Takeaways from Oakland’s mayoral debate
Comparing Loren Taylor and Barbara Lee on the budget, public safety, and local economy
🗳️ Ballots for the April 15 special election will begin to arrive in the mail next week. Remember to vote early and check out our voter guide!
Last week, Oakland mayoral frontrunners Loren Taylor and Barbara Lee went head-to-head on the city’s most pressing issues: How do we improve public safety? How does Oakland attract and retain residents and businesses? How do we fix the budget crisis and avoid bankruptcy?
There’s plenty of coverage on the candidates overall (list of debate recaps below). Below we highlight the key policy differences that emerged, including why we believe Empower Oakland’s endorsed candidate, Loren Taylor, solidified his position as the right person to lead Oakland at this critical time.
If you missed it, you can watch the full replay from KTVU on YouTube.
On the budget…
Barbara Lee’s take: Lee’s predominant approach to fix Oakland’s budget is to grow revenue in order to close the current spending gap.
She plans to lean heavily on her decades of national political experience to attract private investment and philanthropic dollars.
Lee also wants to target uncollected revenues like fines and unpaid parking tickets to bring in more funds.
She stressed layoffs would be a last resort.
Loren Taylor’s take: Taylor emphasized smarter management and optimization of Oakland’s existing resources rather than relying on temporary fixes or one-time revenues.
He called for a city-wide audit, saying mismanagement, corruption, and self-dealing are root causes of Oakland’s budget woes.
Taylor gave clear examples of how he would be more financially efficient. For example, how we can save $20M a year by refinancing the city’s pension debt — for which the city currently pays $130M a year in interest payments alone.
He also called for cooperation from all city stakeholders, including unions and vendors, in making necessary cuts.
Our take: Oakland’s budget is on fire, so it’s probably best to get that fire under control before throwing more valuable wood onto the flames.
Lee’s strategy depends on bringing new money into Oakland, though she lacked specifics and failed to acknowledge how challenging it would actually be. Notably, she hasn’t put forth a substantive budget plan; and it’s barely mentioned on her website.
Taylor offers more specifics and believes in a holistic approach — bringing in new revenue is important, but he believes it’s imperative to be smarter and more efficient with our existing dollars.
On public safety…
Barbara Lee’s take: Lee expressed deep frustration with Oakland’s crime problem.
She supports the public safety strategy outlined in Measure NN, which mandates 700 police officers (Lee said she would like to eventually get to 850).
She also wants to increase the budget for violence prevention programs like Ceasefire, gun buybacks, and MACRO (Oakland’s non-violent response service).
Lee advocates for a broader public safety strategy, giving young Oaklanders better opportunities instead of resorting to crime.
Loren Taylor’s take: Taylor stressed that Oaklanders feel unsafe, which is directly connected to many of Oakland’s other challenges.
He attributes this in part to past decisions, particularly efforts to defund police, noting that he opposed calls to cut $50M in police funding while serving on city council.
Instead, he wants to increase the police force to at least 800 officers within three years by funding three police academies and converting OPD’s overtime spending to full-time officers.
Taylor also supports changing Oakland’s police chase policy, aligning with Governor Newsom’s recommendations last year.
Our take: Both candidates take public safety seriously, but Taylor stands out by prioritizing proven solutions and better resource management. This includes increasing police staffing, where Oakland trails similar-sized cities, and redirecting resources from underperforming programs like MACRO. And while Lee relies heavily on Measure NN, Taylor views it as the “bare minimum.”
On the local economy…
Barbara Lee’s take: As a former small business owner (Lee owned a facilities management company in Oakland in the late 1980s), Lee wants to support local entrepreneurs by improving access to loans and reducing bureaucratic red tape.
She again referenced her ability to attract investment but offered limited details on funding or implementation.
It’s also not clear that giving entrepreneurs a line of credit will help if no one’s walking in the door to eat or shop.
Loren Taylor’s take: Taylor argued Oakland is losing businesses due to crime and high costs.
He proposed practical measures, including establishing a concierge service to help businesses navigate city bureaucracy, waiving city taxes for small businesses earning under $1.5M annually, and creating a dedicated police unit to address retail and property crimes.
Our take: Taylor’s focus is direct and practical: address immediate problems like crime and bureaucracy, and businesses (and investors) will follow. Lee’s emphasis on loans and investment is positive, but misses the fundamental challenges facing local businesses right now. We agree with Taylor that solving Oakland’s fundamental issues first is likely the better path to building a sustainable, thriving local economy.
On leadership…
Barbara Lee’s take: Lee relies heavily on her 25+ years in national politics, emphasizing her track record of securing resources and ability to unite diverse or opposing groups.
She presented herself confidently and clearly stood out as the more veteran politician.
However, she was adamant that “Oakland is not broken” — a memorable moment of the debate and key difference between the two campaigns.
Loren Taylor’s take: Taylor firmly stated Oakland is broken; and views himself as a fresh alternative to the status quo, unencumbered by the existing establishment that got us here.
While he may not have brought the same political gravitas, Taylor positioned himself as a practical problem solver, leaning on his engineering and consulting background to demonstrate his ability to directly tackle complex issues.
He said Oakland needs more than just unity — it needs action. Taylor showed detailed knowledge of city government and clearly articulated where a mayor can make immediate, impactful changes.
Our take: Lee should have no problem convincing voters of her leadership qualities, anchored by an illustrious career in Washington, DC and a message of unity and hope. But the question voters must ask is whether these are the qualifications Oakland most urgently needs right now.
As Taylor said, “Hope is not a strategy.” Loren Taylor offers more than an understanding of Oakland’s problems — he provides detailed, practical solutions designed to quickly address Oakland’s urgent challenges.
At this critical juncture, Oakland needs more than inspiring words; it needs strategic vision, practicality, and sensible solutions. Taylor demonstrated that he's ready not just to manage the city's immediate crises, but to build a sustainable path toward recovery.
Correction: The original post said Lee supports a police force of up to 700 officers, when she said over time she would like it to be 850.
Other debate recaps…
Is Oakland fundamentally ‘broken’? The mayor’s race hinges on the answer (SF Chronicle)
2025 Oakland Mayoral Debate (Oakland Report)
Barbara Lee comes alive (East Bay Insiders)
Mayoral debate: What Barbara Lee, Loren Taylor said about Oakland's top issues (KTVU)
In first Oakland mayoral debate, Barbara Lee and Loren Taylor finally come toe-to-toe (Mercury News)
✅ Are you ready to vote?
Update your voter registration and mailing address
Check if you live in District 2 and eligible to vote for the D2 city council race
View Empower Oakland’s 2025 special election voter guide:
Oakland needs a VERY STRONG MAYOR! One that will deal with the criminals that live in Oakland. I don't believe Lee or Taylor have the balls to deal with minority criminals! I say boot low level criminals. Give them the opportunity to take Alford pleas ( a guilty plea in which a defendant maintains their innocence but admits that the prosecution's evidence would likely result in a guilty verdict if brought to trial. ) Lower crime means lower OPD costs.
Once they accept the plea they have two choices jail time or relocation out of Oakland & the Bay Area with cash in their pockets. Never to return to Oakland. If they do they can be arrested and imprisoned to a prearranged term they agreed too earlier. They could be processed faster than trials. And yes they'll take the money vs jail time. And yes some will return. We could offer cash bounty to citizens should they return. Tampa, FL Had high crime and they lowered to national avg. Oakland can do it too by focusing on criminals.
We should also push out their family members that support them. We don't need to make them homeless. We can relocate them to other cities that are far more affordable. Those on SEC 8
( Home Choice Vouchers) can transfer those certificates to any city in America accepts them. WE can even help them become home owners. Like this home https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3014-N-Mission-Rd-Peoria-IL-61604/5133701_zpid/
A good rule of thumb about how Barbara Lee will do as Oakland mayor would be Ron Dellums. They had the same approach to everything. Many people thought Dellums was a good Congressman, but a bad mayor.