoting a song. It could simply be slang. But the wording is close enough that I’d want to hear the original audio before dismissing the possibility. If there was a recognizable cadence or delivery, the recording could tell us something the transcript cannot.
Hi M. -- Thank you for your comments. Neither the Omarion song nor the Too Short/Husalah song have a call-and-response cadence that matches the exchange in the transcription.
Omarion, "I'm Up":
https://open.spotify.com/track/1hlwA8qvXx0Bl6iYuDbIuD?si=00a87048407541fb
Too Short/Husalah, "Eighty-Four Biarritz":
https://open.spotify.com/track/0kA40CosfV6fuD8vIpkiDM?si=ca7e546e75024ed7
Thank you again for your comments; the discussion is very much appreciated.
You are right...just trying to flex my hip hop history knowledge. lol
SAVE OAKLAND NOW!
Mindy P for Mayor
SAVE OAKLAND
BEFORE ITS TOO LATE!
DRAIN THE OAKLAND SWAMP!
“What this city needs is a good 5-cent cigar!” No, what it needs is a strong, principled leader like Mindy P for Mayor, to sweep clean the “progressive” (regressive) power structure, along with a city council slate of similar common sense and tough (vigilante, if necessary) minded Oaklanders. Sixty years of racial identity socialism, corruption, and incompetence has virtually destroyed this one vibrant city.
I keep coming back to whether there are enough clues in this transcript to narrow the unidentified councilmember, even though there is not enough to identify that person as a fact.
The conversation makes me think the speaker was probably male. Duong and the councilmember repeatedly use “bro” and “brother,” the councilmember refers to “my girlfriend,” and there is the “bring bitches to Oakland” exchange. None of those clues proves gender. Taken together, though, I think a male speaker is a reasonable working hypothesis.
If that hypothesis is right, the male councilmembers serving at the time were Noel Gallo, Dan Kalb and Kevin Jenkins. Gallo stands out to me because the unidentified speaker talks specifically about an RV policy, getting RVs “out of the way,” expected opposition from activists, and finding business owners willing to speak about the impact. Gallo had previously sponsored Oakland measures dealing specifically with RV and oversized-vehicle parking. That is a circumstantial match, not an identification.
There is another piece that I think deserves scrutiny. None of those three men is named in the article or transcript, while other Oakland council figures are discussed by name or are readily identifiable from context. The participant in this call is instead labeled only as “OAKLAND CITY COUNCILMEMBER.”
That does not tell us why the identity was withheld. But given that this was an uncharged local official participating directly in a recorded conversation introduced in a federal criminal case, I think it is reasonable to ask whether the government had an investigative or evidentiary reason for keeping the name out of the public exhibit. That is only a hypothesis. I have not seen anything establishing that this councilmember was a target or subject of an investigation.
Have you checked January 2024 calendars, Sacramento travel or meetings, contemporaneous RV-policy drafts, or other filings that describe this unidentified official? Those records seem much more likely to resolve the question than trying to identify someone from the tone of the conversation alone.
For now, Gallo is simply the strongest circumstantial fit I see. I would not treat that as evidence that he was the speaker, and certainly not as evidence that he was under investigation or committed wrongdoing.
M. -- Thank you for your comment. You and other readers may want to refer to the article's footnote #6, which links to a news report about the trial's witness list.
The newer filings add some useful context.
Kevin Jenkins is openly identified in the government’s evidence. The exhibit list includes “Sheng Thao, Kevin Jenkins messages” as Exhibit 87, and another entry is an “Andy Duong email re Jenkins event.” Jenkins is also named as a prospective government witness. So whatever the explanation is for anonymizing the councilmember in the January 2024 recording, the government is clearly not trying to conceal Jenkins’s connection to the defendants or the case generally.
The timing around the January call is also notable. The government’s exhibit list includes a January 19, 2024 meeting with Julie and Chris Wedge, both associated with Evolutionary Homes. That is the same date as the recorded call with the unnamed councilmember. Oaklandside reports that prosecutors characterize that call as including Andy Duong tying his family’s position on the recalls to continued progress toward an Evolutionary Homes purchase. That puts the conversation in the middle of active Evolutionary Homes activity, rather than leaving it as an isolated political conversation.
There is also broader context for why recordings from Andy Duong’s phone may matter. Oaklandside reports that prosecutors allege Duong recorded city employees and officials hoping to obtain material that could be used for potential blackmail. They also say Mario Juarez is expected to testify that Duong told him he regularly made surreptitious recordings of politicians in compromising situations. That is the government’s allegation and anticipated testimony, not a finding that every recording served that purpose. But it makes the existence of an anonymously attributed recording with a sitting councilmember more significant than it would be standing alone.
The exhibit list may eventually provide another way into this. It contains a run of generic recordings from Andy Duong’s phone and separately lists his call log as Exhibit 562. If those exhibits become publicly accessible during trial, they may answer questions that the transcript itself does not.