City Council - February 10, 2026 (Special)

February 10, 2026 · City Council

Subscribe via RSS: City of Berkeley City CouncilCity of Berkeley Meetings

Agenda

1. 2026 City Council Referral Prioritization Results Using Re-Weighted Range

Voting (RRV) From: City Manager Recommendation: Review the completed Re-Weighted Range Voting (RRV) rankings for all outstanding City Council referrals and adopt a Resolution approving the list of prioritized referrals to city staff. Financial Implications: None Contact: Mark Numainville, City Clerk, (510) 981-6900 Adjournment I hereby request that the City Clerk of the City of Berkeley cause personal notice to be given to each member of the Berkeley City Council on the time and place of said meeting, forthwith. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the official seal of the City of Berkeley to be affixed on this 5th day of February, 2026. /s/ Adena Ishii, Mayor Public Notice – this Proclamation serves as the official agenda for this meeting. ATTEST: Mark Numainville, City Clerk Tuesday, February 10, 2026 AGENDA Page 2 Page 2 NOTICE CONCERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS: If you object to a decision by the City Council to approve or deny a use permit or variance for a project the following requirements and restrictions apply: 1) No lawsuit challenging a City decision to deny (Code Civ. Proc. §1094.6(b)) or approve (Gov. Code 65009(c)(5)) a use permit or variance may be filed more than 90 days after the date the Notice of Decision of the action of the City Council is mailed. Any lawsuit not filed within that 90-day period will be barred. 2) In any lawsuit that may be filed against a City Council decision to approve or deny a use permit or variance, the issues and evidence will be limited to those raised by you or someone else, orally or in writing, at a public hearing or prior to the close of the last public hearing on the project. Archived indexed video streams are available at: berkeleyca.gov/council-agendas. Channel 33 rebroadcasts the following Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. and Sunday at 9:00 a.m. Communications to the City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service to the City Clerk Department at 2180 Milvia Street. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk Department for further information. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the public counter at the City Clerk Department located on the first floor of City Hall located at 2180 Milvia Street, and through the City's online records portal: https://records.cityofberkeley.info/. Agendas, agenda reports, and revised/supplemental material may be accessed via the online agenda for this meeting at: berkeleyca.gov/council-agendas and may be accessed at reference desks at the following locations: City Clerk Department - 2180 Milvia Street, First Floor Tel: 510-981-6900, TDD: 510-981-6903, Fax: 510-981-6901 Email: clerk@berkeleyca.gov Libraries: Main – 2090 Kittredge Street, Claremont Branch – 2940 Benvenue, West Branch – 1125 University, North Branch – 1170 The Alameda, Tarea Hall Pittman South Branch – 1901 Russell COMMUNICATION ACCESS INFORMATION: This meeting is being held in a wheelchair accessible location. To request a disability-related accommodation(s) to participate in the meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Disability Services specialist at ada@berkeleyca.gov, (510) 981-6418 (V), or (510) 981-6347 (TDD) at least three business days before the meeting date. Attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various scents, whether natural or manufactured, in products and materials. Please help the City respect these needs. Captioning services are provided at the meeting, on B-TV, and on the Internet. In addition, assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available from the City Clerk prior to the meeting, and are to be returned before the end of the meeting. If you have obtained interpretation services for your use during a City Council meeting and would like to request assistance, please contact the City Clerk Department at (510) 981-6900, clerk@berkeleyca.gov, or in-person during the meeting. Questions regarding public participation may be addressed to the City Clerk Department (510) 981-6900 or by email at clerk@berkeleyca.gov. Tuesday, February 10, 2026 AGENDA Page 3 Page 3 Page 4 Page 1 of 16 01 Special Meeting Item Office of the City Manager ACTION CALENDAR February 10, 2026 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager Submitted by: Mark Numainville, City Clerk Subject: 2026 City Council Referral Prioritization Results Using Re-Weighted Range Voting (RRV) RECOMMENDATION Review the completed Re-Weighted Range Voting (RRV) rankings for all outstanding City Council referrals and adopt a Resolution approving the list of prioritized referrals to city staff. FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION There are no direct fiscal impacts related to the review and approval of the referral list. CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS Through the December 2, 2025 City Council meeting, there were 53 outstanding long- term referrals to staff. The list did not include referrals that the City Manager classified as short-term referrals or budget referrals. On January 27, 2026, the Council reviewed the raw scores assigned by Council, reviewed the referrals marked for removal, and took action to remove 14 referrals from the list. After the January 27 meeting, staff applied the RRV formula to the scores for the remaining 39 referrals, resulting in a prioritized list. These results are presented to the Council as Exhibit A to the resolution in Attachment 1. Adopting the resolution will formally set the Council referrals prioritization for 2026. This year, three referrals tied for the top score. In accordance with the intended function of the RRV system, all three referrals were assigned the #1 priority and the algorithm was engaged starting with the next highest scored referral. This prevents any lower scored referral from jumping over one of the referrals that tied for the top score when the algorithm and weighted votes are applied. These results will guide the City Manager and the Budget & Finance Committee in development of Strategic Plan projects and funding allocations needed for the referrals. Some flexibility in the order in which the referrals are assigned will need to be exercised by the City Manager to ensure that staff in each department has the available capacity to 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: manager@berkeleyca.gov Website: http://www.berkeleyca.gov Page 5 Page 2 of 16

Attachments (9)

2026. City Council Referral Prioritization Results ACTION CALENDAR

Using Re-Weighted Range Voting (RRV) February 10, 2026 start work on the highly rated referrals and that there are adequate funding resources to complete the referrals. BACKGROUND In 2016, the City Council adopted a system of Re-weighted Range Voting (RRV) to prioritize City Council referrals to staff. The RRV system enables City Council to provide direction to staff on which referrals are highest priority and should be completed first. Reweighted Range Voting is a proportional voting system designed for a blend of fairness and consensus, meaning that it ensures some representation for minority views as well. It accomplishes this by reducing the influence of Councilmembers in proportion to the points they have awarded to the referrals prioritized thus far. Under RRV, Each Councilmember rates every referral on a scale of zero to five. There is no limit to repeat scores (i.e. a Councilmember could give every referral a five). When the scores are tallied, the referral with the highest total score becomes the 1st priority. Once the first referral is assigned, the scores for the remaining referrals are reweighted based on how much influence each Councilmember has had up to that point (based on the score they assigned, 0 - 5). If a Councilmember assigns high scores to several referrals, they use up the strength of their weighted vote more quickly and exercise diminishing influence when the scores are reweighted for subsequent referrals. This guarantees equal influence throughout the full list. If a Councilmember did not score a referral, the default score was set to zero. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities, or climate impacts, associated with the subject of this report. RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION This recommendation carries out the direction of the Council to implement a prioritization process for City Council referrals to staff. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED Council may decide to forgo a prioritization process and continue the referral process with no structured tracking or prioritization of referrals. CONTACT PERSON Mark Numainville, City Clerk, (510) 981-6900 Attachments: 1: Resolution Exhibit A: 2026 RRV Prioritized Referral List Page 2 Page 6 Page 3 of 16 RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S. APPROVING THE 2026 LIST OF PRIORITIZED CITY COUNCIL REFERRALS USING THE REWEIGHTED RANGE VOTING SYSTEM WHEREAS, On March 8, 2016 the City Council approved the use of Re-weighted Range Voting (RRV) for the prioritization of City Council referrals to staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council has assigned scores to all the referrals; and WHEREAS, the Re-Weighted Range Voting formula was applied to the ratings to create a weighted list of prioritization. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the list of prioritized referrals contained in Exhibit A, with the removal of certain referrals by Council direction, is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council grants the City Manager the authority to assign referrals to staff in a manner that ensures equitable distribution among departments and does not exceed the capacity of departmental staff to start work on the highly rated referrals even if that results in the referrals being assigned in an order that differs from the approved list. Exhibits A: List of Prioritized Referrals Page 7 Page 410, February of2026 16 Attachment 1 - Exhibit A RRV - City Council Referral Prioritization Results 1/(1+ W/5) Tracking Meeting Date Title Recommendation Sponsor Responsible Rank number Department DMND0004159 5/7/2024 Budget Referral: Vision Zero Rapid Response on 1. Refer to the City Manager to incorporate the City of Oakland's Neighborhood Bike Terry Taplin, Mark Public Works 1 Bicycle Boulevards?DMND0004159 Route Implementation Guide for all Bicycle Boulevards designated in the City of Berkeley's Humbert Bicycle Plan, pursuant to the City's Vision Zero Action Plan, Complete Streets Policy, and other applicable policies and plans; and to prioritize proactive and retroactive implementation of standards on Bicycle Boulevards in response to recent traffic collisions, with consideration for quick-build interventions that can be removed, modified or made permanent to advance Vision Zero Action Plan goals. DMND0004008 3/8/2022 Referral to Implement State Law AB 43 for Refer to the City Manager to implement state law AB 43 on High-injury commercial Rashi Kesarwani, Public Works 1 Reduced Speed Limits on High-Injury corridors as identified in our Vision Zero Annual Report, 2020-2021 in order to allow a Terry Taplin, Rigel Commercial Corridors?DMND0004008 reduction in speed limits by 5 miles per hour; - Any other corridors covered by AB 43, as Robinson, Susan appropriate, in order to implement reduced prima facie speed limits and identify those Wengraf corridors for future traffic studies where prima facie limits are presently unsafe. Upon completion of this referral, we note that a budget allocation would be needed in the amount of $25,000 to $50,000 for new speed limit signage. Funding will be requested later (likely for the FY 2023-24 budget) in order to allow time for staff to determine the applicable streets for additional signage. DMND0004191 2/22/2022 Southside Complete Streets - Limiting Cars on Refer to the City Manager to develop a community process to explore limits on private Public Works 1 Telegraph?DMND0004191 automobiles on Telegraph Avenue and make recommendations. Staff should engage merchants, property owners, students, visitors and tourists, artists, UC Berkeley, local schools, faith institutions, relevant government agencies including AC Transit, and other stakeholders, as well as relevant city commissions, such as the Transportation Commission and the Commission on Disability. In the evaluation of various approaches, staff should consider strategies to: • Maintain access for public transit, emergency vehicles, refuse collection vehicles, delivery vehicles, and other commercial vehicles that are essential to Telegraph business operations • Preserve access for people with disabilities and reduce conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists • Improve the pedestrian environment and meet the needs of merchants and the commercial district 1 of 13 Page 8 Page 510, February of2026 16 Attachment 1 - Exhibit A RRV - City Council Referral Prioritization Results Tracking Meeting Date Title Recommendation Sponsor Responsible Rank number Department DMND0004232 11/18/2025 Recommendations for the Formulation of Policy Committee Recommendation: to send the item to Council with a Qualified Positive Terry Taplin Finance 2 Advanced Fiscal Policies to Institutionalize Recommendation with the changes as proposed by Councilmember Taplin as follows: Strategic Bond Issuance, Optimize Municipal Investment Returns, and Leverage 1. Structured Bond Issuance Framework Intergovernmental and Philanthropic Capital Refer to the City Manager assessment, analysis, and presentation to the Council of a Funding?DMND0004232 potential comprehensive fiscal policy every two years that institutionalizes, codifies, and makes publicly accessible, a regular, predictive schedule for general obligation bond issuance. This potential policy, in addition to and alongside existing practices, may be informed by actuarial and capital market analysis of the City's bonding capacity and be modeled on established frameworks utilized in fiscally disciplined jurisdictions such as San Francisco, Santa Monica, and others. The goal is to remediate the City's substantial deferred maintenance liabilities and strategically advance the Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

Attachments (5)

Agenda Items

  1. 00:01:06 2026 City Council Referral Prioritization Results Council received the clerk's presentation on the re-weighted range voting results for 39 referrals, heard public comment and council remarks, then voted to adopt the prioritized referral list for 2026.

Transcript

Warning: This transcript is automatically generated by machine and may contain errors, including misheard words, misattributed speakers, and omitted passages. Always listen to the audio or video recording before assuming the transcript correctly reflects what was said. Do not rely on the transcript alone for quotation, reporting, or any other purpose where accuracy matters.
Okay. Hi, everyone. I'm calling to order the special Berkeley City Council meeting. Today is Tuesday, February 10th, 2026.
It is 502 and are you going to take the role from the front? Okay. Clerk, please take the role.
Okay. Council Member Casarwani is currently absent.
Councilmember Tapplin.
Present.
Councilmember Bartlett is currently absent.
Councilmember Treggub.
Present.
O'Keeffe.
I'm here.
Councilmember Blackaby is currently absent.
Councilmember Little.
Parra.
Here.
Humbert.
Present.
And Mayor Yishi.
Cora, Ms. Prezner.
Here.
Wendy, will you turn down the room volume?
It's a little hot.
So that maybe that that sounds a lot better. Yes. Okay. Okay. Moving on to item number
1. 2026 City Council Referral Prioritization Results
one, 2026 city council referral prior prioritization results using a re-rated range voting RV and
I will pass it over to you, Mr. City Clerk. Thank you, mayor. Good evening, mayor and
council members. My name is Mark Newmanville on the city clerk for the city of Berkeley.
And I'm reporting to you on part two of the City Council referral prioritization process.
I will just take a moment here, bring up the PowerPoint.
It's very short.
So today is part two of the process.
On January 27th, we did part one where we looked at the raw scores that were assigned
to all the referrals by the mayor and council members,
and we also voted to remove 14 referrals from the list.
For the remaining 39 referrals,
we used the ranked choice, I'm sorry,
not ranked choice voting,
re-weighted range voting algorithm
to rank those referrals based on the scores.
And we are presenting the final ranked list
to the council today for adoption.
So that's the action that's requested today.
So just a quick recap for re-weighted range of voting.
So there's a list of referrals that the council has adopted
and have been referred to the city manager or city attorney.
For each referral, council member rates every referral
from zero to five.
There's no limit to repeat scores.
The scores are tallied.
The referral with the highest score
becomes the first priority.
Then for the remaining referrals,
these scores are re-weighted,
and then the referrals are ranked using a weighted formula
based on how much influence each council member has
used up to that point by the scores they have assigned.
So in the report, in the item in Attachment 1, Exhibit A is the final
rankings based on the the algorithm. In this case we had a little unusual
situation where we had three referrals, all of which are for Public Works, that
tied for the number one priority. So all three of these were assigned the number
one top position and then the algorithm was applied starting with the next
highest referral. And we kept the tie in place because it more closely aligns
with how the RRV algorithm is intended to work. If we had run the
algorithm, then a lower ranked referral could have jumped one of the three that tied for
first place, which wouldn't have sort of accurately reflected the intent of how the RRB is supposed
to work.
So we have three that are tied for the top position, and then the rest are scored and
ranked using the algorithm and the weighted voting values.
So these are the results for this year.
Congratulations to the Public Works Department.
They not only have half of the top 20 referrals, but they have 19 of the 39 total referrals.
You can see how it shakes out amongst the remaining departments here on this slide,
which sort of leads us into the obvious question
of how the staff addresses the referrals.
And of course you see that certain departments
are overrepresented on the list
and even high up on the list.
So there's obviously a capacity and workload issue there.
So there is some discretion for the city manager
and the department heads to,
that they have an assigning which referrals
and how many of the referrals a given department
can start working on first,
but there is a general understanding
that every department will at least determine
what resources are needed to start work
on their top referral on the list,
no matter where it falls on the prioritized list.
So again, just to recap the action for this meeting,
choose to review the list.
Council could still determine if they want to remove
any additional referrals based on how the, the rankings, um,
played out. Um, if, if you, if the council did want to remove any,
we would have a motion and a vote to do that. Um,
but the primary objective today is to simply adopt the list of the 39
prioritized referrals for 2026. Um,
and then the council will have this information, the city manager,
city attorney, the charter offices and the budget and finance committee,
and it can factor into our planning purposes for this upcoming year.
So that's all I have for you with regards to the presentation and happy to
answer any questions you might have.
Thank you very much. Mr. City clerk, are there any questions from council? Uh,
seeing no questions, um,
In that case, I will see if there's any public comment on this item.
Good afternoon, Jeff Lomax within our means Berkeley's after asking
residents to absorb a 10 to 25% increase in property taxes through measures
you championed and parcel tax inflators you approved on consent.
You've made no meaningful structural changes to reduce the city's $30
million deficit. Uh, your response has not been strategic reform.
It's been blunt instruments of more taxes and more borrowing, endorsing a theater tax
that selectively picks winners and losers, taking money from one business to subsidize
another, raising the sales tax.
And now you're seeking in the fourth item, second on the list, more permanent borrowing
authority to put deficit financing on autopilot.
This is not fiscal stewardship.
It's death by a thousand cuts.
It's a crushing middle and fixed income residents and small businesses that can absorb endless
new assessments to subsidize special interests. So the next time you speak
about the missing middle or affordability, I urge you to look in the
mirror. Policies like item four, three, two, three, two, three, two are not the
solution. They're the problem. Thank you. Did you have a public comment on this
item? That's okay. But we have another regular meeting later. This is a special
meeting. You can come to the next meeting for that one, yes. Yes. Thank you.
At six o'clock. Yeah. At six o'clock. Feel free to hang out. Is there another
comment, public comment on this item? I just want to make a brief comment
regarding the rezoning of the Gilman Street from San Pablo to I-80 in regard
to manufacturing research and development listed as priority number
four on this list of potential items that green light as alum but I do think
that have a significant effect on the culture of that district that ought to be
taking into consideration because I mean a lot of the technological proliferation
the city of Berkeley is due to the UC and it doesn't need to kill out the
culture that grows on the streets of Berkeley for which Berkeley is so famous
and is true to the spirit of character so I just wanted to bring that to y'all's
attention and make sure you take the proper precautions in regard to that potential rezoning.
Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment may be online. There's one hand raised on the Zoom
and that is Paul Matthew. Paul, you should be able to unmute. Thank you. Thank you,
Council Member. I hope you can hear me. I'll rather hold Council. I hope you can hear me.
I've been a Berkeley resident for about 19 years. I appreciate that the Council and staff have the
structured process for prioritizing and ranking referrals. So just want to commend you for that,
actually. First, I want to comment on the fourth item on fiscal policies and bond issuance.
In general, I definitely support the idea of a structured process backed up by good analysis.
And I especially like the idea of benchmarking against best practices in other cities,
so I was really glad to see that. I have two concerns, which are really what I see as more
is emissions and I think it would be, the whole item would be strengthened by addressing those.
But I think any analysis on bond issuance should explicitly and carefully analyze impacts on
property taxes and the financial strain on homeowners. Just an example from my own personal
case, you know, I'm a UC retiree on a pension and I got an annual 2% increase on that pension.
Last year, my property taxes, the fixed assessments, went up by 27%.
So, you know, it's just those kinds of strains are not just on me, but many other people like me.
So I think any analysis must look at impacts on a financial strain on homeowners with property taxes.
And the second item is that we need to look at life cycle operating costs because these bonds
are for capital cost items. I get that. And that makes sense that capital costs are covered by
bonds. But, you know, once the building is built, there are obviously life cycle costs, maintenance
costs and I think any analysis should cover that as well. Thank you. Thank you.
Other public comment online? No other hands raised. Okay very well. Are there
any comments from Council or motion? Yeah I do. Yes Councilmember Humber. Thank you
Madam Mayor. I want to thank the city clerk and the city manager's office for
their work on this effort. I also want to thank my illustrious predecessor
Councilmember Lori Drosti for bringing this process to Council some number of
years ago. I know that our budget situation, our ability to work on even
the most high priority items is going to be limited, but I nonetheless think this
is a great exercise for us to do in order to contemplate and compare our
priorities among Council and try to get on the same page about what we'd like to
see done given limited resources. I'll add that the main theme I'm seeing here
is an emphasis on infrastructure, shared streets and pedestrian and bicycle safety.
And I'm very gratified that we have a strong consensus around these public realm efforts
that are so important for safety and quality of life.
I'm prepared to approve this list, and we'll hold out hope that with various public funds,
grants, and maybe future revenue increases, we'll be able to tackle all the high priority
items on the list thanks thank you councilmember luna para thank you um i'll my smear i'll move
to approve the staff recommendation second okay clerk can you please take the roll
okay to adopt the prioritized list of referrals uh councilmember tapwin yes
Councilmember Tragob. Aye. O'Keeffe.
Moona Parra. Yes. Humbert. Yes. And Mary Ishii. Yes.
Okay motion carries. Very good. Thank you very much.
This is the last item on our special agenda meeting packet so
uh our calendar. Is there a motion to adjourn?
So moved. Second. Okay can you take the roll for that please clerk?
Okay councilmember Taplin. Yes. Tragob. Aye. O'Keeffe. Yes.
Lenapara. Yes. Humbert. Yes. And Mayor Ishi. Yes. Okay, we are adjourned. Thank you very much.
All right, our regular meeting will start at 6pm.