Allen, et al v. City of Oakland, et al

Filing 727

ORDER re: outside contracts. Response by Defendant City of Oakland due by 09/21/12. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 09/11/12. (tehlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/11/2012)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
5

DELPHINE ALLEN, et al.,

6
7
8

Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF OAKLAND, et al.,

9

MASTER CASE FILE
NO. C00-4599 TEH
ORDER RE: OUTSIDE
CONTRACTS

Defendants.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
On January 24, 2012, the Court ordered the Chief of Police to consult regularly with

12 the Monitor “on all decisions that may impact compliance with the NSA [Negotiated
13 Settlement Agreement], including but not limited to . . . personnel decisions, including . . .
14 engagement of consultants. . . .” Jan. 24, 2012 Order at 3. The Court has recently learned
15 that the City has entered into a contract with Strategic Policy Partnership, LLC, to conduct a
16 comprehensive review of the Oakland Police Department. In addition, it has been reported in
17 the press that the City has augmented two of the contracts it has entered into with outside law
18 firms to conduct investigations related to Occupy Oakland. For one of these firms, it has
19 been reported that the contract was increased from $100,000 to $275,000 – a 175%
20 increase – and it is not clear why the original estimate was so far below what the City now
21 contends is required.
22

To ensure that the record is complete, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the City shall

23 file, on or before September 21, 2012, a list of all contracts it has entered into or modified
24 since January 24, 2012, that relate, directly or indirectly, to NSA compliance. For each
25 contract, the City must identify the contractor, including a list of responsible individuals if
26 the contractor is an entity; the amount of the contract; the contract’s scope of work; the date
27 the contract was entered into; and the actual or expected completion date for the contracted
28 work. For any contract that has been modified since January 24, 2012, the City must identify

1 the date on which the contract was modified; any changes to the contract’s scope of work;
2 any changes to the amount of the contract; and the City’s justification for the contract’s
3 modifications. For all future contract modifications and any new contracts, the City shall file
4 a notice with the Court that includes the above information, along with the date on which the
5 Chief consulted with the Monitor about the contract or modification, within two business
6 days of entering into or modifying the contract.
7
8 IT IS SO ORDERED.
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10 Dated: 09/11/12
THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2