the meeting. Thank you. Hello,
It's black be unipara here Humber here and Mary. She here. Okay quorum is present. Okay. So for the report out from the closed session, the City Council met in closed session on June 8, 2026, pursuant to government code section 54956.9 subsection D and provided directions to outside council and approved a settlement by compromise and release as to a worker's compensation matter assigned claim number B E R.
2300046 and WCAB 585885. Okay, very good. Ah, I just realized it's the first meeting of the month,
and so I will read us the land acknowledgement statement. The City of Berkeley recognizes that
the community we live in was built on the territory of Hu-Chun, the ancestral and unceded
land of the Chochenyo speaking Ohlone people, the ancestors and descendants of the sovereign
Verona band of Alameda County. This land was and continues to be of great importance to
all of the Ohlone tribes and descendants of the Verona band. As we begin our meeting tonight,
we acknowledge and honor the original inhabitants of Berkeley, the documented 5,000-year history
of the at the West Berkeley Shell Mound, and the Ohlone people who continue to reside in
East Bay. We recognize that Berkeley's residents have and continue to benefit
from the use and occupation of this unseated stolen land since the city of
Berkeley's incorporation in 1878. As stewards of the laws regulating the
city of Berkeley, it is not only vital that we recognize the history of this
land, but also recognize that the Ohlone people are present members of Berkeley
and other East Bay communities today. The city of Berkeley will continue to build
relationships with the Lijian tribe and to create meaningful actions that uphold
the intention of this land acknowledgement. We are now moving on to matters so I will actually
call forward Stephanie Allen. Thank you Mayor. I'm here tonight on behalf of the school district
gardening program. It's called Cairns to Carrots and as you know funding for education has been
devastated in this state in this country.
So we have to do a number of things
in order to keep programs going.
The gardening program exists at every school in the district.
It's very popular with the children.
And we recently began a campaign to collect cans, which
could then be turned into the recycling center for money
to help fund the program, but also
to teach children about recycling.
The program got kicked off with the essential help
of city manager Paul Boudenhagen.
We wouldn't have been able to do it without him.
So this award is for him.
On behalf of the program from our students, our staff,
thank you very much.
I don't know how to do it.
That's so cute, it has carrots.
Okay, go ahead, Paul.
I don't have anything to say about that.
Oh, God.
That's so nice of you.
All right.
Yep.
Thank you.
Yay.
Thank you very much.
That was very nice of you.
It was very helpful.
Oh, no.
We wouldn't have gotten started without you.
Yeah.
Everyone is welcome to bring an award for Paul
during ceremonial matters.
OK, well, it's actually time for your comments.
I'll give you a moment to walk on over in case
if there's anything you want to add.
Anything for your city manager comments section?
I'm still so stunned and please thank you.
No, I don't have any comments other than thank you
to Ms. Allen and I want to thank her also
for the outstanding work that they've done
on the kids to care program.
It's a really important program, so thank you.
Very sweet, thank you.
Okay, and so, oh, we are also actually adjourning
memory so apologies for Alan Toby which was requested by councilmember Trager and so would
you like to read go ahead councilmember thank you I'm yes I would like for us to join in
memory of Alan Toby we also have his wife Ruth here and we have his son John online
who may say a few words.
We were all very saddened to hear that Alan Toby
passed away on February 24th of this year,
following a long and courageous struggle with Parkinson's.
But the terrible disease did not define him.
The zest for life and commitment Alan put
into everything he did, did define him.
And this is his story.
He was born in Brooklyn, New York, on December 11, 1944.
He graduated from MIT in 1966 with a Bachelor's of Science
in Literature and Biology and went
on to earn a Master's of Divinity degree
from Luther Seminary in 1970.
In June 1968, he married Ruth Jensen
in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
they raised two children, Chandra, Toby, and John Toby.
After hearing Ron Dellum speak on the UC Berkeley campus
for he enrolled to study sociology,
he volunteered for Dellum's first congressional campaign,
beginning a lifelong commitment to civic engagement
and progressive causes.
Alan became active in the Berkeley Tenants Organizing
Committee, which promoted the city's rent control ordinance.
He was also a founder of Stop Institutional Creep,
a community effort that sought to preserve
a historic residence at the corner of Ridge Road
and Scenic Avenue, where the Graduate Theological Union
Building and Library now stand.
Alan's work at Wine and the People,
a Berkeley store specializing in home winemaking
and brewing supplies that also produced its own wines,
led him to advocate for legislation allowing brew pubs
to manufacture and sell their beer in Berkeley.
He was both an inspiration and an instigator
in Berkeley's becoming a pioneer
in the legalization of microbrewing.
Professionally, Allen built a career in management
and marketing for high-tech companies.
In retirement, he continued his commitment
to public service and environmental stewardship,
serving on the boards of the Sierra Club
and Berkeley's livable Berkeley organizations.
And the Sierra Club is when I first got to work with him
as a fellow member of the Sierra Club's
Northern Alameda County Group Executive Committee.
I got to watch how beautifully he brought together
people that normally wouldn't agree
or even talk to each other
and how prescient his commitment to housing for all was,
getting them to actually do it together.
At his West Berkeley home,
Allen was well known for bringing neighbors together
and strengthening community ties.
Among his many local accomplishments
was being the squeaky wheel
that led to the city's installing a stop sign
at the intersection of Gilman and Peralta,
which he would tell me was one of his proudest achievements.
Throughout his life, Alan championed big ideas,
but never lost sight of the wise learning
that for those ideas to be embraced,
it was on us to meet people where they were at.
We will always remember him for his dedication
to social justice, environmental advocacy,
community building, public service,
and his slogan of choice, for the people.
Alan, you truly epitomized always being there
for the people, presenter.
We have, I think, John online, hopefully.
Yes, I'm here, Igor, can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Excellent, thank you for those very kind words.
Good evening, I'm John Toby,
Helen's youngest son, proudly born and raised in Berkeley.
Mayor Ishii, Deputy Mayor Trega, members of the council,
thank you for honoring my father today.
Allen believed the city reveals what its people value,
the shape of a street, the scale of a building,
whether a neighborhood stays walkable.
These are choices about what kind of life
people are allowed to have.
He lived in Berkeley for more than 50 years
and he became part of its fabric.
He paid attention to it.
He argued with it.
He defended it.
He believed in the city that was something
you participated in, not something you occupied.
He loved his little neighborhood of Westbury most of all,
a neighborhood where people knew each other
because they were so often on foot,
passing each other's porches.
As Igor said, he spent considerable energy
fighting for a stop sign
at the corner of Gilman and Peralta,
a simple stop sign,
because he understood that small things
are where real life happens.
Kids crossing the street, neighbors walking home,
the ordinary details that tell you a place is cared for.
Through liveable Berkeley and his writing for Berkeley side
and other venues, he carried those values
into the wider city.
Affordable housing, preservation alongside progress,
a Berkeley that made room for people
instead of pushing them out.
His guiding idea was simple.
In the words of one of my favorite chefs, Jose Andres,
you should build longer tables, not taller fences.
You had very little patience for posturing
or for process used as theater.
If he thought something was standing in the way
of a livable city, he said so.
Sometimes diplomatically, as Igor said, sometimes not.
But even that came from caring.
He expected better because he believed better was possible.
To many people, Alan was a plant enter,
an advocate, a public voice.
To me, he was just dad.
The person who made dinner every night,
Who loved a terrible pun,
who asked impossible questions about everything.
Losing him leaves a silence,
but it also makes something clear.
Love leaves an inheritance, standards, curiosity.
The belief that paying attention is its own form of love.
That if something matters,
you should care enough to say so.
Alan gave Berkeley 50 years of that,
and he gave it to us too.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for sharing that.
And thank you to Council Member Traka
for bringing forward our adjournment in memory this evening.
Now I'll move on to public comment on non-agenda matters.
So public comments on non-agenda matters.
We'll draw five cards for in-person speakers.
And then the first five hands raised on the Zoom
will be allowed to speak one minute per speaker.
So I'll draw the five cards.
And if you're on the Zoom
and you want to give non-agenda public comments,
again, comments on items that are not on the agenda,
then you can raise your hand on the Zoom.
five in-person speakers are Teresa Gonzalez, Malik Loudermilk, Andrew
Fisher, Cornelius Smith and Celeste Marks. So you can come up in any order and
you'll have one minute per speaker. Good evening, Mayor Yishi, City Manager
Buiken and members of the City Council. My name is Teresa Gonzalez. I am the
state director of Liffrey, California.
I'm here to urge you to fund the Berkeley Gun Violence
Intervention and Prevention Program
to address the funding gap for FY27,
to make us whole because we weren't in the FY27 budget
either, and also a baseline commitment
for continued operations through FY28.
The results speak for themselves.
When we initially came on and submitted our proposal,
We were striving for a 10% gun violence reduction.
We landed at 100% in 2025.
In addition to that, we just sent over
some information for you all today.
The National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform
published the first of its kind Berkeley gun violence,
the Costa gun violence report.
It has been proven that I have one, thank you.
I have a virtual, oh, I have a virtual,
oh, a minute from Santina Gonzalez.
Hi, Santina, are you yielding your time?
Yes, I'm yielding my time.
Okay.
Hey, the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform
documented that one single fatal shooting
cost Berkeley taxpayers $3.2 million.
In 2024, Berkeley had three fatal
and five non-fatal shootings.
The nonfatal over $700,000.
A combined taxpayer cost of more than $13 million
was spent in 2024.
In 2025, the cost was zero
and we gave that money back to the taxpayers
because they deserve it.
That was a 13 to one return
on a $1 million investment per year.
We also extended and we're fiduciary responsible
and extended our funding for a whole nother year
without asking you all.
So we really got for $2 million,
three years worth of program services.
We ask for continued support and integrity.
We appreciate all of the support
that you all have showed us thus far.
And we ask that we don't just focus on cost savings,
but the impact of human lives
and the ripple effect that it has
in our entire Berkeley community.
We thank you for this resource
and the continued investment also in prevention efforts.
Thank you, so we don't have to see this anymore.
I'm sorry, thank you.
rose that I didn't hear it beep the second time I'm Dr. Steven Alpert during
the last council meeting mayor is she interrupted by public comment remarks
information provided by the First Amendment Coalition indicated your
interruption was a violation of the First Amendment to right to the right of
free speech the night circuit has ruled that criticism specific members are
gunning body is a violation of the First Amendment.
Your interruption was, quote,
just a reminder not to refer to individual council members
refer to us as a body.
Moreover, I was not addressing council member Humbert,
but instead clearly referring to misinformation
on this website as displayed on this poster.
For government code 54960, a formal cease and desist later,
letter was forwarded demanding that this council
acknowledge the violations and make an unconditional commitment not to interrupt any speaker addressing
statements or positions publicly made by individual company members or other city officials.
The council has 30 days to comply with all matters of this cease and desist letter.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good evening.
I'm Cornelius Smith.
I'm here on behalf of Berkeley High School and Live Free.
I'm a school safety officer and mentor at Berkeley High.
I'm speaking on behalf of Live Free because on numerous occasions, Live Free have come
in and helped me mediate situations with young men and women in conflict.
And the reason you need Live Free in your budget, it makes the community safe for all
community members young and old.
One of the last times like me in Live Free have you been to court for a kid or giving
money out your pocket or clothes.
It's not a tax write off for me, it's how we were raised.
You reach one to teach one.
So you need live free and you need mentors to make sure the community is safe, not just
for the kids, but for you all sitting up here.
If you notice in social media, it's a lot of young people losing their lives over social
media and conflict, substance abuse is rampant.
So we need live free in order to make it safe for everyone.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good evening, Mayor, honorable mayor and city council members.
to meet some of you, know who our faces are in the community. My name is Andrew
Fisher and I'm here to say a few words on behalf and in support of the LiveFree
organization. I've lived in Berkeley for close to 50 years. I've built a small
business here along with my wife that has grown and flourished in this
community for 20 years and counting. Our kids currently attend BUSD, that
community. Much like you, I'm thankful for I live and I feel a strong sense of
pride especially seeing the city's evolution over the course of my time
here. There's another there's no other place on earth like Berkeley and I think
the surrounding communities. As part of this community and with an interest in
keeping to what I think are our core beliefs of compassion and leading and
lending a helping hand to our neighbors and our excuse me people in need I would
like to strongly encourage you on over there. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, my name
is Malik Louder milk. I would like to pass my minute over to Reverend Angela.
Thank you. Hello, my name is Reverend Angela Jernigan. I am in resident of
West Berkeley and I am here to really morally insist that the city find the
money to maintain the baseline for live free funding. This is a program that pastors and
community leaders fought hard for to get to the city for a decade and we finally got the funding,
finally put it in action and it ended gun violence in the city in one year. It is the
cheapest way to intervene on gun violence if you just look at the numbers numbers alone it is the
cheapest way to maintain the peace it is also morally unconscionable to not fund a program that
we know saves lives please read the letter that i and a dozen other clergy and community leaders
signed for you. Thank you. OK. We have speak going to speakers on zoom now. First one is
Russell. Hi everybody. Russell Beets here. The murder is rampage by the dinosaurs and
today all around the Middle East and Palestine and Lebanon in Iran is going on and on and
on and I insist at some point in the near future that a Gaza Genocide remembrance day be brought
forward to the city council of Berkeley. Thomas Vassie had guts enough to bring up the U.S. as
liberty attack by the Zionist entity. Yesterday in Congress it was a great speech, 25 minutes I should
just listen to it. They need to be stopped. Gaza needs to be remembered and I would ask you very
politely at this point to consider that for the future thank you very much. Thank you also.
Next is Sandhya. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Om Shanti. Om Shanti means I'm a peaceful soul.
My name is Sandhya and I represent Anuguti Meditation and Retreat Center in Navator.
Anuguti is part of the Ramakumari is a wonderful worldwide woman-led non-profit organization
with centers in over 140 countries and affiliated with the United Nations through Economic and
Social Council, ECOSOC, and UNICEF. Our mission is to empower individuals through meditation,
self-awareness, and spiritual values to create a more peaceful world. Today, I am delighted to
invite you and your family to our Wellness Wonderland Family Fair on June 20th, celebrating
the International Day of Yoga and the spirit of family and community. This free event is being
organized in collaboration with several Bay Area organizations and will feature wellness booths,
yoga, meditation, Ayurveda, holistic health, scientists, and speakers exploring well-being
and consciousness. Cultural program and activities for all ages. Thank you.
Next is to Vayo Smith.
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes.
Well, first and foremost, hello to you all.
So, hello, my name is Tovio Smith.
First and foremost, I want to say that I am a proud member
from Berkeley along with my family.
Been here for many generations.
Wanted to say that the Live Free Program
is extremely important to me and my community.
And honestly, it should be to you too.
Todd Walker my coach last mentor and role model showed us as a kid violence was in the way, and he showed us this through a scare straight program.
The lessons that he taught us was if we wanted to go down that road, there's only 2 ways that we're going to end up either dead in the streets in the violent way or in prison.
With that lifestyle so we are here to police our community. So I just want you guys to let us police our community.
Thank you. Thank you last is a phone number.
Call her phone number ending in 211.
Well, first of all, I like to ask a prayer for this beautiful woman who is murdered by her boyfriend in this street. This is awful. This is awful. This is Berkeley.
Berkeley is a peaceful town on a piece.
Roy's manager, Roy is a bunch of people.
Mary, as you look at it, I think I recommend
the friendly meeting, what can we solve for them.
People in Berkeley actually need us more than ever.
We'll be in the business 53 years.
What we're looking at right now,
we're seeing our country dismantled, demolished.
I can't describe it.
I've been in Berkeley for 63 years.
I have never expected the beauty and elegance of the city and state
and the country getting demolished,
and I agree with Professor Bate by the way about Gaza,
that Sir Sir Maysi was great.
This government, the U.S. is liberty.
I was a kid in Egypt when my head was bombed in 1948 and 1956 by Israel.
In 1976, Egypt defeated Israel.
Thank you very much. We will move on to the consent calendar.
I should note that there is another opportunity for non-agenda public comments at the end
of the meeting. Thank you. Yes, yes. Do any of my, yeah, I'm so sorry. I got deleted from
my agenda somehow. But yes are there any public comments by employee unions? Anyone
online from an employee union? All right, thank you very much. Thank you. My gosh.
Okay, anyone have any comments from the consent calendar? My colleagues? Yes,
Councilmember O'Keefe. I have other comments I'll make in a second but I
want to recuse myself from one of the items. Item 22, hot tub item. I don't know
do I have to give the room or something or can I just say I'm recusing and then
not talk about it. Yes we'll have to take two votes on the consent calendar we'll
take one vote separately on item 22 and then another vote on the remainder.
Okay, sorry about that everyone but trying to do it right. Thank you I
appreciate that. Councilmember Casarwani. Thank you very much Madam Mayor. I'd
like to be recorded as donating $100 to item number 19. This is the Poet Laureate
program and $100 towards item number 21, which is the Holocaust Remembrance Day
program, and I would like to be added as a co-sponsor to item number 22 to
streamline our approval of hot tubs. Thank you very much. Thank you. Can we
move on, Councilmember Humbert, please? Miss that. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm
We want to draw attention to items 18a and 18b policy recommendations for the City of
Berkeley regarding event producers and civic events.
That's a and companion report is b, policy recommendations for the City of Berkeley regarding
event producers and civic events.
I just want to make – confirm that when we vote on – the consent calendar will vote
on adopting the recommendations in the City Manager's companion report 18B.
Yes, we would be adopting this for the purposes of adopting 18B. Thank you.
Thank you. And then with respect to 19, which is the poet laureate program, I'd
like to contribute a hundred dollars to my discretionary office account, also a
$100 to 20 which is the Chavez where to tribute site or formerly named that
$100. I would like as to item 21 the 2027 Holocaust Remembrance Day program
I'd like to contribute $500 from our DA discretionary account and then with
respect to item 22 and final item on the consent calendar having to do with
amendments to Berkeley Municipal Code section that relates to hot tubs I'd
like to add council member council members Bartlett Casarwani and Trigub as
co-sponsors on this item for their requests that's all I have thanks thank
Thank you very much, Councilmember Bartlett.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Through this, item 19, the Berkeley Poet Laureate Program,
I'd like to donate $200 from my D13 account
to support this wonderful program.
Item 20, I think Councilmember Casarwani for this.
Oh, Mary, this is yours, thank you.
For the $200 as well to the Chavez,
we're at the attribute site.
Should be wonderful.
2021 the 2027 Holocaust Memorial Day program under the $200 to support this
wonderful annual event and I think that's it but lastly for the live free
people that are here I want to just recognize you and thank you for the work
you've done it's many years working on this and now finally got it funded it's
working tremendously want to thank you for all your work thank you very much
councilmember Luna Parra thank you I'd like to donate $200 each to items 19 20
and 21 and thanks to the authors thank you I'm trying to do math while I'm
calling on you all to add these numbers okay councilmember Traeger vice mayor
Traeger thank you madam mayor and thank you to our staff and administration
across all departments for your work on many complex items.
There are several items that I'm excited about
in terms of continuing our partnership
with business improvement districts,
such as the North Shattuck Association and Visit Berkeley.
On item 10, which is a contract that will ease
the burden to dispatchers and provide more consistent responses for public
dispatch. I want to thank staff very much for bringing forward this item. Our
office has been receiving input from constituents about sometimes there is
of less than consistent response that they receive
when they call.
And I think this is a systems issue, not a people issue.
And I think this will really help.
And I also want to appreciate staff's comprehensive write
up of the sole source and the single source justification.
I think this is a gold standard
for what I appreciate seeing in items before us
where there is a single contract or vendor
to be selected from.
Moving on, I would, on items 18A and 18B,
While I will be supporting a motion to approve 18B,
which is the companion report,
I want to thank the Civic Arts Commission as well as staff.
We all share the desire for a more equitable, transparent,
efficient, and predictable special event program in Berkeley.
Our office has also been working on an item
in support of these goals
that will serve as a complement to these efforts.
And I want to thank the commission
for bringing this forward today
and staff for working on, well,
assessing the feasibility of implementation
and trying to really get through what are the things
that we can do on this front right now.
I would like to contribute $150 each to items 19 and 20.
And I would like to thank my colleagues as well as the mayor
for putting together item 22, 21, thank you.
21, which is the Holocaust Remembrance Day program.
And those are all my comments, thank you.
Thank you very much.
Council Member Taplin.
Thank you, Madam Mayor, and good evening, everybody.
On item 19, I would like to be recorded
as relinquishing $1,000 from my D13.
And if there's room, I would request
being added as a co-sponsor.
Sorry, which item was that?
19, the Poet Laureate.
Ah, yes, yes, please.
We'd love to have you join us.
Thank you very much.
And we really appreciate your work on this front.
On item number 20, I'd like to
be recorded as relinquishing $250.
On IM21, I would like to be recorded
as relinquishing $500 from my D13.
And I would, if there's room, request to be listed
as a co-sponsor on this one as well.
The 2027 Holocaust Memorial Day program.
I think that we should have space on that one.
Is that correct?
Council Member Tregeb, Vice Mayor Tregeb?
I believe so.
Yes, thank you.
Thank you very much.
Those complete, that completes my remarks.
Okay, back to Council Member O'Keefe.
Thank you, these are my real comments.
Oh, first of all, I'm told I was supposed to say
I'm going to show you how to
use it because I don't really
know why I'm recusing it's
because I have formed an intent
to purchase a hot tub so it's
kind of obvious but I have to
say it for the record.
So I shouldn't put on it.
My real comments are I would
like to be recorded as donating
$200 to item 19, item 20 and
item 21.
Thank you very much for bringing
those forward and then lastly I
because I really feel like our civic events are really under threat right now for a number
of reasons, and they have, it's hard to defend them because they don't really, it's hard
to quantify or point to their value, but I think we can all feel it, that they really,
they have a really intangible value to our community.
So anything we can do to help promote them, keep them, promote them, keep them from dying
out and maybe even have more one day. That'd be great. So just happy to support item 18.
Thank you very much. And I'm so sorry. Council Member Brockaby, I missed you because
your little hand is being covered by my captions.
I'll just jump up and down next time, no problem. Thank you. I'll be quick. Again,
I want to echo thanks to the economic development team for their work on the telegraph bid and the
In the North Shattuck bid as well as the visit Berkeley bid that work is so important to our business climate, business activity, business activity in the city. So just appreciate these items coming forward.
On item 18, similarly to my other to colleagues, I really do appreciate the civic arts commission, bring this forward, helping us think through how best we can support our events activity in the city.
And I do support the feasibility analysis that the city manager recommends to make sure that whatever we pursue is thoughtful and rooted in economic cost and economic benefit, but again, I see them connected.
And so I just wanted to thank everybody's work on those items. And then on the relinquishment items, I'd like to be recorded as contributing $500 to the Berkeley Poet Laureate Program.
$500 for the Huerta Shabbos Huerta tribute site.
And $1,500 to Holocaust Remembrance Day.
And thank you to my colleague.
Thank you very much.
Okay, so I did just wanna mention
that I'm very grateful for staff's ability
to continue leveraging dollars.
On tonight's agenda, we're gonna be submitting a grant
a total of $315,267 in the state of California
for FY27 through FY29
for the Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health Program.
The city is estimated to provide $123,550
in matching fund revenue
and draw down $105,089 in state revenue each fiscal year.
Thank you so much to the Civic Arts Commission
for their policy recommendations.
And as was mentioned by Council Member Humbert,
We will be accepting this report 18B
with the intention of accepting 18B.
And lastly, thank you so much to everyone
who put in funding towards the Poet Laureate,
the Tribute Site, and the Holocaust Remembrance Day
for FY 2027.
And I think that that is it for me.
Okay, do we have any public comment on consent calendar
or information items only, come on up.
Good evening, my name is Daniel McTressney Young
and I am the Ecology Center's
Farmers Market Program Manager.
I am here this evening to speak in support
of items 18A and B, and just say that
I appreciate the city staff's commitment
to working with event producers
and especially thank Peter Redue and Kerry Arredondo
for their thoughtful consideration
of the Event Producers' Bill of Rights in item 18A.
The Berkeley farmers markets advance the city's
cultural, economic, climate, health, and strategic goals.
We look forward to the continued city support
to ensure the future of Berkeley's farmers markets
and other special cultural events.
Thank you, anyone online to speak on the consent calendar
information items only?
Oh, I'm sorry, Moni, where are you coming?
I want to thank council member O'Keefe about the comment
on the civic organizations in the arts and culture.
That's what Berkeley's all about
and the indigenous people's day powwow committee,
I'm honored to be a part of that.
Choctaw and Mississippi relatives that I have,
I've been in powwow committees in Yakima, Washington,
Seattle and here and we want that to thrive and continue so we really
appreciate the council's support of that and live free and prevention of
violence my assist my aunt was killed in her bed and my cousin as well violence
might have rises that level prevention is everything and this program is saving
lives so I really appreciate also councilmember Bartlett's comments thank
you thanks anyone online for consent calendar information items only yes we
have seven hands raised first speaker is Lisa bullwinkel good evening everyone I
want to thank you so much for your contributions to the poet laureate
program. Susan Felix, who was our art ambassador to the city, really encouraged me to kind of push
this through the Civic Arts Commission, and lo and behold, we've raised almost $5,000 too
for our next Poet Laureate. Thank you so much. Also, I want to thank the city staff for their
amazing work and positivity in going forward with the event producer's policy. This was no
small tasks and we're really excited to see how much joy we can bring to the city by producing
events in collaboration with you. And so I thank you again, especially Peter Radu and Kerry
and the city manager. It's just been great trying to get this done and I think we're there.
Thank you, Lisa, and thanks for all your work. I know you do a lot too.
Next is Cameron Wu.
Good evening, everyone. Thank you for taking my comments. I come to you tonight to speak as a
private citizen of Berkeley, not as an art commissioner, which I am on the Civic Arts
Commission. But I come to you tonight as a private citizen. I'd like to mention kudos to the mayor and
the Berkeley City Council for contributing to Berkeley's Poet Laureate program with passing
item 19 tonight. With Berkeley's long and rich tradition, literary tradition,
it would be a shame to lose this valuable program. It's a modest sum, but one that is
greatly appreciated. Also, thanks for all the work you've done and the hopeful passage of item 18.
the events, producers, comments, and revisions. Much needed. Thank you all for your hard work.
Thanks again. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Cameron. Next is Kelly.
Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Yes, loud and clear. Okay. I have a problem with Holocaust
Remembrance Day as it is as if the Shoah, the Holocaust was so horrific that it is the only
genocide to remember. We don't recognize the Nakba and the current genocide that we as a country
participate in through financing an army. We recited our meetings, the land acknowledgement,
but we don't state that we live in a country created through genocide and ethnic cleansing.
I'd like us to live in a city, a country, and a world where we condemn all
genocides, instead of blinding our eyes and excusing some, depending on who is suffering
and who is committing them. Next is a caller with a phone number ending in 211.
You should be able to unmute. Hi, consent item four. Go down, walk down to the graph.
about four out of five storefronts are closed, shut down forever.
Do something with the people who have this place empty.
Second, with the effect Holocaust, human memory is very short.
People are killed over so many beautiful Jews in the dark.
Nobody is never with TV.
Every day you watch little kids in Gaza, in Lebanon, getting caught in their heads.
They're saying 70,000, no, it's more like half a million Palestinians are dead.
By the way the old semantics, now how can you just make semantics
it's central setting because it is the San Francisco community don't wait until the
story to let us do um it's worth it it's a criminal thank you.
Next speaker is Alex Knox.
Good evening Mayor and Council members Alex Knox Telegraph Business Improvement District.
I just want to say, echo Council Member Blackby's thanks for the Office of Economic Development
and their critical work to ensure that we're able to continue operating and put these steps through
motion. And I'm also very pleased to report that just today we approved and finalized our new
strategic plan for the telegraph district, which we will be unveiling and publicizing over the
coming weeks, but really establishes an ambitious forward-thinking vision for the telegraph district.
I'll be pleased to share that with you. As also a contributor and collaborator on the policy
recommendations from the Berkeley event producers. I want to say that I really thank the group
of people that came together to bring those recommendations together. But really recognize
and thank the city manager's office for their good faith efforts. Thank you.
Next is Russell. Thank you everybody. Norman Finkelstein wrote a book called
the Holocaust industry where he details how it's become big business and a way to
guilt-treat people out of money. I suggest that for the sake of balance the city of Berkeley
does the Gaza genocide remembrance day at the same time the other Holocaust remembrance day goes on.
Otherwise, it's proving the the press become the pressure, the first chance to get and the Palestinian people have been a press for seventy eight years. So, for the sake of balance, consider the gossip remembrance.
Gossage, other side, remember to stay. Thank you very much.
All right, next is Della Luna.
Yes, I agree with some of the speakers.
Seeking balance in regards to Holocaust remembrance day there should. I mean, we don't.
Want to only just remember 1 genocide, it just honestly doesn't make any sense to take that stance, but I was want to just speak about number 18 a and 18 B and I'm really glad to see that this.
Is on the agenda and I guess being passed, I hope it's being passed and, um.
I wanted to say, I hope it means that the bathrooms will be open again for the farmer's market for years. We've had access to bathrooms at the Saturday farmer's market specifically, and we've used the park.
With no problems, and it seems in recent years, the way the city has tried to manage that space has only just made it worse and the numbers are going down at the market and the vendors are upset. Like, everything's just cranky.
And so, I just hope that you can restore it to a space that's actually an event that's normal to be at like a regular Saturday afternoon. Thank you.
And the last speaker is M.
Jervis. Hi, everybody Matthew Jervis. Thank you. Everyone I wanted to speak in.
Obviously, we're excited about 18 and B and the direction of the conversations that have been going about the event producers and the partnership with the city.
The community really expresses itself in these amazing events that we're able to put on and I'm looking forward to partnership with the city and making more of them. So, thank you very much for your help and and all the city staff and the event producers that have come together in this very constructive conversation. Thank you.
Thank you. That's it. Okay, thank you. Alright, so.
Is there a motion to, sorry, I see that Councilmember Taplin has his.
Thank you very much. I want to thank the mayor and the vice mayor again for their
authorship of the Holocaust Memorial Day program item. This is a very important
event. I'm very proud that this council has continued to support this event. And
even today in 2026 we see an almost daily basis, the grim reminder of both
the impact and the presence of noxious anti-Semitic thought and conservatorial
thinking and with that I move adoption of the City calendar second so that
would the consent calendar perhaps yes so minus the yeah minus 22 and then we
can ask councilmember O'Keefe to step right is that okay yes okay and okay to
the seconder as well all right so this is well this is when you would be
recused on. Everything except 22. Right. Oh yes you're correct. Sorry so this is
every items 1 to 21 councilmember Kess Narwani. Yes.
Tapplin Bartlett. Yes. Traga. Aye. O'Keeffe. Yes. Blackaby. Yes. Munepara. Yes. Humber.
Yes, and Mary she yes, okay. Yes. Thank you. She carries
Is there a motion to?
Wait, let me just okay. Is there a motion to approve number 22 on the consent calendar? So moved second
Can you take the wrong that please?
For item 22 on consent council member kiss our wani. Yes, tap Lynn all right Bartlett. Yes
Tragob I
O'Keeffe is recused
the city of Toronto. So we're
hear this item and the next two at the previous meeting so I will let you hop
right in. Thank You mayor and council members. My name is Scott Gilman I'm the
director of health housing and community services I have the pleasure of
introducing our deputy director Tanya Bustamante. Approximately six months ago
Tanya became responsible for the Environmental Health Division and she
has a brief presentation to review our fee proposal. Thank You Scott. Good
Good evening, honorable mayor and council.
Good to see you all again.
So this evening, I have a brief presentation
to walk you through our environmental health
permit fee increases.
Can you just put it a little closer to you?
I don't know why.
It still sounds a little quiet.
Can you hear me better?
That's better, yeah, thank you.
All right.
So this evening, I will provide you with a brief background
of our environmental health food safety program.
provide you with a rationale for our fee increases
and also talk a little bit about the fee increase impacts.
So to start off with our background,
food safety and inspection really comprises the bulk
of our Environmental Health Division's work.
The Environmental Health Division is responsible
for permitting and inspecting all food facilities
and that includes school kitchens, retail
and non-retail food establishments, mobile food vendors,
temporary event booths, restaurants, bars,
farmer's markets, and so on and so forth.
The division's approach focuses on the prevention
of foodborne and food-related illness
by emphasizing the importance of education
on key food safety principles,
and also by following the Federal Food
and Drug Administration retail food program standards.
Follow-up inspections occur when a facility
doesn't meet minimum standards of the California Retail Food
Code, which is a subset of our California Health and Safety
Code.
So our current fees have remained largely unchanged
since 2011.
Fees were never set at 100% of the full cost of our operations.
Additional facility categories and fees
were added to the division's fee schedule back in 2016,
2021 and 2024 but those were really to reflect
newly created categories of food facilities
as defined in the California Retail Food Code.
But existing fees overall were not updated
or increased at those times.
The proposed fee structure outlines fee increases
that are needed to sustain our division operations.
Additionally, the proposed fee structure reflects
a 40% increase in inflation and cost of living.
So I'd like to give you a little bit of our,
I'd like to give you a scope of our food facilities,
which make up the majority of the types of facilities
that our environmental health inspectors inspect in Berkeley.
So the city of Berkeley inspects approximately
over 950 food facilities.
We also have non-food facilities,
which include pools and spas, body art,
cannabis and tobacco distribution, et cetera.
So to help you understand the difference
between risk categories in our food facilities,
it really is largely dependent on the type of food
that is prepared and served,
and also the food preparation that is involved.
So a low risk facility, for example,
might include something like a cafe
that serves pre-packaged foods.
A medium-risk facility might be something
like a yogurt shop.
Whereas a high-risk facility might include something
like a sushi bar or restaurant.
The Environmental Health Division team
has only four active field inspectors currently,
and the city requires six to meet its inspection targets.
I'm sharing this with you because our high-risk facilities
require more inspections and typically those are the ones
that we get the most complaints on from community members.
Our proposed fees are based on a comprehensive fee study.
So facilities are categorized based on the type
of facility that they are, the risk level,
and also the square footage.
Fees were calculated based on the staff time
that it takes to complete inspection activities
and services.
And we also take into consideration
complaints investigations and follow-up re-inspections.
The recommended increases and the creation
of a new fee structure will increase the division's revenue
to more appropriately cover the costs
of delivering both mandated, state and local,
and non-mandated services to the community.
and adequately inspect our over 1100 facilities
that we have in Berkeley.
Mandated services include our mandated facility inspections
for all of our establishments,
noise permits, stormwater inspections, et cetera.
Non-mandated services include things
like general nuisance complaint investigations,
noise studies, expanded food program services.
We often provide technological assistance
and consultations to food business owners.
We also do community outreach and education
and special event guidance beyond the required permitting.
The fees would defray the costs
of the division software transition,
which is currently in process.
We are transitioning to a new platform,
which will increase accuracy and transparency
of our facility inspection data.
And it will also help to fund our new
Packarding Program costs,
which the division hopes to implement next year.
Actually, I just wanna add that these last three bullets
are specifically in response
to the city auditor's recommendations,
directly related to their audit findings.
We are actively working on a new platform
that will enable us to make our facility inspection reports
more readily available to the public.
And of course, we're keeping the city auditor apprised
on our progress.
Expanding our capacity and modernizing
the division's operations will enable them
to be more responsive to our community's needs
and more transparent with the outcome
of the services that we provide.
Obviously, these increases will have impacts
on our businesses in Berkeley.
Our Office of Economic Development
is available to assist business owners
in connecting to resources that can help sustain
and grow their business in Berkeley.
And that concludes our brief presentation
and happy to answer any questions you have.
Thank you very much.
I think we have a number of questions for you
starting with Council Member Tapplin.
Sorry, Vice Mayor Trico.
Thank you so much.
So I don't know if this is a question for HHCs
or if Eleanor might be online.
And I absolutely recognize the need for this fee increase.
We have, of course, heard some concerns
from the small business community
around the steep nature of this increase.
And while I recognize that there will be almost a year
for restaurant owners to plan for it
since fees were already assessed this year,
I am curious if there are any concerns
about small business owners being able to pay the fee
and just what the rollout plan is around.
education, change management and potential opportunities if there are demonstrated hardships
to either have an installment plan or other possible ways to get to the intended goal
while also trying to hold onto the small businesses we have.
Well, I can certainly speak to the outreach
and education piece.
We do plan to work with our business owners
and in fact, our field inspectors, for the most part,
have a very good rapport with the business owners
that they do interface with.
So we plan to do a mailing with all of them.
We plan to do face-to-face interaction and communication
between our field inspectors and business owners
to address their concerns and hopefully work with them.
And I'm not sure if Eleanor can add anything
from the Office of Economic Development perspective.
Did you want her to respond?
Is she here?
I know she's online,
but I don't know if she has anything to add.
I'm here, thanks for the opportunity to talk.
It's been great working with HHCS on the site
and we stand ready to support small businesses
as they're getting information about the changes
and helping them comply with the new policy.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, moving on to Council Member O'Keefe.
Did you skip someone?
Go ahead.
Yeah, I did, I just pressed it.
So Council Member Bartlett, then Council Member O'Keefe.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Thank you for your presentation.
Can you go back to the chart of different cities
their fees. This one? Mm-hmm. So this is interesting. As I go through this, I'm
curious that maybe Eleanor can answer, maybe you can as well. Why is San
Diteo so high? Do you have any idea? That's a good question. No, we just surveyed what
their current fees were, but why they're so high, we don't have information on
that. Okay I don't have that many restaurants there. Okay and it's so it's
fine. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember O'Keefe. Thank you. I think it's San Mateo
County that has a lot of restaurants. The whole county, right. I haven't been to
San Mateo City. My question has to do with the status, you mentioned in your
presentation the status of the making available online the restaurant
inspection information I know that we had we had a presentation about that
quite some time ago I don't remember how long ago and it was forthcoming then so
do you have a date I know it's a little off topic but you brought it up and I'm
curious yeah it's been it's been a long road but we hope to launch it at the end
of summer early fall okay and I just I guess I haven't had a question last time
that I'm still curious about.
We don't have to get into it, but my understanding
is there is a PDF of all of the current,
like maybe it's, I'll talk to you about it offline,
actually it's not important for right now,
but I thought there was an easier way.
But anyway, we'll look forward to that, thank you.
Okay, yeah, I was curious, actually on this chart as well,
if there was a reason why our retail grocery store
inspection is so much higher than Alameda's,
because I feel like it's largely on par otherwise.
Do you know?
Can you speak to the last time
that Alameda raised their fees?
Yeah, so you'll see on the chart,
Alameda's fees were effective in 2021.
And so we believe that they're gonna be adjusting fees
as well, we don't have confirmation
of when that's gonna happen,
but I think that's part of it.
Well, it's just that that one in particular
is like half of ours.
Even our older fee, you know, we also hasn't increased it.
But it's not going up that much between
what existed before with us and now.
So anyway, I'd be interested in understanding
that a little bit better.
And then the other question I had was about ongoing increases.
Do we have anything in place for that?
We don't have anything in place,
But we do plan on being better about keeping pace
with the economy in terms of increasing our fees
if we need to, and also keeping pace
with the rest of the Bay Area jurisdictions.
And cost of living, of course, is a factor as well.
Thank you, and can you speak to any other features
in this new program, this new system that would exist?
Just to understand that a little bit better.
I know that more transparency for the public is great,
but I'm wondering if it also provides any services
for those that are being inspected as well.
I don't fully understand the details
so we could get back to you on that,
but I do understand that there will be a public facing portal
that the community members will be able,
and business owners will be able to easily access.
Okay, thank you.
And then, oh, Vice Mayor Traged, did you have something?
You wanted to ask a question?
I think Council Member Blaca may have had his hand up, but I do have a question.
Oh, go for it. Sorry. I can't see you anymore. Council member. So go ahead. I'm hiding.
Thanks. Director Gilman, Deputy Director Bustamante. I just had a couple of questions just to understand some of the big picture numbers as well and see managing may want to jump in here too.
So, on an annual basis, again, we're in budget season, so I'm kind of trying to put this in the context of the budget. Also.
Uh, it's my understanding that the general fund reimburses something on the order of about 980,000, right? To kind of.
Level, set the that fund that's correct.
Okay, and then so this, these new revenues, these new fees would generate.
An additional 666,000 in revenue annually.
Um, estimated, but then we'd also be hiring 2 new resources to fill out.
Some of the inspection program and so the net.
The net revenue generated would be more on the order of about 229,000 or something. Right?
Yes, that's correct. Okay. And so the general fund would still be.
Chipping in on annual basis kind of 750,000 plus.
Yes, okay.
Is the, is the goal of this fund.
That it should be self sustaining ultimately, or is that the right way to think about it? Is the goal trying to get that to basically.
To 0 out so that the general funds contributing 0, or do we think this.
Is there a reason that the general fund should be making I mean, is it is it by design that the fees should be covering the cost of running the program? Or is this always going to be the case? We're going to have general fund contribution.
of general fund contribution. Good question, council member. Yes, our goal is to get the fees up to
the point where they're fully supporting the program. Yeah. As the director and deputy
director have said that fees haven't been raised for a long time, so we're kind of in a catch-up
mode, but that is the goal. Okay, okay. You know, I know we're pretty deep into this particular
budget process, but this does feel like an area these are heading into the next fiscal year that,
You know, you know, the county does, I think, a pretty decent job at this work. Should this be something that we at least look at? Are there some of these functions? Because again, this just feels like is what we're getting in difficult budget situations, difficult kind of budget scenarios that we're in now.
You know, if this is a function that the county is providing to every other city in the county.
I don't, and again, I don't know what kind of costs we would sort of bear to make that transfer.
But I at least think this should be on the list of things to look at. I know we're probably not going to be able to do it between now and June 30. It doesn't seem like that's that's prudent.
But I know we're also probably not going to completely finish the job. It's sort of totally closing the structural deficit between now and June 30. So I think I just want to come back to this because this just feels like I appreciate all the effort and the work. We're getting better. We're getting closer.
But if this is just sort of a number that we're still going to be 750,000 dollars in the red from the general fund if this is just something we need to leave on the table and look at next year of.
What would it look like if we transferred some of this over? So I just, I want to at least leave that out there for consideration. But again, I appreciate the effort and I appreciate that. This is going to help us close the gap. Some are also going to help us.
Get better service in the short term because we will have inspectors that are then I think, again, filling the gap that we haven't had up to full staff per the auditors report.
I don't know. Again, see, I don't want to comment on that, but that's just looking at the numbers. It's kind of, it's the question that kind of strikes me.
We could certainly hear your request and that's something we could certainly start to delve into is doing more analysis of that and understand the cost and benefits and understanding the.
you know, both like you're saying,
both the cost to the general fund,
as well as whatever gets raised
through the special funds,
as well as understanding the benefits
of having staff who can do this work
so that we can present that picture to you.
Yeah, appreciate it.
Yeah, again, between now and June 3,
I don't think we'll have time,
but just leave it for future.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Council Member.
Vice Mayor Trabeb.
And then I do wanna move on,
cause I know we have a couple more fees in particular,
and quite a few more things to cover.
Understood, I'll be as concise as I can.
For this slide, the Bay Area comparison with the county,
can you confirm whether this is unincorporated areas
of the county with the exception of San Francisco
or is it a median throughout the county?
The service is provided by the county.
So Berkeley is one of the few cities in the state
that has its own environmental health division.
Okay.
So these are all full counties.
Okay, so I want to echo Council Member Blockaby's
comment about just continue.
I know we've been in dialogue around this piece
and I would like to continue.
So my other question on table two with the new fee schedule,
it looks like the, this is with the two additional FTEs
in FI27, the expense increase would be about 10K,
well, just a step function.
But this is, the plan would be to present the high,
well, the positioning of the two FTEs under AA01,
And I'm wondering what that means
in terms of expense projections given,
if it's a one that's mid fiscal year,
then it probably takes time to hire those positions.
Can you speak to whether the expense increase
will actually be for 36,000?
That is our anticipated projection.
We took into account how much it costs,
how much a registered environmental health specialist costs.
And so those are our projections for two FTE.
Okay, so if possible,
I would like to bring back this discussion
certainly before a decision is made
on hiring additional FTEs.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there any public comment on this item?
We are on item number 23 changes
to the environmental health fee schedule.
Anyone online?
No, there's no hands raised online.
Okay, very good.
Are there any other comments from our council members?
Yes, council member Humbert.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Yeah, I have a few.
I recognize that no one likes fee
and this is gonna address a number
of the fee increase matters that we're hearing tonight.
I recognize that no one likes fee increases.
I understand why to Berkeley residents and visitors
it feels like being nickeled and dimed.
And I know this is especially unpleasant
when we're dealing with rising inflation
and amazingly rising gas prices.
But that said, we need to keep our city fees
on parity with inflation
and actually reflect the cost of providing these services.
So I've appreciated Councilmember Blackaby's
and Councilmember Trigube's comments in that regard.
Now unless residents are willing to approve
much higher taxes that would enable us
to subsidize these items, we need to adjust these fees.
And that's also generally the fairest way of doing it.
And I want to wind up where it's cost neutral.
We live in a city with a lot of wonderful amenities
and high level of services.
Now, people may sometimes not feel that way
because a garbage can is left uncollected
or a median gets overgrown,
but that doesn't change the overall picture
that Berkeley does a lot more than most cities its size.
And to keep that up, we need to keep up with costs.
So I plan to support this in the other fees
that we have before us tonight.
And we'll have some additional comments
about the parking fees specifically.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Any other council member comments?
I did just want to add that as well, that I know that it is really challenging for some
of our small businesses, especially our restaurants, to have these fee increases.
And so I do really want us to look into some kind of regular increases so that we don't
have these jumps.
I think that that creates a lot more uncertainty for our small businesses, and I will be supporting
this as well, but I do want us to look into that and also understanding cost benefit analysis
of having this in-house versus the county. And yeah, I want to just also thank you for the
presentation for the information. The comparison I think is very helpful for us to understand.
And with that I will see if there is a motion to close the public hearing.
Some moved.
Second. Can we take the roll on that please? Okay, to close the public hearing, Councilmember
Kiserwone. Yes. Taplin. Bartlett. Yes. Dragob. Aye. O'Keeffe. Yes. Blackaby. Yes.
Unapara. Yes. Humber. Yes. And Mary Rishi. Yes. Okay. Public hearing is closed. Okay. Is
there a motion to approve the resolution? So moved. Second. Can we take the roll on
that too please okay to approve the changes to environmental health fee
schedule councilmember keserwani yes Taplin Bartlett yes I okay yes black be
yes unipara yes Humber yes and Mary she yes a motion carries thank you thank
you all so much okay moving on to item number 24 so by the way my goal is to
get through 24 and 25 hopefully within the next 30 minutes we'll see and then
take a brief break. So moving on to item 24 repeal and reenact
Berkeley Municipal Code chapter 14.52 to adjust the go Berkeley parking
management program, change parking permit fees, establish a new schedule for
parking violations, fines and late payment penalties and rescind resolution
number seven one comma six two seven dash n s which was also
continuing from May 19th, 2026.
So again, apologies for you all having to come back again
that we weren't able to get to your item before the end
of the evening and I will pass it over to you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good evening, mayor council members,
we're here to marry interim director of public works.
Tonight we have with us Mark Helmbrick,
transportation manager and Elliot Schwimmer our Go Berkeley subject matter expert guru.
We do have a brief presentation for you guys tonight and I'm sure there's going to be a
lot of healthy questions afterwards so I'll hand it over to Elliot to start a presentation
and then from there we'll be happy to field any questions and inquiries.
Thank you.
Good evening mayor, vice mayor and council members.
My name is Elliot Schwimmer, senior planner.
Tonight we are presenting a comprehensive proposal
to adjust Berkeley's parking management program
to ensure the long-term fiscal sustainability
of our parking funds.
Council is being asked to take four key actions tonight.
First to repeal RENACT chapter 14.52 of the municipal code
to allow for extended meter operating hours
from six to eight p.m. operate meters on,
operate meters in new commercial areas of the city
author is a translate transition to cashless hardware to reduce long-term
costs. The second action is to authorize public works to pass through parking
vendor service costs to the customer. Third, we are proposing updates to the
residential parking permit fee schedule for 2028. And fourth, a long overdue
realignment of our parking violation fines to keep pace with inflation and
align with nearby jurisdictions. To start, I want to provide a quick picture of what
the city's parking program looks like today.
For on-street parking, the city operates 1,945 single space
meters and 242 multi-space pay stations,
generating 8.8 million in FY25.
On the off-street side, the city owns and operates
three parking garages, Center Street, Telegraph Chaining,
and Oxford Garage, with 1,239 spaces in total.
The garage is generated 4.9 million in FY25,
combined parking generated 13.7 million last year
with on-street meters accounting for about 64% of that.
That 13.7 million is what funds our parking services team,
including parking enforcement.
It also funds our meter hardware, garage operations,
and the $1.9 million annual debt service
on the Center Street Garage reconstruction.
As you'll see, it's not currently enough to cover all costs,
which is what brings us here tonight.
The core issue is this, without action,
The city's combined parking funds
are projected to carry a deficit of roughly $1 million
by the end of FY27.
The near-term strategies council approved in January,
2026 make progress, but they're insufficient on their own.
Second, our parking infrastructure is aging,
mechanical coin and receipt mechanisms
are the primary cause of meter downtime
and manually collecting physical cash
from nearly 2,200 devices,
require significant staff and armored transport costs.
Third, evenings and Sundays consistently show
high parking occupancy in our commercial districts,
but those are the hours when our meters are off,
so we're not able to manage parking during these times.
Regarding RPP, the residential preferential parking program,
the current price for a permit is the same
regardless of how many permits you have,
but this does not promote the city's environmental goals.
These aren't just financial problems,
they go directly against the four goals
of the Go Berkeley program,
making it easier to find parking,
reducing greenhouse gas emissions from circling vehicles,
improving turnover for local businesses,
and making streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.
Our first recommendations address parking demand
after 6 p.m. and on Sundays.
Currently, meters operate Monday through Saturday,
9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
We're proposing to extend that to 8 p.m.,
two additional hours every day,
and to add Sunday operations from 9 to 8 p.m. as well.
The data is clear.
Parking demand in Berkeley's commercial cores remains high
during evenings and on Sundays.
When meters are inactive during peak demand periods,
we lose both revenue and the ability to manage turnover.
Drivers circle longer, double parking increases,
and blocks fill up in ways that lock out
short-term customers and delivery vehicles.
These two changes are projected to generate
approximately $1 million in net new annual revenue
after accounting for the added enforcement costs.
I'd also note that Berkeley would not be unusual here.
San Francisco operates some meters until 10 p.m.
and on Sundays, Oakland began Sunday operations
from 12 to 6 p.m. citywide in January.
Walnut Creek, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Monterey
also operate on Sundays.
On zone expansion, we're proposing to install
about 30 new pay stations in high-demand commercial areas
that currently have no meters.
Our data shows that these areas regularly
exceed 85% occupancy.
that's the threshold at which a parking availability effectively breaks down
and cars begin circling looking for spaces. Adding meters to these blocks
encourages turnover and ensures a space or two is consistently available. Net new
revenue is projected at $317,000 in the first year following a
one-time capital cost of $296,000. On the cashless transition we're seeking
authorization to replace aging meters that accept coins and print receipts with
with tap-to-pay units.
Coin jams and printer failures
are our top causes of meter downtime.
Eliminating physical cash also removes roughly $95,000
in annual costs from armored transport,
fewer parts and less maintenance.
We'd start with a pilot survey users after 30 days
and expand district by district based on feedback.
An important equity note, all new hardware
would allow prepaid debit card functionality.
While we are working on a Clipper card integration,
pre-paid debit cards could also be used right off the bat,
which are available and reloadable
at dozens of retail locations.
This preserves access for residents
who don't have credit cards or smartphones.
And just to note our public survey showed 70%
of the 670 respondents support this approach.
This map shows the 27 block faces we're proposing
to bring into the Go Berkeley program.
All locations showed occupancy within or above
the program's target range of 65 to 85%
on one or both sides of the street.
You can see the blocks cluster into a few distinct areas,
North Berkeley commercial corridors
around Hopkins and Fifth Street,
the West Berkeley Industrial District
along 8th, 9th, Potter and Heinz,
and several blocks along San Pablo,
Novia, Addison and Telegraph in the central
and southern parts of the city.
Some blocks are significantly over target,
even over 100% occupancy.
So there are functionally no open spaces
and the block is generating congestion
rather than managing it.
Introducing meters at these locations
is not about raising revenue in isolation.
It's about making these corridors function
the way the rest of the meter network already does
with consistent turnover and at least one or two spaces
reliably available at any given time.
Every time someone pays a Berkeley parking meter
by credit card, the city pays the processing fee.
that costs about $456,000 per year.
We're proposing to pass that cost through
as a transparent customer paid service charge
of 35 cents per transaction.
This is consistent with the convenience fee model
already used in the city of Berkeley by Park Mobile,
which is our mobile payment parking provider.
The charge would be displayed on the screen
before the credit card transaction is confirmed
so drivers can choose to cancel if they prefer.
After transitioning, the city would still owe
a reduced annual service fee of about $50,000 to our vendor.
But the net savings to the parking meter fund would be approximately $406,000 per year.
47 percent of public survey respondents supported this change and only 33 percent opposed it.
The residential parking permit program is operating at a significant deficit.
We spend about $4.1 million per year administering the program,
primarily the personnel costs for 21 parking enforcement officers,
supervisors, and administrative staff,
and collect only about $2.85 million in permit and citation revenue.
That's a $1.3 million annual gap.
We're proposing a new graduated fee structure for the FY28 permit year,
taking effect May 1st, 2027.
The key changes that permit fees would scale with the number of vehicles registered at an address.
The first permit would go from $85 to $100.
The second permit would be $125.
And the third, $150.
Visitor passes and other permit types
would also see modest adjustments, as shown.
The rationale is straightforward.
Households storing more vehicles on the public right of way
are using a disproportionate share of limited curb space.
A graduated structure creates a gentle incentive
to use off-street parking where it's available
while keeping permits accessible.
This change is projected to generate approximately $615,000 in new annual revenue.
And I do want to note that this item is responsive to a council referral.
A parking fines tell a similar story for most violation types.
The last comprehensive update was in 2010, 16 years ago,
since then cumulative inflation measured by the consumer price index has been
about 49 percent. The result is Berkeley's fines are well below those of neighboring
cities. An expired meter citation in Berkeley is currently $43. In Oakland the same violation
is $64. In San Francisco it's $108. When the financial penalty for overstaying a meter
is low enough that it feels like a competitive parking alternative, compliance suffers and
so does availability for the next driver. We're proposing to adjust fines upward in
line with cumulative inflation since each find was last set, meaning increases of between
3% and 49%, depending on when a particular violation was last updated or added to the
schedule. An expired meter would go from $43 to $64, street sweeping violations from $49
to $73. These levels would still keep Berkeley meaningfully below San Francisco.
And here's the full picture. The recommendations before Yutsuneta projected to generate $7.1
million in new annual revenue, with 2.3 million in new costs, and 500,000 in cost savings
for net annual increase of about 5 million. Without these measures, the combined parking
fund balance is projected to fall negative to negative $1 million by the end of FY27.
With them, the combined balance is still projected to be negative, but the trajectory of the
balance would change in FY28, building up a balance instead of depleting it.
The key point is that this package is self-reinforcing.
Operational changes increase curb access
in busy commercial districts,
generates revenue that funds better service
and supports continued cost recovery.
The rollout for the Go Berkeley changes
would be phased to prioritize education.
It would begin with the citywide sign replacement program
in early FY27.
It would implement a pilot period for the new evening
and Sunday hours during this month,
depending on parking enforcement, staff capacity,
Warning citations may be issued during the additional hours,
giving motorists time to learn the new rules
before financial penalties begin.
The full transition to cashless hardware
would then follow over a three to five year period.
Tonight, staff is asking council to take four actions,
adopt first reading of the ordinance
amending BMC chapter 14.52,
adopt the resolution transitioning parking meter
transaction costs to its customer service charge,
adopt the resolution implementing
the new graduated RPP fee structure for FY28,
and adopt the resolution updating
the schedule of parking violations and fines.
Thank you for your time.
My colleagues are here as well,
and we're happy to answer any questions.
Thank you very much.
I think we have a number of questions
starting with Vice Mayor Trigg up.
Thank you so much.
I have two, three, four, five.
I have six questions, one in the report,
there is a mention of an increase to a surcharge
for additional annual or semi-annual residential permit
and I couldn't quite understand what that describes
and how it's different from an additional,
just paying for an additional parking spot.
Yeah, that's the surcharge for the fourth
and beyond residential permits,
which requires a waiver form.
Okay, got it.
Moving on, how,
can you describe the extent to which this proposal
is coupled with other principles of Go Berkeley,
in particular around enhanced way finding and signage
to educate drivers on the existence
of our two parking garages as it concerns the downtown?
It's a good point that the curbside parking
and garage parking policy are interrelated
and they need to be managed together.
We are looking at other options for increasing signage
to the Center Street Garage in particular,
but this item does not include
any wayfinding signage for garages.
Okay, thank you.
Can you speak to planning for,
or is there going to be any heightened enforcement
in residential areas?
I'm just thinking about the downstream impact
if I'm sparkling around and I see a parking meter
where I'm not used to seeing one.
Without other options,
I might look for a different parking spot
off in a residential area.
So how will this program be calibrated
to account for those kinds of downstream impacts?
This item does propose a significant increase
in parking enforcement staffing.
If that's your question, I mean,
there would be increased presence in RPP areas
as well as Go Berkeley near areas.
Okay, thank you.
Can you speak to the planned education process
when switching to cashless operations?
And I am in particular thinking about those residents
who are non-residents who don't use a card to use on the cash.
I understand there's clipper compatibility,
but how will they be educated about that?
The pilot period, so I mean anticipating doing a community message and getting the word out about the pilot period, very significantly working with news organizations like Berkeley side to get the word out.
I think with the community message, a website and the pilot period, you know, hopefully folks would start to catch on and observe that there are other options if they don't have a bank account or a credit card, a debit or credit card.
Okay thank you, two final questions. Sticking with the pilot or the report mentioned that
the transition to a modernized set of parking meters will be,
it'll be on one particular block, I was curious if that block or area has been identified for the
pilot and also it then said the program would expand based on positive feedback. So what would
constitute positive feedback? I know this is not the most popular thing in the world talking about
parking fee increases so how would the data be disaggregated to be specific to
the new and improved parking meters themselves? I think a survey would be
critical to seeking feedback on that specific block for the this is the
cashless meters. The pilot period is is really for items 1A and 1B which are the
hour extension in the Sunday parking so that would be the first month where the
pilot period to understand and to get the word out but then the the cashless
meters would be on a block specific roll out time frame where we'd survey just
the limited number of people on that block to see how they're experiencing it
and try to also do like dash flyers to try to understand how drivers are feeling
that so it's a combination of business feedback and a motorist feedback. Thank
Thank you. Is there a general area you've identified right now for the pilot?
Yeah.
Okay. Thank you. And last question is, I was looking at the chart on figure, well, so figure
Number two, I see where by FY31, if we approve this, it's projected to almost get the fund
balance, the combined fund balance to break even.
I'm curious that this off-street fund six to seven balance, which looks steady state
between figures one and two.
Is the intention to kind of keep like,
are there plans to stabilize the funding
for that balance where we would continue
to run increasing deficits?
It's kind of wandering beyond FI31.
The off-street fund is challenging because the garages,
I mean, it's all under the Go Berkeley program,
So it's all managed based on demand.
So 65 to 85% target is our sweet spot.
If occupancy exceeds that, we raise rates.
If occupancy is below that, we're supposed to lower rates.
And for the garages, two of our garages
are significantly below the target range.
And so for those garages,
the program guidelines would say
that we should lower the rates,
which would not build back the revenue in that fund.
So it's a little challenging that we're not really able to
increase rates in those garages to recover the balance there.
Also, long fund, right?
Yeah.
We also have a $1.9 million annual debt obligation
for the Center Street Garage, which is depleting that fund
balance every year, or has been.
Yeah.
When does that debt obligation run until?
I believe it's 2046.
Thank you.
Those are all my questions.
Okay, Council Member Bartlett.
And then Council Member Black would be your next.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Thank you.
Could we pull the chart back up
that the Vice Mayor was referencing?
I'm curious about a number or two on here.
Is that the chart in the report?
Yeah, with the $7 million ultimate earnings.
in your presentation? Oh, in the presentation, yeah. Two away from the end, I think. Yeah,
that one. Page 11, yes. Here we go. So I'm wondering if, I'm curious, at the rate of
non-compliance, is this factored in into revenues? So a number of tickets issued, they anticipate
Is there some sort of a formula that time has shown are likely to be issued?
We do not account for an increase in compliance due to the changing fine amounts.
So this is just purely the number of citations issued times the increase in the rates.
Is there any data at all around anticipated noncompliance?
Because I can imagine, you know, moving the whole new day and two new hours each day,
in highly demand areas, there will be some tickets.
Go ahead.
I would put it that there will be a shift in noncompliance from current hours to the
later hours, right?
I mean, there's a non-compliance that happens as you get to the end of the regulations already
and those times are going to shift with this.
Yeah.
Okay, but no hard estimation as to what that could be, right?
No?
We haven't qualified that.
Okay.
And I'm curious about the survey respondents.
This 44% was it that support these increases?
would these respondents? We don't have identifying information of the
respondents. I mean it's there's 669 respondents that were citywide
presumably from a community message from the communications department. Okay.
Team. Okay. Anna, did you have any specific input from any interest groups
like the small business community, the seniors, people like that? Yeah, nothing
as well as in our community.
We're very specific from the
senior community but we did
get specific requests for
parking meters on certain
blocks from businesses and
those blocks are proposed to
have meters.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thanks so much.
Thank you.
Councilmember Blackby.
Thanks, Madam Mayor.
Go ahead and leave this slide
up.
I had a couple of questions
about this slide as well.
Is that does all that revenue accrue to the various parking funds?
No, so.
The parking funds will see the extended hours to a PM Sunday operation zone expansion.
The cost savings from the cashless transition, the transaction charge pass through, but then the bottom 2 RPP fees and parking fines. Those accrue to the general fund.
Okay, so question of the manager and I know remind me, I think, again, putting back into the into the budget process currently. I think we have an assumption and fiscal 26 that we're transferring about a million from the general fund, plus or minus to the parking fund to keep them solvent.
Is that is my recollection about right there? Yes, it is. Okay. If we were to pass some of these new measures.
how would that affect what we're able to do in the budget? Would we be able to dial that? Would that also give us
some room in the fiscal 26 and fiscal 27 budget if we were to pass these increases?
It wouldn't because we're phasing these in over time, so they wouldn't hit right away.
Okay, okay, okay.
I wanted to zero in real quickly on the Sunday operations, so observing sort of all of of all the line items on the chart. This is the 1 that gives me.
The greatest pause, because it almost feels like, you know.
We're squeezing basically we're it's we're occurring again. I just want to say, I appreciate stuff. I know we've had it back and forth in this on the last couple of days. I just thank you for indulging me and all the questions because I'm really trying to understand.
Like, where are the biggest bangs for our buck in terms of doing this work? And clearly, you know, the bottom two line items, actually, the bottom four line items are the most straight ahead. Like, we're not incurring any additional cost.
We're either saving money or we're generating new revenue. I will say of the top three line items, the Sunday operations feels like, I'm not really sure if the juice is worth the squeeze. Right. I mean, we've heard a lot of people who have concerns and I share concerns about
It's nice to have a day a week where we're not worrying about paying for parking. I mean, again, that's, you know, that's not the biggest problem in the world, but it is a nice benefit. It is nice to be able to go and go downtown or go to other businesses and go to Saul's or do whatever you do on Sundays and not have to worry about paying the meter.
And also just observe that it's costing us 1.3Million to generate 1.4Million in revenue, which is again, a very modest return for the infrastructure and the added operational costs relative to extending hours to 8th or expanding the zones to places where they.
The parking meter should be expanded. Did you give any thoughts kind of back to the team? I mean, any thought about.
Why the cost for the Sunday operations, you know, runs relatively high relative to those other options and why the margin is so small on the Sunday piece.
In, in the chart in the staff report, there's some one time.
Costs that are listed in here.
And so, after your 1 in this.
this projection changes.
So there's currently in this report $363,000
to outfit parking enforcement vehicles
with license plate reader technology.
And so that would come off afterwards.
And then right now we're also loading in quite a bit
of the parking enforcement into Sunday.
And the reality is item 1A, 1B, and 1C all consume a bit of that additional parking enforcement cost. So.
Got it. Okay. Well, I'll just come back to this in deliberations because, again, I appreciate the thrust of all this. That's the 1, I think of all the things on here that I'm the most, the most reticent about. It doesn't, it feels like that's not a clear slam dunk, easy win.
And so, so I want to come back to that and deliberations, but I appreciate all the time and effort and pulling us together and just getting into a better position where we will be more solvent and the parking funds will be more sustainable for the long term.
So, thank you for doing all this work and that's it. Thank you customer. Yes. Thank you. Madam mayor. And I want to thank Mr. Schwimmer. Mr. helmbrecht.
and Director O'Meary for all your hard work on this
and thank you Mr. Schwimmer for your presentation.
I also want to talk about Sunday.
I really just have questions about the Sunday enforcement
and I appreciated Mr. Helmbrecht's answer that,
you know, in the first year there may be a $132,000 upside
but in subsequent years it should be
more significant than that, right?
Is there any estimate of how that might go up?
I mean, I suppose it's fairly easy math, right?
In terms of what's in the report, we loaded all of the costs of outfitting the enforcement
vehicles in this line, and so it'll go up by $363,000 at a minimum.
So that's fairly significant.
And it's also the case, is it not, that on Sunday, I mean, I have to say, people store
their cars in areas where meters are not operational and that can affect turnover in
terms of, you know, accessibility for people who are shopping on Sunday and Sunday is a
big shopping day these days. Maybe it wasn't a century ago when all the shops were shut,
but it is now so I mean that's the other factor really to consider and I think you have considered
it is turnover, making parking available and not just allowing people to store their
cars and cause shoppers, for example, to have to park blocks and blocks and blocks away.
Is that right?
It's kind of a leading question, but...
Yeah, no, that's exactly right.
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah.
Those are my questions.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Linopara.
Thank you.
And thank you so much for the presentation.
I'm curious if you have any information on nearby jurisdictions or comparable jurisdictions that and their RPP costs. How much how much they charge for RPP. Yeah, they're comparable. I don't have that information in front of me, but we can get it get over you. Okay. Thank you.
do you know how much San Francisco would be approximately to be quite
honest I'm trying to recall from memory but it was quite a bit like double if I
recall correctly but again to Elliot's point just the surrounding it's
comparable thank you okay thank you councilmember Taplin I thank you very
much I just have one question I'm wondering what other jurisdictions also
have Sunday parking? Yeah, so Oakland began operating some parking meters on
Sundays in January. Sacramento, LA, Seattle, Washington DC, Chicago operate
until 8 p.m. or later and then at Walnut Creek Sacramento Santa Cruz Monterey
they all operate on Sundays they have a some of them might have different
operations for Oakland I think they started later in the day so ours is a
little bit different as far as operating hours but the day is consistent yeah
thank you thank you very much for that yet so it's not like a completely novel
concepts. Appreciate it. All right, any other questions? Okay, my one question was
actually about since we are removing the ability for people to use coins and then
we're having this card fee, I'm just wondering if there's reason we can't
just build the card fee in. Because it's kind of like saying like oh if you if
If you're using a card but then you have to use a card, you know?
We have a bit of work to do on this.
We're having a meeting with Clipper momentarily.
We've also talked to Passport as part of our back office integration of our parking system
about being able to essentially refund the cost of any cards when you go to use the card,
right?
because we have a lot of
concerns here.
We have a lot of questions
going on in this case about
what your first parking.
Might be discounted by the 3
dollars at the card costs. So
we're working on being able to
resolve that issue. But we have
a little bit of ways to go and
this is going to be a long
build in we have a lot of
meters out there with coins.
We've got a long way to go on
this one we're trying to get
direction that we can go in
this direction. Then we'll
bring information back.
We're we're way off my way off my estimation. If you have public comment, um, item number 24, which is the one about parking, please come on up.
Thank you. Of course, I'm concerned about the small businesses, but at the same time, we have to implement all these fees.
It goes for the last presentation to and finds.
last presentation to and finds we have this budget deficit we have to preserve
essential services we have to have our fire we have to have our police we have
to have our repairs accessible we have to have homeless housing I consider
that an essential service and I hope that 1383 will be enforced the waste law
That's something that's going on in forest.
That's up to the local jurisdictions
to have a compliance plan.
There is also the smoking.
That's another possibility for fees.
I see people smoking publicly.
They're not getting citations.
It's also happy in multi-residential housing.
There is the rental housing safety program
that landlords are advised they have to inspect units by July 1st, but then the city doesn't
really, it says right on the city website that there's nothing, you have to file with
the city. You should have to file something with the city if we want people to do it.
And then there should be a fine if you don't. Instead, it's a very selective enforcement
if just somebody happens to call up and it's complaint triggered. So there are
things we're not doing. I can say I'm personally impacted by the go go
grandparent
situation, the transportation and yet I have to say objectively it had to be
done because we all have to get sorry. Can we can we keep it focused on this
item? Well, I'm talking about fines and fees and so that includes the parking.
Thank you.
thank you did you have a comment on this item
no come on up my name is andrew marrowitz i'm
item number 28 you'll love me um i heard this
i heard the environmental fee for restaurants
it occurs to me that the city is just reaming through people
financially i'm sorry just i know you were talking about
the restaurant fees but that was the other item so if you have a comment on
the parking fees and parking fees added to the environmental fees figure those
restaurants those owners of those restaurant operators restaurants they're
gonna have to either pass it along which is gonna drive out the customers
because they don't want to spend such high rates they have to pay their minimum
wage to servers and whatnot you're gonna kill restaurants they're not gonna want
to stay in business they're gonna go somewhere else or they're gonna just
stop it's just a short-sighted version of we need more money this is how we're
going to do it but there's not a long view of what the impact is and it's just
to pay for salaries why not instead for instance the city has 13 paid holidays
per year why don't you go back and that's more than any other city in the
state why not take away one paid holiday and pay for all of this thank you thank
Thank you. Anyone online have comments on item number 24.
So we have first speaker is Michael Katz. Good evening. How long do I have two minutes?
Thank you. I urge you to follow Councilmember Blackby's lead and at least get rid of the
first three items and the card fee, if not the whole item. I hope you'll have the wisdom
to do that. Whenever this amorphous public comment or public survey happened, what's
going on now is insane inflation due to Trump's war and Trump's tariffs. And nationally,
there is a democratic and progressive message to pursue affordability and reduce the pain
on people. This city just seems to keep going in the opposite direction with sales tax hikes
that would make our regressive sales tax one of the highest in the country. And now this,
could kill off a whole bunch of restaurants, which are dropping like flies already. And the
thing I find most glaring here is there's no change in the double parking fee, which I think is $60
base. So the cost of an unexpired meter would be higher than creating an active hazard by double
parking, which I'll come back to if I have time. You know, if you look at what's happened with
tax measures in the East Bay last week, it doesn't look good for the people putting up
with these kinds of additional pain. And if the city is losing money on parking management,
maybe this university city should be smarter about how it's managing parking.
The most cynical thing I see in this measure is the claim that this would somehow make cyclists
safer by reducing double parking. There is no double parking enforcement in this city,
as far as I can tell. I ride a bike every day. This is the worst hazard to cyclists. It's much
worse than moving vehicles, because it forces us into oncoming traffic. If we actually enforce
double parking, $60 a pop at least, $263 a pop in transit-only lanes, and those are all the way up
Durand in the restaurant cluster, where there's some of the worst abuse. PCOs could be siting
vehicles all day on Shattuck Upper University, Durand, put all that money in the city budget,
and thank you for your comment your time is up. Next speaker is Kelly. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes.
I just find this whole thing so completely annoying and I think council member Bartlett was
really getting to the right questions. The big question I always that I have looking at this
is who is making the money from managing the parking meters? 9am to 8pm every day is annoying.
Sunday is a particularly bad day. Can't we give people one day of rest? I hate that I'm
tracked everywhere and now I have to use a card to pass to park so now I'm tracked again at another
spot. So we're going to have to we're going to create anger and annoyance and with Berkeley
residents and visitors for $100,000 on Sunday. Is it really worth it?
Yeah, as the last speaker said, double parking. That's a big issue. It looks like, you know,
this is going to push people to use Uber and Lyft and DoorDash a lot more. It's just,
and then charging us for using a card when we have to use a card and we can't use coins anymore,
It's just everything with this is just totally wrong. I'm sorry that Public Works is pushed into trying
and charged with making parking a profit center for the city, but I just think this is
totally the wrong direction and you all need to reconsider here what you're doing and and just
push this off or another day. So, that's all I have to say.
Right. Thanks Kelly. Next is Della Luna.
Yes, I would like to follow up that speaker. I like that push this off for another day. Just 1 doesn't seem like the right time costs are going up for people everywhere. So why just like hammering a couple nails.
And a Sunday should.
Be free and people should definitely be able to go to church for free. So the later starting time in Oakland has makes sense.
But I'm trying to imagine people in church trying to go out to pay their meters. They don't get a ticket.
Also, the fees that the staff showed, it doesn't show.
The, the tiers of those fees, like, sure, it's 49 dollars, but that's for, I think, 21 days and then it goes up quite significantly. And so I don't think that you all really got to see the, like, full impact of.
All of those fees and their tiers and so if someone couldn't pay a 60 dollar ticket, then it goes to, like, 128 or 229 is really astronomical the way it rises.
Um, but overall, I wanted to first speak about Sundays, but overall, I don't think that this should pass Sunday is.
Kind of like a more relaxed state where people where I would would go downtown or go hang out and go to shops and kind of meander rather than being on a mission or running errands downtown. And so taking that away.
Again, I think it would harm the restaurants, like.
Another a person spoke about, but I do feel like you're putting, you're not the impact that this would have on the business districts.
Would be negative, so the overall net, I think is not positive for Berkeley and just think about Sundays, seeing that really only tying to like 100,000 dollars revenue.
It really didn't lift my spirits as in. Yay, we got this that this is like.
A plan, but also, I feel like we have to not only just generate revenue, but make sure we're spending the money appropriately.
That we do have the funds, so I think there's other ways. It seems like you just want to gouge constituents. Like, how much you call it revenue, but you're just taking money out of our paychecks just to exist.
Just to go to the market, or just to go downtown and we have to pay just to exist in the city.
And I feel like you should find other ways to. Thank you. Thank you. Della.
That's it. That's the last speaker.
Okay, thank you very much comments from my council colleagues starting with council member Bartlett.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Humbert. Thank you for the presentation.
And is it on now? I'm double miked here. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Thank you for the presentation. Thank you for the diligence here. I know this
is not in a vacuum. The proposal comes from a severe need. We
have a strong deficit, we are underwater in many ways, and we have responsibility to stabilize
our budgets. However, I'm concerned about this particular approach. You know, relying
on parking enforcement to raise money is regressive in nature. It just is. And at a time where
People are being nickel and dime everywhere they turn at a time
where their streets are jammed full of ride share companies,
delivery companies, and they're not during the burden.
These corporations are not during the burden
of this economic need.
The residents are.
And these residents pay incredible rents
and incredibly high property taxes,
and we want them to pay more taxes.
So honestly, I feel they pay enough already.
And I think that the freedom to live in your community,
your very expensive community, comes with the ability
to drive around and do stuff.
The small businesses that we have,
I get a million emails every week.
Ask for help, ask to support them, stop by them,
bring the customers, or do anything to help them stay open
because they're all struggling.
They're all on their last legs.
And I'm worried that this approach
of impacting the ability to park near them
and go see them will impact them worse
and make them shut down even sooner at a time
where jobs are threatened, as we know,
by the encroaching technology, the war in Iran,
and the threat to the stability of the dollars at play here.
We have a lot of headwinds here, and I'm not sure that we're
supporting our people by drowning them in these fees.
I'm curious about the ratio, if there's
projections about such a thought about loss of business revenue
opposed to the seven million in parking and find
fees increases, right, if that measures up. And also I'm curious about
the quality of life of persons and that's sort of an
intangible aspect that is hard to measure but I can tell you
people feel it. So, but
to work with you, you know, I would suppose, I would propose
sort of middle ground here, a two-year pilot wherein we measure the results
here, see how it's happening, check on the compliance rates, the impacts of
businesses, the result of this. And also tied to real economic metrics and
then a deeper understanding of the need to continue these metrics because the
the driving patterns we all know will be changing. I was in LA last week, every
the car was a automated transport vehicle. It's coming here next. So we
may not need this much enforcement. Our whole our whole street strategy will
evolve and in two years we'll be clear a picture. So rather than commit these
seniors being caught out there trying to pay these fees to go to Walgreens and
commit these small restaurants to having no business and people going to
Emeryville and going to Forest Street, private parking lot that's free are
going to other places to evade our our our overwhelming penumbra of cost to the
business here and do and live your life here it's just we look at this in two
years. Councilmember Taplin. Thank you I'm gonna say like pretty much the exact
opposite of all that but I first want it can you clarify how long we're in hook
for the parking garage? 2046. 2046 so that's not gonna go away. We're talking
about public space being used for car storage just because there are not
currently fees does not mean that parking is free. The city pays to maintain
it. People who don't drive pay to maintain this parking. For the people
saying we should put this off another day putting things off for other days
is how we got here with the deficit in this fund, the deficit in the marina
fund, the deficit in the general fund and this isn't this isn't a business it is a
fund that is supported by revenue collected in the associated use of this
operation and it makes no sense to operate a deficit it makes even less
and so willfully operate a deficit and I get that it's hard to do new things and
people want everything to be free and people don't want to pay for parking
and they might get upset but some of the choices we have to make are difficult
and they are necessary and if we don't make those choices today the choices we
will make tomorrow will be even more difficult so I will be supporting this
and I will make a motion to adopt this african mediation. I'll second that
motion thank you council discussion yeah councilmember Humbert yes anyway
thank you madam mayor and first I want to associate myself 100% with the
comments made by councilmember Taplin he hit the nail on the head consistent with
what I said before I understand that people feel nickel and dime by things
like additional metered parking days and longer hours for to pay at parking
meters but at the same time we're talking about using 200 square feet of
public space to store a private vehicle. That should carry a cost for the reasons
that Councilmember Taplin articulated especially during high demand times. Free
Sunday parking is a long outdated holdover from a time when most businesses
were closed on Sundays. We had blue laws. People were more likely to be at home or
at worship. Sunday is now a very busy day for most commercial districts so it
makes sense to charge for parking for curb management. In fact, in my
experience in downtown and in the commercial districts is folks from the
surrounding residential neighborhoods park their cars and store them all day
Sunday and that displaces, you know, potential shoppers. So, you know, arguably
and I think this is probably correct, if we move those cars around and make
parking available the merchants on Sundays will will likely do better. I
also want to point out that the answer to the question that I my leading
question during the the question period that the hundred thousand dollar delta
that you know for Sunday you know the hundred thousand dollar you know
essentially not profits but positive fund inflows, that's only the first
year after that it's it's it's three hundred thousand plus so that's very
significant that's not that's not chicken feed. Parking availability and
turnover are important for reducing circling, congestion, carbon burning of
automobiles and making it easier for people to quickly find parking and all
day parking that also contributes to double parking for pickups and
deliveries. That's another problem. I understand that businesses are
concerned that paying for parking may dissuade people from visiting on
Sundays, but if we look at Emeryville which has paid parking in a garage, which
is decidedly less convenient than street parking, it seems people are
relatively willing to pay for parking, especially if finding a spot is
relatively easy and charging for street parking and the way we do it helps
ensure spots are available on any given block. So overall I'm supportive of the
Sunday parking component. I also want to address the the higher RPP fees. The
people may balk at higher RPP fees especially if on a percentage basis
we're looking at something like a 50 to 100 percent increase. But again we're
We're talking about being able to privately use 200 square feet of our public roadways.
Roadways belong to everyone and could instead be used for green storm water infrastructure,
bike lanes, or just even expanded sidewalks for pedestrians.
In what other situations can you essentially get 200 square feet of private storage space
for the equivalent of $10 to $13 per month?
For perspective, 150 feet of private self-storage space on San Pablo Avenue currently costs
$418 a month granted those are enclosed storage spaces, but even if we raise
RPP to $150 a year that would still be something like a 98% discount on what an equivalent amount of private storage space goes for
And many buildings in Berkeley charge hundreds of dollars a month for private parking
Even at these higher rates RPP remains a really kind of amazing bargain
So for all these reasons I plan to support this item
Thank you. Thank you councilmember Casarani
Thank you very much madam mayor. Thank you for this presentation. You know, this has been a long time coming I
Think Elliot you were maybe here was it 2019. Oh, you were not here. Okay, I apologize
Well, I was here when we were trying to increase these fees
Earlier in my in my first term like has I believe it was
2019 and we were not able to do so and I think
there are
So there are a lot of costs
associated with that, right?
We are underfunding our
enforcement, for one.
We have areas of our city where
your report tells us we have
high demand, people are
circling, people are unable to
get a parking space where they
feel that they need to be, you
know, maybe it's close to a
business, and so I think we
our streets and I want to remind all of us I think some of us have already said
this the streets you know are up that's a the public right of way that's a
public good and so when we give it away for free sometimes that's appropriate
because the demand isn't there but what you're proposing here is to charge you
know a fair reasonable fee to encourage turnover so that we can have more
customers come to these businesses and encourage people to move on and and have
less circling. So I think it's better for the environment, it's better for our
management of the public right-of-way which is a public good and I'm going to
say something that some people may disagree with. You do not own the street
space in front of your home. That's not yours. That is the public right-of-way.
and you don't own the street space in front of your business,
that belongs to everybody who's trying to move around our city.
I know this council has a commitment to enable everyone in our city to move around safely as well.
So I think this is a really important thing.
It's a long time coming.
I also want to talk about RPP.
I think I was the one who did that referral to ask
for the graduated fee increases for RPP
because we, you know, in my district,
we hear stories of people owning multiple, multiple cars,
like seven vehicles,
that they are parking on the public right of way,
the public good.
So if people wanna choose to do that,
you know, that is their choice,
but we need to have that be reflected in our costs.
And as we all know, we are facing a deficit.
I think this parking fund, you said,
had a million dollar deficit.
So we need to rectify this
and I do understand this is hard.
I think people have very strong feelings about parking
and I think this is just something
that's been a long time coming and is a necessary change.
I hope we can continue to expand
once we, in areas where we see that there,
the occupancy is going above that 85% target threshold.
Thank you very much.
Thank you council member O'Keefe.
Thank you.
A lot of what I wanted to say has already been said.
I really want to associate myself
with council member Tapin's comments, especially,
and I'll just highlight a couple of things
that were mentioned by other council members.
One is I've really always thought it's ridiculous
that we don't turn for parking on Sundays.
This is irrespective of the revenue benefits to it.
I just think this isn't the 19th century.
This isn't Europe, like we're a modern secular place.
And as Council Member Humbert pointed out,
it's not even a day when a lot of stores
are closed anymore.
So it doesn't make any sense for us
to not charge for parking on Sundays.
I think this is a great idea.
Even if it was revenue neutral,
I would say it was good just for the sake
of logical consistency.
It's good policy.
So I wanted to say that.
And then also, this has already been mentioned a little bit,
But I really want to emphasize, this
is compatible with our city's climate goals.
I'm actually usually one to defend parking and cars.
I think it's a completely valid choice.
I don't think there's anything wrong with people
wanting to drive.
However, it does have a cost that people
don't pay when they drive.
And it makes perfect sense to make
driving a little bit more expensive.
I think that's a very, very appropriate way
to discourage driving and thus encourage
other kinds of mobility that have less of an impact.
And I just want to remind everyone that
people with disability placards
don't have to pay for parking.
So that's one group that you do want to look out for,
especially when you're saying things like that,
but they're not affected by this.
So that's an important detail.
Those are my comments.
I support this.
Thank you very much.
Vice Mayor Trigga.
Thank you and thank you again Director Amiri and to your team.
I have to preface my statements with a comment that I echo my colleagues' remarks that public
streets are our shared resource and parking on the public right away is a
privilege and for that reason alone I generally support this necessary
increase in fees just to address some speakers and we are in a tough budget
situation but even if we weren't the cost of putting this off for another
another year would be 1,349,486 dollars and that's in fiscal 27 alone and it would balloon
to 5,418,155 dollars in fiscal 31.
As the downtown council member, it is certainly my experience walking by downtown that there
is little to no available parking on Sundays, and largely the same vehicles are there for
longer than I think they would otherwise be.
That said, this is the area where I do have the most discomfort.
To be clear, I still support this.
I do think the rollout needs to be particularly gentle and well-calibrated here.
And I will note that Oakland did introduce Sunday parking, but only in the highest demand
area.
really would like to roll this out in a gentle way.
I also would like for us, and this obviously does not,
it can't happen now, but I would like to have a discussion
in the future to assess our fine schedule for severity.
Double parking and parking along red corbs
should be assessed,
the fine for that should be assessed at a level
that is significantly higher
than simply overstaying a meter by a few minutes.
And as director Amiri knows,
because he and his team joined us
for an inspection of an intersection
along with council member Keefe a few days ago,
and we heard from residents
that parking on red corbs happens.
It happens in my district.
It probably happens in every district.
Double parking happens frequently,
and it is not getting enforced.
So I actually also support this because the enforcement,
I think will go up across the board.
I would like to make sure that we continue to think about way-finding and signage.
The Center, Street, and Alston garages are far short of their capacity, including at
peak hours.
That needs to change.
I think we can change it if we continue to educate the public about their existence.
And I know it's challenging to keep the costs below the costs of street parking, looking
at our six to seven fund balance, but I think we need to really have a, just take a deeper
dive on that.
Lastly, I would like to, this is not part of the motion, but I would like to encourage
staff to do very targeted engagement with the business community, particularly business
associations where these changes are being proposed, as well as the chamber and visit
Berkeley across all districts.
And then I would love to see if there is a way to schedule a one-year review, so probably
at the end of FY 27 to see how implementation is going
and any lessons we can glean from it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Blackby.
Great, thank you, Madam Mayor.
And thanks again to staff for all the work on this proposal.
I'll say I support the vast majority of what is here.
I think, again, making the parking funds more solvent,
we know is critical, getting ourselves on firm or financial footing is critical, making sure that
we're getting the circulation we need in our key commercial corridors. That's all
critical, helping us reduce the amount of cruising around that has an impact on emissions.
I will say I'm just not comfortable that I'm comfortable ready to move forward on Sunday.
I'll just note that Oakland's proposal on Sunday is 12 to 6. It's not 9 to 8.
I'd be supportive of something that.
Potentially more limited in scope, we're looking at particular neighborhoods, but not all neighborhoods in terms of the of the meters. I just think we could. We could say this more. I'm just not convinced that the economic benefit is there relative to everything else that's in here. I mean, if you look at the.
I also say that extending parking meters from 6 to 8 on days when we're already enforcing the meters until 6 is not as heavy a lift. Right? I mean, that's, that's not as big an expectation change. I think for people adding meters and areas that are our new and emerging commercial areas, not a surprise. And we should do that. Right? I mean, all of the fees, the updating the schedule parking violations, all these things may complete sense to me.
I just think that on Sunday, we should apply a scalpel as opposed to kind of a hatchet here and study that more. And frankly, we could, I think, look at everything and let everything run and have a much better understanding of how much economic activity, how much revenue that we're generating from all of the other things before we sort of look at, again, what to do with Sunday.
So, the numbers to me just don't quite add up in the same way that the others do maybe if we had more time to sort of understand dig into the economics a little more, I could support it, but I'm sort of not at that position right now.
So, I think, so I offer an amendment to the main motion to again, accept the main motion, but strike 1B, which is the Sunday parking for now and give us more time to study it and deliberate before we decide to move forward with that piece of it.
you're offering a friendly amendment. Not a friendly amendment. I'm just making
amendment to the main motion. Yeah, let's see first of all if there's
a motion to close the public. I'll move, sorry.
Can we take the roll on that, please? Close the public hearing. Council member
Kiserwani? Yes. Taplan? Yes. Bartlett? Yes. Traga? Aye. O'Keeffe? Yes. Blackaby?
Unapara? Yes. Humbert? Yes. And Maryishi? Yes. Okay. Both hearings closed. Thank you. A bunch
of lights just popped up. So I'm gonna go first with Councilmember Taplin. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
So since I made the motion during the public hearing, should I remake the motion now?
I move that we adopt the SAC recommendation. And I second that. Thank you. And I did want to,
think you know for the Sunday thing it's gonna have one-time costs so that's
like doing it later wouldn't change that and part of what we're doing is getting
data through the survey or through the engagement to assess further expansion
so I don't see why we wouldn't be able to assess the impact of the Sunday
charging why we would not be able to do that as part of what's already recommended
but it wouldn't make sense to me to delay Sundays just to like have more
years of the deficit growing to then have the same upfront one-time costs to
then have to collect data we could have collected at the onset of adopting it.
all right so Well thank you councilmember Leno Parra I agree with what
councilmember Taplan has said and councilmember Kiswani and others and I
just wanted to point out that I think we're talking about how this is going to
affect people driving on Sundays and how and how this isn't fair for people
driving and that really makes no sense to me especially because when we're
talking about the most economically disadvantaged members of our community
they don't drive most of the time they take public transportation which isn't
free on Sundays so that I just wanted to point that out as another reason why I
I think this is a no brainer, thanks.
Thank you, and so just going back to what you were saying,
Council Member Blackaby, so you were proposing an amendment,
do you wanna?
Amendment to the main motion to, again,
accept staff recommendation except strike 1B
on the listening component.
So I will not accept that.
No, I'm not offering you as a friendly amendment.
I'm just saying, I wanna make an amendment to main motion
That's what we're talking about
and we're going to go back to
the motion that we built on
first and then back to the
motion.
He's making a motion to amend
the main motion.
I see.
Okay.
A second from council member.
Yeah, so it's like what is he.
Okay, so council member Bartlett
is seconding.
So let's just take a vote on
that.
There's no.
Okay.
So that's amending the main
which part of the motion
One D one D just the one D. Okay, please
Okay, so this the motion is to whether or not to amend the main motion to remove
One B from the staff recommendation
Councilmember kiss or wanting no
Kaplan no Bartlett. Yes, Trigga abstain
O'Keeffe no black abhi
unipara. No, yes. Humber. No. And Mary. She know. Okay. Motion fails. Okay. The motion
is not amended. Okay. I oh yes. Councilmember unipara. Thank you. Sorry. I forgot to mention
that I also think that the RPP cost should be higher especially in future years. I was
looking up Oakland's and it's around 160 just an idea. The example says about 215 annual
fairly. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember O'Keefe. Yeah, I just want
to piggyback on that. I think that the second and third one should be way expensive. I think
that was smart to change it a little bit, although I think the difference that you're
proposing is pretty minimal, but I think that, you know, one is should be really pretty accessible,
but yeah, more is a luxury good.
And actually, while I have the floor,
I just wanna make another comment I forgot to make before.
I just really wanted to thank the staff
for identifying Hopkins area for new meters.
I was actually planning to ask for that
before I realized you had already done it.
So I think that there's a really important needed improvement
for that area.
So I just wanted to say thank you for that
and I'm happy to be supporting
that small aspect of this as well.
Thank you, Vice Mayor Trigeb.
Thank you.
So I did it before, but I wanted to, once again,
echo my gratitude to staff.
This is a very well-calibrated, I mean, it's well thought out.
Everything is well thought out.
We may agree or disagree with the numbers,
and these are projections.
But I absolutely understand the decisions
that were made based on the conclusions you reached.
And so with that said, while I am,
I'm gonna be supporting the main motion.
I'm not loath to propose any changes to it right now.
As part of what will hopefully be a one year review
of the program, I would like for us to look at
a more highly graduated fee schedule for RPP,
as well as increases to define schedule
for things I already outlined that to me,
and I think to most people are a bigger deal
than while we're staying a parking meter,
such as parking on a red curb or double parking.
Thank you.
Yes, thank you.
Council member Chaplin.
Thank you, and I wanted to wrap up my part of this
by just really thanking you and your team
your diligence and also I also want to command your resolve I've seen this
team tackle many contentious issues with clarity and and a lack of and
and fortitude and I'm really grateful to all of you and thank you so much yeah
oh sorry councilmember Humber and then councilmember Kessiwani yeah all I want
to say is exactly what councilmember Taplin just said to you thank you so
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Go ahead, councilmember Kasarwani.
Thank you.
You know, I just wanted to clarify just like the fiscal bottom line.
So with RPP alone, even with these changes, you're saying that you're projecting a $1.3
million deficit annually at these fee levels.
Is that accurate?
That's slide nine.
Yeah.
I believe it's a the 1.3 million dollar deficit is existing and so it would go down so the
615,000 and net new would chip away at that
I'm sorry. I just couldn't hear you that well. Okay, you just say that again. Yeah, but
I'll pull up the slide. So
Yeah, I mean you're right. It's still 1.3 million dollar deficit moving forward
We plan to revisit this next year as it's been brought up. Okay every year
Okay, so I just want to make sure so you so you will be coming back annually to do these increases and and
It sounds like there's some
Some support although we haven't taken a formal vote on that but but this concept of doing an even more graduated
Greater increase for the second and third vehicle that may be an option
Okay
I just wanted to clarify that and then so then on the the meters that you're saying a 5.3 million
annual
Surplus or benefit
Do I have that right? So so you have the annual revenue and the annual cost so you're left with the 5.3, correct?
That includes everything so that includes the RPP fee increases and the parking fines. Oh, okay
So that's cumulative. So just with an RPP
So is there a reason why we would want the RPP alone to be self-sustaining if it's part of this larger?
I don't know if it's all one fund or is RPP a separate fund. It's not a separate fund
It's not it's not its own enterprise fund. Oh, okay. So so it's technically not a problem that that area is running a deficit because it's not
On the on the whole exactly. Okay. Okay that I just want to clarify those points. Thank you very much. And I do appreciate
That we are going to look at these fees on a more regular schedule. Thank you
Thank you. I'm gonna be supporting it this evening and it's a big part because
basically what we're doing right now is we're subsidizing parking in our city by
a million dollars a year and so I want folks to really make sure they're
understanding that. The other thing I want to say is that I know I hear a lot
of folks say that there isn't enough parking in downtown and I think it's
because they don't know we have this parking lot
that is really underutilized on Center Street,
between Center and Addison?
Alston?
Oh my gosh, thank you.
Addison, thank you.
Between Center and Addison.
So folks, please go park in our parking lot.
It's there, it's bright.
There's always spaces available and, yeah, thank you.
And then I just generally wanted to also add my support
because of climate reasons and also because
as we were talking about parking management,
having one to two spaces kind of available
enables more flow and that is better for our businesses.
So I want to make sure folks understand that too.
I understand that an increase in parking costs people money
and I also want to remind folks
that people don't have to drive.
not everybody has to of course there are folks who need to take cars and I
understand that but there are many people who don't need to take cars they
can take public transportation they can walk they can bike and I believe that
this will also help to encourage that so I will be supporting the motion and with
that I will see if we can take the role in that please okay this is to adopt the
staff recommendation on I am 24 Councilmember Kessarwani? Yes.
Taplin? Aye. Bartlett? No. Traga? Aye. O'Keeffe? Yes. Blackabee? Yes. Unapara? Yes.
Humber? Yes. And Mayor Ishi? Yes. Okay motion carried. Thank you. Thank you all so
much for your presentation and for your work on this. I could tell it was a lot
of work, we are going to take a break until 9 o'clock and just so folks
understand. So we have one more fee and then we have, oh sorry, yeah, which is
number 25 and then we have an appeal. We have a conversation which is discussion
about the desired qualifications for the next ODPA director, which is repetitive
I'm realizing, and then also the CIP. So that's a pretty significant number of
things left, I just want to flag for folks, so thank you. We will take a break
for the next 10 minutes and come back at 9 o'clock. Recording stopped. Recording
in progress. Okay, thank you everyone for your patience. I want to make an
announcement and say that item number 28, I don't believe we'll have time for it
this evening because there's a significant presentation involved and
I'm sure folks will have a lot of questions. So we will be moving that one
to the meeting on the 16th and we are moving on right now to item number 25
which is the zero waste plan checks and compliance inspections fees and that was
also continued from May 19, 2026 so also apologies to you all and your team for
not being able to hear that item at the previous meeting and you having to come
back tonight so thank you very much for being here. Mayor why don't we make a
motion to move item 28 because it's a public hearing so yeah yeah it just quick
yes thank you I would like to entertain a motion to move item number 28 to the
meeting on the 16th. So moved. Thank you. Second. Okay. Thank you very much. Can you take the roll on that? Okay. Councilmember
Kisarwani? Yes. Taplin? Aye. Bartlett? Yes. Trago? Aye. O'Kee? Yes. Blackaby? Yes.
Unapara? Yes. Humbert? Yes. And Maryishi? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Alright. I'll pass it
to you. Good evening mayor council members ah Wahidah Mary again in our
director of public works tonight we're presenting the proposed zero waste fee
updates for council's conditions consideration these fees are intended to
better align cost recovery with the staff time and resources needed to review
inspect and support compliance for zero waste related requirements including
plan reviews construction and demolition compliance special events and related
programs I'll have staff intruders themselves and then Leticia will jump
into the presentation and we'll be happy to answer any questions from there good
evening mayor and council members my name is Leticia how to gain solid waste
and recycling a little closer yeah thank you
Solid Waste and Recycling Division Manager for Public Works Zero Waste
Division. Tonight we are presenting a proposed cost recovery fee for zero waste
plan checks and compliance inspection services that are already being
performed by staff in support of state mandates and local ordinances. The
purpose of this item is to establish a more sustainable funding mechanism for
for the existing services while continuing to support local businesses in Berkeley's environmental and climate action goals.
And hi, I'm Johnny Delar. I'm the senior field representative for the Zero Waste Division.
So I do conduct some of these inspections and plan checks, so I'm here for support.
In this brief presentation, we will cover our staff recommendations, the proposed fee
revenue table and fiscal impact assessments.
Staff recommends adopting a CUS recovery fee for existing zero waste compliance activities.
These activities include construction and demolition, recycling reviews, trash room
and space allocation reviews, special event, waste reduction plans, food wear ordinance
inspections and SB 1383 food recovery compliance activities. These are all existing support
services currently being provided by staff. The bottom line is that staff currently performs
a significant amount of technical review and compliance related work without a dedicated
cost recovery mechanism. In 2025 alone, staff estimate spending over 3,000 hours conducting
plan checks and inspections with annual cost exceeding approximately 400,000. Current plan
checks and compliances inspection costs increasingly impacts the declining zero waste
enterprise fund. Without a dedicated recovery mechanism, these costs continue to be absorbed
within the Zero Waste Enterprise Fund, increasing fiscal pressure over time.
Staff is recommending a flat $250 fee per activity to support partial cost
recovery for these existing services. Our funding gap, the project deficit
without action is $419,000 combined for zero waste plan and inspections.
These are specialized one-time technical review services that support construction projects,
special events, food recovery programs,
and the implementation of local ordinances.
These services are separate from direct refuse collection services funded through
existing rates. Without a dedicated cost recovery mechanism, these costs will
continue to be absorbed within the zero waste enterprise fund, increasing
ongoing fiscal pressure on the fund over time. The proposed fee amount is
based on an average of approximate two hours of staff time required for review,
coordination, inspection, documentation and follow up. The objective is to
established a reasonable cost recovery mechanism
for specialized services already being performed by staff.
This chart details the increase in growth
of compliance checks and plan reviews
from fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2025.
The number of plan checks and inspections
is growing steadily over a year,
over a year with no fee implementation
or cost recovery mechanism in place.
Our fiscal impact assessment
is an estimated annual revenue of $419,000 per year.
The purpose of this recommendation is straightforward.
To establish a recovery mechanism
for these specialized services
is based on 2025 activity levels.
The proposed fee structure is estimated
to generate approximately 419 annually.
the proposed fee would support direct cost recovery and help offset operational
and staff cost currently absorbed by the zero waste enterprise fund while
supporting the city's continued implementation of required state unfunded
mandated programs. Staff is recommending implementation effective July 1st 2026
with fees incorporated into existing permit review and compliance service
processes. I'll turn it over to our interim director. So before we jump into
the staff recommendation slide I do want to go on the record indicating that
staff will be adding the following language to exhibit A of the resolution
adopting the zero waste plan check and compliance inspection schedule. The
language that is being added to exhibit A is as follows. Not withstanding any
other provisions of this fee schedule fees associated with social solar permit
application shall be applied in a manner consistent with government code 6 6 0 1
5 where applicable the zero waste plan review and compliance inspections shall
be adjusted reduced or waived as necessary to ensure that total permit
related fees do not exceed the maximum amounts permitted by state law. With that
said and recorded we'll move forward to staff recommendations. So tonight staff
has provided feedback presentation data to support. We're asking council tonight
to support adopting the resolution established establishing zero waste
plan check and compliance inspection fees and also authorized works to
to implement fee collections effective July 1st, 2026.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you both.
Excuse me.
Thank you all so much.
Does anyone have any questions?
Yes, Vice Mayor Trico.
Thank you so much.
Yeah, I had more, but I'm going to focus on,
I think three questions.
One that, just the statement you read,
that is a government code section
that is a photovoltaic system fee cap.
What is the relationship between this cap
and zero waste collection fees?
So the relationship may be that
There might be an overlap.
I'll give you an example.
If someone pulls a roofing permit
and that activity generates waste
that needs to be the recycled or disposed,
but that roofing permit, it's tied into a solar permit.
Then that's where there's an overlap
and we need to make sure that we stay within the cap
as we adjoin our fees to this code.
Got it.
Thank you for clarifying that.
The report mentioned that certain inspection
responsibilities appear to have shifted to public works
due to staffing shortages.
Do you anticipate this being a permanent change?
Yes.
And if these fees are adopted,
are there any additional compliance, education,
or technical assistance efforts that staff
would like to pursue in the future?
At this time, we're pursued.
There are other compliance inspections,
but those are covered under our regular rates,
under regular schedule collection services
for our resident community and our business community.
These fees are for a small group of general contractors,
architects.
These are for ancillary services,
things that are typically,
we're not able to recover the cost
because they're not covered
under the regular scheduled service rates.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Other questions from my council colleagues?
Council member Blackby.
Thanks real quick question to see manager have have we ever had to deploy kind of general fund transfers to the 0 waste enterprise fund to kind of make the fun solvent cover these negative balances. Does that happen in the past?
No, it hasn't council member without this. Is there a chance that is this is the fund kind of diminishes? We might have to consider that in the future. If we didn't pass something like this.
Yes, that's, that's one of the things we really want to prevent from happening is any kind of a general fund transfer as we're already struggling with the budget and other general fund transfers. So yes. Okay. Thank you. That's it.
Thank you. Other questions. Is there any public comment on this item item number 25, which is the zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection fees.
It has, I mentioned in the previous comment,
we really do have to look at 1343
and starting to enforce it, providing warnings
and then fines for non-compliance.
And that goes with not only businesses
but also apartment buildings.
We need revenue right now to save our essential services.
We have to do this.
nobody likes paying more money in an uncomfortable time such as we're in
right now. Uh, but it's just, it's just a reality. We have to do these things.
Thank you.
Thank you. Any other public comment on this item online?
There's one hand raised. Um,
caller with a phone number ending in two one one.
Caller with a phone number ending in two one one. This is for item 25,
zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection fees.
All right, well, okay, I guess not.
We'll continue on.
All right, thank you very much.
Are there any comments from my council colleagues
starting with Vice Mayor Tracob?
Yeah, I will move the staff recommendation as amended
And I would just, I hope that this increase
will bring the fund balance to cost neutral.
But it is exactly cost neutral.
And so I just wanted to,
If expenses continue to outpace revenue,
even with this fee collection,
I would be interested in this coming back to us
at the end of next fiscal year.
Thank you.
I second.
Council Member Trigueb's speaking motion.
Vice Mayor Trigueb speaking motion.
And we need a motion to close the public hearing as well.
Thank you.
Is there a motion to close the public?
So moved.
Second.
we take the role in that please. Okay close public hearing council member
Kessarwani? Yes. Taplan? Bartlett? Yes. Strega? Aye. O'Keeffe? Yes. Blackaby? Yes.
Lunapara? Yes. Humbert? Yes. And Mary Sheehan? Yes. Okay public
hearings closed and there's a the motion has been made to on the item. Yes
let's take the role on that please. Okay are you ready? Okay this is to adopt
the resolution for zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection fees
with the inclusion of the language that was read into the record for exhibit A.
On the motion Councilmember Kessarwani. Yes. Tapplin. Aye. Bartlett. Yes.
Okay, Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, okay, motion carried. Okay, thank you very much. All right, um, thank you so much for the presentation. Thank you for being here. Thank you for coming back and, um, moving on to item number 26, which is appeal of the housing advisory.
advisory commission decision to deny the appeal
and affirm the determination by the building official
for a 1615 Fairview Street regarding the applicability
of exterior elevated elements inspection requirements.
Okay.
This is for staff.
So you're welcome to pull up a chair.
If you'd like to sit right there, you can.
So the way that this is going to go,
so we're opening the public hearing for this item
and we will have a presentation from the planning staff
and then an appellate comment period,
which will be seven minutes and then public comments.
One minute per speaker yield up to a maximum of two minutes.
We will then take council questions,
close the public hearing, have council comments
and then take a vote
and there are three different options below,
which I will get into later.
So we're gonna start off with presentation
from the planning staff.
if you'd like to sit while you wait please feel free and or if someone can get you a chair that
would be helpful too I think yeah go ahead. Thank you Mayor good evening council members I'm Jordan
Klein director of planning development joined at the staff table by Jeff Jensen the assistant
building and safety manager and Galadriel Burr who's a community services specialist in the
special projects unit of building and safety and she will be making the
presentation. Thank you Jordan. Good evening mayor council members. So I'm
just gonna jump right into it. I know it's a long night. Um let's see.
Apologies. My first slide is not. Okay. All right. My apologies. So
intermediate response to the balcony collapse at 2020 Kittredge Street on
June 16th 2015 which resulted in the death of six students and seriously
injured seven others and emergency ordinance was adopted requiring
inspection and certification of weather exposed exterior elevated elements for
all buildings containing three or more dwelling units. In 2018 the state
adopted inspection requirements under the California Health and Safety Code
and these were subsequently codified under Berkeley Municipal Code 19.40. Both
state and local laws require that all buildings containing three or more
dwelling units with exterior elevated elements that are located six feet or
more above grade to be inspected on a cyclical basis and that they require
certification by licensed professionals and neither state nor Berkeley Municipal
code provide exemptions for owner occupancy,
vacancy, or income level.
This slide shows examples of exterior elevated elements.
It includes weather-exposed wood and metal decks,
walkways, balconies,
stairway systems, guardrails, and handrails.
Berkeley's inspection requirements are managed under
the city's exterior elevated elements program or E3 program for short.
and these inspections must be performed by licensed or certified professionals.
Thanks. I have it. Okay. So the appellate property at 1615 Fairview Street is a four-unit building
with existing exterior elevated elements. In 2016, Mr. Merrowitz first submitted an E3
exemption declaration form that declared under penalty of perjury, that his property did not
have exterior elevated elements. Later that same year, he submitted a certification form verifying
that his property did in fact have exterior elevated elements. In 2021, the next E3 program
cycle, Mr. Marowitz again submitted an exemption declaration form stating that his property did
did not have exterior elevated elements
and that his building had fewer than three dwelling units.
In September of 2025, staff issued a notice of violation
and a warning of administrative citation.
Mr. Merowitz then claimed exemption
from inspection requirements
and requested a formal determination.
In October of 2025, the building official
issued a determination stating that the property
was not exempt from E3 inspection requirements.
Mr. Merrowitz then appealed the determination
to the Housing Advisory Commission.
And on January 15, 2026,
the HAC denied Mr. Merrowitz's appeal
and affirmed the building official's determination.
So for the sake of brevity,
I have summarized duplicative points from the appeal,
and they've been combined in five different issues.
So the first issue that was raised by the appellant
is the assertion that the rental housing safety program
provides annual inspections for exterior elevated elements
and that there are provisions for self certification
and exemptions for vacant and owner occupied units.
Staff's response is that the rental housing safety program
and the E3 inspection program are two distinct programs
that are mandated under separate legislation.
Any exemptions that are applicable to RHSP
are not relevant to the E3 inspection program.
And per state law, E3 inspections cannot be performed
by city employees.
The rental housing safety program ordinance
requires inspection of rental units,
meaning units that are either rented
or are available to rent.
Therefore, if a unit is owner occupied,
it may qualify for an exemption under the RHSP program.
In contrast, state and local laws
mandating E3 inspection requirements,
require that all buildings containing
three or more dwelling units
with existing exterior elevated elements
are to be inspected on a cyclical basis,
regardless of whether the building
or any of the units are owner occupied or vacant.
The next issue that the opponent raised
is that existing provisions and, oh, sorry, yikes.
My apologies.
The next, I apologize, I'm nervous.
The appellant asserts that the building department
and planning department were the creators
of the balcony collapse and that the balcony collapse
was due to too much weight and too many people.
So staff's response is that the balcony at 2020 Kittredge
failed due to severe dry rot and water damage.
This was determined through multiple investigations
by subject matter experts, including city staff,
third-party licensed professionals and independent investigations by the
california state licensing board
this determination was also confirmed by the district attorney's findings
the design of the balcony that failed was also found to have been compliant
with the building code at the time
it was constructed
and regardless of the details that led
to the tragedy
or that precipitated adoption of the legislation that mandates the e3
inspection requirements
the building and safety division
is responsible for enforcing local and state codes
and staff of properly applied E3 inspection requirements
in the case of 1615 Fairview Street.
The appellant has also asserted that the,
or has questioned the application
of the hardship exemption for low-income property owners
who cannot afford the appeal fee
and asserts that the building official
imposed a $1,000 fee.
Staff's response is that the laws governing E3 inspection
requirements do not provide an exception for low-income property
owners.
And to clarify, thank you.
So this would be the fourth issue.
My apologies.
So the hardship exemption for low-income property owners,
the laws that govern the E3 inspection requirements
do not provide an exception for low-income property owners.
And the $1,000 fee that was actually addressed here
was for the HACS appeal fee,
and there's not an additional fee
that was assessed for this council appeal.
And the final issue raised here is the appellant questions
the impartiality of staff and prior hearing bodies.
Staff's response is that E3 inspection requirements
universally apply to all buildings
with three or more dwelling units
that contain exterior elevated elements.
staff have correctly identified and applied E3 inspection requirements for
1615 Fairview street.
Staff recommends that council deny the appeal and affirm the building officials
determination that 1615 Fairview street is not in compliance with the city's
E3 inspection program and to uphold the associated fees consistent with council
adopted policy and state law.
Thank you. That concludes the staff presentation.
got it okay thank you we will let me go look at the script we will now hear from
mr. maverick the appellant oh first are there any questions for are there any
questions for stuff okay I'm gonna yield back to the mayor sorry so I actually
need to accuse myself I just realized that this house I think is too close to
my house so and I didn't realize this on it's on a different street but just
geographically so I'm gonna give the process over to you vice mayor and then
you will have to lead it so I'm gonna send it to you right now I think okay I
haven't pulled up. You have it? Yes. Okay, great. All right. Thank you. Okay, we
will now hear from the appellant. The appellant, you have up to seven minutes to
speak. Justice can't be served in seven minutes, I'm just putting that out front.
You all are intelligent people, one attorney as far as I know. So you're not
gonna have a great grasp of what I'm about to introduce and I wanted to
introduce it first because I may run out of time rather than what I really want
to focus on I'm gonna read this and I don't know I submitted this to you guys
today so you might not have had an opportunity so I'm just it's my oral
arguments so I'm just gonna read verbatim and if you the one you have in
your mailbox you can keep as a record to refer back to the mind pulling the
mic a little closer to you thank you this triple E is based on several fronts
I have and continue to call into question actual virtual certainty that every aspect of this appeal by housing advisory commission building official city attorney's office and subsequently the city mayor are without required fairness and impartiality as required by the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The creation of the Tripoli mandate violates the U.S. Constitution.
This is true and accurate for not only the local ordinance for Tripoli, but also the California State Bill 721.
I introduced this first rather than later to prevent my time allotment of seven minutes
from running out.
These balcony laws violate the Fourth Amendment against unconsented and unwarranted searches
of a property, especially the property's curdleage.
The Fifth Amendment and the property's owner's right to exclude government is violation and
protected civil rights as well.
And the Fourteenth Amendment, for a complete disregard of due process, including fair and
and impartial due process by a fair and impartial
trial of fact is also a violation.
As such the Tripoli mandate is illegal
and unenforceable on its face.
An interesting and illuminating factual reality
of law making is that there is no mandated requirement
that any proposed law must first assure and guarantee
that before being enacted, any such law must not be
in conflict with the US Constitution
and must not deprive the citizens civil rights.
Gee, I wonder why it is that there is
no legal requirement mandating that.
Where is the accountability of our legislators,
city staff, and the government when there's no requirement
of constitutional affirmation?
Interesting, each of these entities have immunity
from accountability, be it qualified, municipal,
or legislative immunity.
But conversely, full and strict accountability
is required from the citizens and the taxpayers.
There is nothing but hypocrisy in our systems.
Then there is the issue of city staffs
changing the rules of the appeal
as set forth in the HAC appeals in chapter 19.90.
The city changed the rules twice
in their relentless effort to gang up strategies.
In fact, I recently discovered that in reference
to the HAC hearing and its video of that hearing,
city staff is allowed to transcribe the video,
eliminating anything that city staff wants eliminated
as determined by the city, of course.
For instance, at the very beginning of my hearing with the HAC, I asked point blank,
can you all be fair and impartial as a trial or effect?
Not one, not even one of the HAC responded to that immediate question.
Isn't that curious?
As you might expect, these specific exchanges were eliminated by city staff.
Justice, which with such unlimited discretion by city staff as legislatively
provided by City Council, City staff can manipulate the facts and the omission
the facts any way they see fit to win no matter what the truth might be. There
is this is not fair or an impartial it is injustice. When if ever will City
Council hold City staff strictly accountable as the City holds the
citizens voters taxpayers strictly accountable based on the historical
track record? Never. They then consult with the city attorney in the building
official designates to formulate the HAC decision. That's in my prior documents.
So there's a threefold. One dating back to February, one dated back a few weeks
ago, and this one. And I included exhibits, etc. So the question is do you guys want
to even question the constitutionality of Triple E? It violates both the fourth
the fifth and the fourteenth amendment. And it's unenforceable. It must be declared unenforceable.
So that's the primary focus now because it's the strongest argument. As far as the RHSP,
it was effective for decades. Now suddenly it's archaic. This was an extension and I
expect the argument when I go to federal court because I expect I'll be denied. So I'm going
the federal court and putting out the word and it was opposed to state court
because the impact of the state law 721 won't be impactful in a federal court
at all but that being said I wanted to focus more so on the extension of the
rules that they've applied to the Tripoli that was not just to protect
balconies it was to protect everything and they're going to they're going to
argue there are I anticipate the arguments can be safety is always the
magic word when in fact they're fishing for safety violations and you can't do
that without good probable cause these are all lawyers words I've become a
somewhat proficient non-licensed attorney and I will embarrass the city
attorney when it comes to this case, because they can't fight constitutionality
unless you have a basis. And they're gonna say, well, safety, and but they the
case precedents reflect the idea of it must be narrowly construed to minimize
the impact on property owners. And they're not going to be able to do that because what
they did is exceeded the balcony, they exceeded the decks, they went, and whether
it's a triplex or whether it's a rental property, it's a triplex, it's a rental
property. So they're just using semantics to confuse people. I want to
focus on the abuse of process and the unfair unfairness and injustice by city
staff. There's so many ways they've just plain ganged up on me in a variety of
ways. They didn't announce to me that this Newman New Mainville didn't indicate
why he brought Jordan Klein, the planning director, and why he brought in
the city manager's office and so all of a sudden it extended from beyond the
building official and Miss Burr then it's now all these three heads of
departments so they can gang up on me some more and accelerate and expand it's
just a game to win it's not about fairness and it's not about impartiality
it's about breaking that me down it's and I have I ask you to read this
is because I'm out of time already.
That's seven minutes is not justice.
And this has no presidential record of law.
Thank you so much.
I'm now going to ask if there were any public comments
members of the public.
If there are none in the room and Mr. Palen,
I'm actually going to ask for you to step away from the guys.
Thank you.
Okay.
Are there any comments online?
I don't see any hands raised.
Members of the public,
if you're wishing to comment on this item,
please raise your virtual hand.
Seeing no virtual hands,
we are going to bring this back to the council for questions.
Are there any questions?
Seeing no questions, we will go to Council comments.
Oh, we need to close the public hearing, thank you.
I'm gonna entertain a motion to close the public hearing.
So moved.
Okay, there's been a motion and a second.
Clerk, please call the roll.
Okay, to close the public hearing,
Council Member Kisarwani.
Yes.
Tapplin.
Aye.
Bartlett.
Yes.
Tragov.
Aye.
O'Keefe.
Clackaby, Unapara, Humbert, and Mary, she is recused.
Public hearing is closed.
Okay, thank you.
We're on to council comments and possible action
and for this appeal, the council may do any one
of the following, continue the public hearing,
remand the matter to the Housing Advisory Commission
or reverse or affirm wholly or partly,
modify any decision, determination of requirement
of the commission.
Council member Peiplit.
Thank you, Vice Mayor Trigob.
And thank you for your presentation
and thank you for your presentation as well.
You are my constituent.
So of course I am sympathetic and all ears to you.
We have spoken on the phone many times about this.
I've walked over and seen the place myself as well.
Looking through this and discussing this earlier
and having an early familiarity with the issue as well.
I want to share some context with you here.
So the law that this E3 is born from and all that,
it comes from here when this balcony collapse happened.
And it happened in a building where
my father and I had a business, a coffee shop.
And every time it rained, the rain
would flood down the back of the building
inside the parking area.
It's the inside of the building.
like torrential columns of water would come down
every time it rained.
And I knew the program, too, that
had Kids from Ireland come over here, that building.
They were my customers.
So when the balcony collapsed due to this rot of the wood
from the water inside the building,
we were caught in the wares.
And it was tragic.
It was terrible.
And never again, right?
So I say this because in your legal analysis
the 14th and fifth amendment, your constitutional analysis
here.
And I welcome you approaching us from a constitutional point
of view and going to the appropriate courts.
However, you should know that governments
have broad powers for health and safety protocols
to protect their citizens, protect their property.
And unless those decisions are arbitrary or capricious,
as they say, random or bad, right?
Then they tend to hold stand.
Or they exceed the statute, right?
In this instance, I would argue that it wasn't arbitrary.
You're looking at this.
You have six elements that are directly
applicable to the E3 law, which is six feet above the ground.
Because if that falls, someone gets hurt.
And that's our mission to prevent that happening again. We also, it's not capricious,
it's not bad. What do we have to do? We didn't single you out. Everyone in the
city that has a balcony above six feet is subject to this investigation into
these requirements. And we didn't penalize you above others. We gave you
chances we did what we do, we can do. As the staff said, we do not control this
process is a state mandated operation that obviously is to good effect as
we've not another balcony drop since then and hopefully never again. So I
gotta say I appreciate your passion and uh and your your your effort to
embrace the law. But I would encourage you to take that same passion and
embrace the safety of your tenants. Because just as you're my constituent,
so are they. I have no tenants. I refuse to be a landlord anymore. Thank you.
Show me the building. I'll take it over. There will be no crosstalk. Now please
continue. Council member. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Uh, so with that being said,
you know, I just again, uh, I understand these are these are tough. These are
tough things to deal with, but they are necessary and I encourage you to re
into the business of providing shelter for people
because we need it.
OK, now.
No, but I'm addressing you.
But anyway, so listen, with that,
I'm going to move to adopt the staff recommendation
because there just is not a basis to deny the findings.
OK, is there a second?
Second.
OK, it's been moved and seconded.
Any further comments?
Okay, I will make a brief comment
because this is an issue near and dear to my heart.
The tragic, terrible accident that led to
six people losing their lives
in the prime of their lives happened in my district.
Last year, I had a chance to absorb that tragic event
with a delegation from Ireland, including some of the parents.
And when I looked in their eyes, I
was able to tell them that I will never
imagine what they have to go through
and are still going through.
But one thing that I can promise is that on our watch,
we will do everything possible to ensure
that there will be no such tragedies ever again.
I followed the E3 ordinance closely
while I served on the Housing Advisory Commission.
And I was grateful for the city's prompt response
to that tragedy.
And in fact, the city's prompt response
and the E3 ordinance became a model for what later
became state law.
I think the city's police powers and the states
are very clear on this matter.
We do have the power to regulate E3
and I will be supporting this motion.
So if there were no other comments,
Clark, would you please call the roll?
Okay, to affirm the decision
of the Housing Advisory Commission,
deny the appeal and uphold the associated fees
on the motion, Council Member Kesser-Wani?
Yes.
Taplin?
Aye.
Bartlett?
Yes.
Traga?
Aye.
O'Keefe?
Yes.
Unipara? Yes. Humber? Yes. And Mary, she's recused and the motion carries. Thank you
very much. We're going to briefly recess for the mayor to return. Do you need to
take a recess? No. Okay. All right. Well, we will continue then. Okay. Thank you very
much Vice Mayor for handling that. And apologies folks for not realizing
earlier. All right. So we are moving on excuse me to item number 27 discussion
about the desired qualifications for the next director of police accountability.
So for those of you that don't know or actually like everyone here knows but
just so just so folks know we have hired WBCP Inc. which is a recruiter and they
are helping us to recruit for the Director of Police Accountability
position. So far they have had conversations with community members. We
actually have a survey that's out and this is our opportunity as council
members to let this recruiter know about the qualifications that we would like to
see in our in our new Director of Police Accountability. So this is a really
exciting opportunity and one thing I did just want to say before I'm gonna pass
it over to Lauren who is on the line. Lauren's been doing a great job thank you
very much Lauren and Lauren actually if you could raise your hand as well so
that our city clerk can find you. What I'd like to focus this conversation on
is like aspirational what is it that we want as opposed to what is it that we
don't want. I think that that will be a helpful framing for us as we're
having this conversation so I think hopefully Lauren is and I will let
Lauren help us walk through this process there she is I see you Lauren thank you
so much for being here absolutely thank you Mary she and council members thank
you very much for the opportunity to join you I'm sorry that I'm not able to
be there in person I do look forward to meeting you all in person when I'm there
for interviews. But I thank you Mayor Ishii for the introduction. I know you've covered
a lot of ground this evening, so I'm going to try to keep this concise. But as Mayor
Ishii mentioned, I have been working with her and Council Members Lunapara and Humbert
to begin the recruitment for the Director of Police Accountability. And we're at this
critical juncture in the recruitment process where we're taking a lot of feedback. And
as the Mayor mentioned, we did have a community meeting.
We do have a survey running,
which is still open for responses.
So for anyone who is online or in the building listening,
that survey will be open through at least tomorrow.
And the information for the survey is posted
on the new section of the city's website.
So definitely still opportunities to participate
and to provide community feedback.
But I am excited to hear from you all on the council
this evening about what you would like to see
in candidates for this role.
This is gonna inform the ideal candidate profile
that I'll use to pre-screen candidates,
that the subcommittee will use to screen candidates
that will ultimately help us form interview questions
and inform the process in a variety of ways.
In your council, in your agenda packet
was a few broad questions that I offered up for you
to consider, the most central of which is,
what are the competencies, interpersonally and technically,
you're looking for in candidates.
But also what would you identify as challenges
and opportunities for a candidate stepping into the role?
And what would you identify as the most critical priorities
for a new director stepping into this role?
In the next, I would say like 12 to 18 months.
Those would be things that it's important
for me to understand.
So, Mary Ishii, I am sure that you have
a preferred organized way that you'd like to do this,
but I would love to just hear from the council
and I'll take avid notes and ask questions
and would just love to hear your feedback.
Thank you, I appreciate that, Lauren.
First, I just wanna check in with my council member colleagues
to see if you all have any questions about this process
or like what we're asking you to do today.
Okay, very good.
So, Lauren, is it actually,
is it possible to maybe put the questions up?
And- Yes.
I think that might be helpful.
and then we can have the council members
address those questions.
It just will be easier, I think, if everyone can see them.
Yes.
Okay, is my screen up?
Yes.
Excellent.
You might be making it a bit bigger,
just doing a, yeah, a few, couple more, that's great.
That's great, thank you.
Thank you so much.
Okay, so council colleagues,
if you can just press your buttons
and I will have you each go through
and answer these questions.
I think that will be great.
I imagine that as folks are speaking,
you might have more ideas,
so it's okay if we need to kinda come back around again.
All right, I'm gonna start us off
with Council Member Taplin.
Thank you very much.
So I think going down the questions here,
if my time can start, that would be great.
Thank you.
Yeah, I think for me, it's really important
the new director work with the the Commission and the department and the
charter officers to implement the the regulations. I think sorry I'm trying to
synthesize both my notes and the questions. I think I think having
familiarity with California's foreign officer personnel
and record access laws, as well as Berkeley
local law enforcement policies is important.
Having objectivity, I think a challenge sometimes
might be when there is a complaint or potentially
a policy that is not being complied with.
Sometimes there might be a tendency
to assume an outcome, whether desired or undesired.
And then when that occurs, that presents a barrier
to when the results of an investigation
or a course of action is otherwise
from what one might assume might be the outcome.
But we're focused on what we do want and what we don't want.
So someone who will be able to be objective
and keep an open mind along throughout
each step of the process there.
And then my last one responds to the final question, for me having a collaborative approach
to working within the city organization and alongside the companion components of the
city, those being the Department of the PD and the charter offices to work in tandem
instead of working against or just really leading into the ability to leverage the close
working relationships we have both inside the city and with the community. Thank you.
Thank you, Council Member. Thank you. Okay, moving on to Council Member Humber.
Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. And since I serve on the ad hoc selection committee and had
the opportunity to share thoughts at the recent community meeting. I'm going
to be mainly listening to others. I appreciate council member Taplin's
comments and I'll be listening to my other colleagues with with great
interest. I wanted to say thank you to Lauren and her organization for their
work on the public outreach efforts and their recruitment materials. They're
really good and thank you to the mayor for placing this item on the agenda so
that we could do this publicly as a full body. I know we're all very interested
and finding a strong candidate who has the management skills,
public safety, and criminal justice expertise,
and overall right and collaborative attitude
for our community.
And I'm grateful for this opportunity
to hear more from all of you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Moving on to Council Member O'Keefe.
That was sooner than I expected.
I'm not gonna answer all four questions
and I think I'm expecting to broadly agree
with a lot of comments people will make.
So I'm just gonna make two comments
that I think other people might not make.
One is, I guess this is in response to the third question.
We all saw last month how much fear and uncertainty
there is in our community around police surveillance.
And this is a really serious issue.
And the person who occupies this role
can really do a lot to help.
They can look out for the fears and concerns
that the public has and really keep an eye on making sure
that people are safe from the threats
that perceived or real from police technology.
So I would really like to see someone
who actually has a competency around that
and really understands how the technology works.
And I think that could be a really, really powerful skill
just based on the kinds of new issues that we're facing
in this community that are very serious.
And so that's one thing that I'd really like to see.
I'd like to know any candidate that we see.
I'd like to know what their level of understanding
of that world is.
And then second thing, this is related, but more broad.
I really wanna see someone who's really good
at communicating with the public.
This is really, this job is really important
for the public to feel like our law enforcement is,
that they're safe from our law enforcement
for lack of a better way to say that.
And I think that if this person can really communicate
with the public and really build that trust,
that's actually the most important part of the job.
So I'd really wanna see really strong public communication
skills and a real commitment to building
that trust in the community.
Absolutely.
Thank you very much.
I'm gonna go online to Council Member Blackaby.
Thanks Madam Mayor.
Thank you, Lauren, and subcommittee for all the work
on this really important search.
I will do my best to go through each of the four questions.
In terms of priorities, first one,
and hopefully we're close,
but certainly just to get the final regulations
over the finish line.
Again, I know there's multiple people involved in that.
Like it's not just ODPA, but it's also department,
DPA, city staff, but to do her or his part
to kind of get the operating regulations done
is really important because so much
of what is possible with the PAB keeps getting held up
by the fact that this stuff isn't done.
It's a time sink, it's a money sink,
it's a resource sink for the city and for the PAB.
Get them done, like that has to be a priority.
Second is then making enough time then to focus,
like the most, one of the most important functions
of the PAB is to do really effective investigations
about complaints, making sure you have
the time and the resources to do that.
And again, a sub bullet on here is also then the ability
to sort of triage or to the extent it's possible.
I know that the charter language is,
there's some kind of precision here,
but to the extent you can identify things
it can be administratively closed sooner in the process.
So you can spend more of those investigative resources
on investigations that need to be investigated.
That's really important.
Because not every issue, not every complaint is the same, right? At some point, if you need to figure out, do some initial work and decide, hey, this is something I really need to spend time on. Maybe this one is one we should administer. If we close, that will help.
If you do the 1st, 2 things, then you also have time to do things like the policy reviews as council member O'Keeffe and others alluded to.
some of the surveillance technology,
participating in the RFP process,
all of this, they could be very effective thought partners,
but to be able to have the time for that,
you need to have the first two things under control.
But that is a priority.
This can be a center of expertise in this area
to do the policy work.
And then fourth is the ability to do some better
and ongoing kind of community outreach.
And by that, I really mean to broaden
The engagement to a wider swath of the public. I think right now, we're still kind of talking to kind of very narrow parts of our population. I think this is something potentially that more these are conversations that more the community should be involved in.
We should figure out how to do that in the path that the director could be effective. So those are 4 priorities in order. I think in that order challenges and opportunities.
Certainly, we're all in a budget environment.
So how do you make the most out of existing resources,
funding budget, that challenge and an opportunity,
building relationships with all of the stakeholders,
as people alluded to, this is a really tough job.
Part of what makes it tough is you've got lots of plates
to keep spinning and then lots of people to navigate.
And so again, that's a challenge.
You've got to be good at being able to sort of build those relationships across the organization and beyond the organization with the public.
And I think an opportunity is really to make our police accountability board more of a center of expertise in this area.
Be a center of excellence, be someone that certainly relied upon the city, but maybe even more broadly in terms of people that do this work really, really well.
All right, technical competencies, I would say, obviously previous police accountability work would be really, I think, essential. I don't think you just sort of step into this job. Not having had some experience there.
You've got to be a good manager of people and by that, I think that's managing your staff, but it's also managing laterally and it's also managing upward.
You've just gotta be really good at sort of managing in all of those directions. And I think, as council member said, a really effective public communicator. This is a position that when it comes to issues around public safety, you're gonna hear from the mayor, you're gonna hear from the city manager, you're gonna hear from the police chief.
And you'll be hearing from the direct accountability in the press and those, you know, you need to be a respected voice and a responsible voice in those sorts of public dialogues.
And then lastly, it's safe for the interpersonal leadership competencies, like a lot of the charter offices, like us and others, you've got to be both independent, but also collaborative.
And again, I know that's a difficult balance. You've got to be able to be independent. And again, this setup in the charter to be an independent oversight body.
So no one is questioning that that needs to be that needs to be clear.
But all of us have some amount of independence and all of us also have to be able to work with everybody else to get anything done. So you have to again, figure out how to be both independent and collaborative and have those sort of interpersonal skills.
Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead.
Almost almost last things. And yeah, last thing I'd say is then recognize that you do have many stakeholders to manage. I mentioned before the council.
The department, BPA, the public, city staff, city manager, HR, all those things.
So, there you go. That's it. Thank you.
Thank you so much for your, for your very thoughtful answers to the questions. And yeah, I do want to encourage folks like to say what you need to say because, you know, this is our opportunity to talk about it.
And I want to make sure that the subcommittee and also Lauren that we really have a good sense of what everyone wants to see. So don't feel rushed. Okay.
Go ahead, Council Member Bartlett.
Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you
for doing the hard work here, Mrs. Gerson-Green,
and finding this person, and then the committee as well.
Thank you.
So Berkeley, of course, I mean, you may or may not know this,
but Berkeley is the home of police accountability.
We're the first ever.
And so we have responsibility to do it right
and to be a place of leadership for the country.
So I mean, so going through your list here,
merging with my original notes,
the priorities immediately.
So we're storing public trust in the office, very important.
Professionalize the sort of processes that were there.
Repair relationships that have been ruptured
over the last few years.
And of course, I bring further transparency
and more diligent reporting.
That's, I'll just leave it at that.
The biggest challenge is, and there was opportunity,
so again, the challenge is that trust in the office
has been strained, trust between the office
and other departments of the city has been strained,
trust between the office and us have been strained,
and trust between the community at large,
with all of us has been strained around this topic.
So again, getting to that.
Another challenge that this town is, of course, very active,
very sophisticated politically, and expectations
are very high.
Another challenge is that this role is very, very complex,
is that it sits at the intersection of law and labor
laws, labor relations, politics, public safety, race,
Homelessness, mental health, and civil rights.
All that in one role.
And another one, opportunity.
Opportunity is a good opportunity now.
Again, this is a chance for someone to be a leader.
This role in the right hands is a game changer
for their lives.
They can really do something big from this position.
And opportunity to really deploy new methods of data,
data gathering, new technologies,
I think my colleague mentioned that.
Opportunity really takes us to the next level
and embrace the future of modern policing.
So yeah, the competencies you need,
you definitely need a really good experience
in civilian oversight.
It's too hard to jump into this thing.
You need investigative competence.
Excuse me, investigations.
You know, how to run an investigation.
You need to understand all the police practices,
the laws around policing.
The laws around labor, and really those
are the two strong ones, and also constitutional laws
as well, and the nuances around constitutional protections
as well.
And there are sometimes limitations.
You understand policy and systems, so municipal systems.
You have to understand that.
Data skills, again, and public reporting elements
and communication powers, so you can
communicate effectively the data you're gathering
and the work you're doing, and the changes
that you are promoting and implementing.
You need to learn how to work with politicians.
I'm not included in myself, but these eight people and others,
you know, how to work with them.
I'll get with interpersonal.
What's the next one?
interpersonal competencies, where are we here?
Yes, yes, yes.
So here, this is the most important one here
because you need to, this person needs to operate
in ambiguous or unstable environments
with limited and often conflicting guidance and hostility.
They have to be able to really be centered
in that maelstrom and stay the course for this role.
Very difficult.
and they need to be diplomatic with their independence,
with their mission directive as well.
They need to be able to earn credibility
across the divergent populations and divergent elements.
Low ego leadership, you have to be able to work with a team,
even though you are the person, you still have a team,
and the city itself is your team.
The police are your team, we're your team,
the city manager's team, city attorney's team,
You have to, the person has to really understand
how to work with a team and quarterback it.
And crisis communication, these scandals come up.
Incredibly violent things happen.
Heartbreaking things happen.
They have to be able to communicate a crisis effectively
to the community.
And of course, this is the most important one.
The only cultural competence and an affluency
in racial equity because that is the core
of police oversight in America.
please. Thank you. Thank you so
much. Councilmember. Thank you.
Oh, Vice Mayor Traegeb. Okay.
Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um I'm
going to start with challenges
and opportunities and, um, I
think that the acronym VUCA is
I think we, at times, and especially someone in that well,
at times, has to navigate all of these attributes.
So that is both a challenge and an opportunity.
There is a challenge and opportunity to navigate
a highly dynamic landscape of emergent
and existing strength, weaknesses, opportunities,
and threats associated with surveillance technologies
and policies, as well as ever-changing regulations
at the state level, such as a recent change
in reporting requirements that Berkeley then had to look
at how our own requirements fit within that framework.
Another challenge and opportunity is
that this would be a new director
within a relatively new department,
working with a mostly new PAB.
And then finally, it is a tight budget year for all of us,
and ODPA is not,
not unique in that having to navigate that challenge.
So there will be a need for this role to,
someone in that role to understand and set priorities.
Speaking of priorities, to me,
some of the critical priorities are to finalize regulations
governing the PAB and ODPA.
Working with the PAB to evaluate the,
now what will be a contracting process
for items related to the safety technology ordinance
as well as other tools and reporting requirements
and cadences that are or may be under review
in the future by the council.
Of course, I already mentioned that this is a challenge,
an opportunity and a priority.
They would need to work closely with the PAB,
much of whom will be new.
And a priority for me is for their ability
to work collaboratively with various stakeholders,
including but not limited to PAB, BPD, city manager,
charter officers, mayor and the council,
as well as their respective reports.
So that brings me to desired qualification.
So I come from an independent oversight.
That is something I did in the regulatory space
in the federal government.
And likewise, I see this role as in part a role
that dispenses independent oversight.
And that means it's very important for whoever is
in that role to be impartial, to get to the truth.
And I think we know what that is not.
So that is not playing gotcha
or reflexively assuming the worst without getting data.
But it's also not someone who goes along
merely to get along.
It is vital that someone in an independent oversight role
maintains respect for everyone's roles,
even when there is a professional difference of opinion.
It is also someone who should have strong knowledge
and understanding of all relevant regulations,
someone who seeks to listen to all perspectives,
and yes, maintains a cultural competency, as has been said,
develops a deep understanding of the issues
and acts based on that understanding.
An understanding of how different stakeholders operate
and interact would be a plus.
In addition to that, as mentioned with the budget
and other constraints and resources,
they have to be a good program and project manager
and should be able to set priorities.
And what was done here, ideally they would have experience
working in a jurisdiction with significant challenges
that underwent meaningful improvement under the leadership.
And finally, and this is probably the most important,
as has been stated by others,
they need to have sound communication skills
and they need to be strong in communicating with the public,
both the entire public,
as well as broad swaths of the community
that may disagree on certain things,
as well as internally within their own department
and cross cutting through the city.
That is all, thank you so much.
Thank you very much, Vice Mayor.
We are moving on to Council Member Kesserwani.
Thank you so much, Madam Mayor,
and thank you for initiating this conversation
with the full council.
And thank you to the Mayor and Council Member Humbert
and Council Member Luna Pada for being part of that,
or being the group that is making more
of these decisions for us,
because this is such an important role
that has been authorized by the voters of Berkeley
to create this Office of,
a Department of Police Accountability,
and so I'll just quickly run through these questions
because I think everything I wanted to say
has already been covered,
but I just do wanna share it from my perspective.
So in terms of the first 12 to 18 months,
I think it will be important to rebuild trust and visibility
that this office has a new permanent director
and I think one good way to do that
is to conduct listening sessions with the community
and to make sure that the director does outreach
to the diverse range of community members
who interact with our police department.
I also think that it would be useful
to strengthen public reporting
so that the public can track patterns and outcomes
and the work that's going on in this office
and better understand the role that it plays.
Okay, so then let me look at the biggest challenges
and areas of opportunity.
And so I think there are many members of our community
who are very engaged.
And so I think that can be an opportunity.
And I talked about doing listening sessions.
I think it'll also be important.
And I thought a lot about this
when I first got elected in my first term
is thinking about how to outreach to people
who are very busy and are not likely to go to you.
They're not gonna come to you,
to your, you know, the Berkeley Police Department
has coffee with a cop.
Only certain people are going to do that.
So how can you come to people where they are
and engage with them?
I think that will be very important to,
for the director to have a broad understanding
of the community's sense of police accountability
and its importance, because I think in this space,
there do tend to be activist voices
that are very loud and strong.
And I would want this person to know
that they have a responsibility to represent
the entire city's interests
and to actively pursue voices that, you know,
they may not necessarily get a chance to hear from
unless they do that proactive outreach.
And so, okay, let me keep going.
In terms of technical competencies,
background and experience, you know,
I think this is, as others have said,
a very technical role with important technical competencies,
like having expertise in how
impartial investigations are conducted,
somebody who understands the California legal framework,
I think that's already been said as well.
I think this is going to be a pretty broad start.
So it may be somebody who's not from California,
but somebody who has demonstrated
the ability to come up to speed on the technical and legal
understanding that is needed to be effective in the role.
And then finally, I think the last question
is probably most important,
the interpersonal leadership competencies.
I almost would think of this role,
even though it's not an elected position,
it's that level of importance and visibility
and challenge and so I do think as others have said,
communication will be very important.
I think what Council Member Blackaby said
about being independent, but collaborative,
independent and collaborative,
that's very much what we have to do on the dais.
You know, I think we all have very strong views,
but we need to get to five votes
and that person is not part of those vote counts,
but you know, I would love to see
director of police accountability who can work collaboratively with the
council because we are often wanting the input of that director on the various
public safety policy issues that we're grappling with and and so that's going
to be important to be collaborative and and also to bring an objective oh fact
I don't know how the time really goes by fast.
The objective fact-based perspective to things,
and let me just see if I haven't left anything out here.
And I also think in terms of likening it
to a political role,
somebody who has had to navigate a political environment
and has done so successfully,
somebody who understands the importance of relationships
as the director and not just with the council,
but other city staff, you know,
somebody who can work collaboratively
with the police chief, you know,
that's really what's required to be able to be independent,
but also just be able to understand
that this is an organization
with a lot of different people serving in it
and they need to learn how to navigate that,
and then there's gonna be tension in that naturally,
but to be able to do that in a respectful
and productive way is very important.
Thank you.
Thank you, thank you all so much for your thoughtful comments.
Council Member Taflin, did you have something you wanted to add?
Yes, thank you very much.
I just wanted to add very briefly,
in addition to all the political acumen
that this role requires.
I think it's important to recognize
that this is also a position for a city employee.
So having someone with experience leading a department,
managing a department budget,
especially in a public agency, non-academic institution,
non-nonprofit, but a public agency is really important.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
I know that my council member colleagues
on the subcommittee and I have already given
plenty of our opinions.
And so I did just wanna say thank you to everyone
who spoke and who shared their opinions and their thoughts.
I think that your feedback is really, really important.
And I also wanna let you know that this really mirrors
what we heard a lot in the community meeting as well.
So just so folks know, like that gives me
a really strong sense that we are very aligned
on like the kind of person we're looking for
and the kind of skills that we want them to have
and abilities and also what we see
as areas of challenge and opportunity.
And just so my fellow council members know too,
we had folks there who have been very supportive
of the ODPA position, folks who have been more critical.
We had folks, we had the BPA president when he was there.
We also had former members of the PRC, let me think,
and then folks online, you know,
from League of Women Voters, and yeah,
so I just wanted to let folks know,
I really felt that there was a good representation
of folks from different perspectives,
and that our consultant has done a really excellent job
leading those conversations,
and also making sure that we're moving through this process.
So speaking of, Lauren, I'm gonna pass it back to you,
and if there's anything else you wanna say,
and if you could also just walk us through
kind of what the next steps are
so that folks know what to look forward to going forward.
Absolutely, thank you, Mary Ishii.
I have appreciated hearing from all of you.
This is very helpful and I do wanna echo what the mayor said
that it's very encouraging to see
that there's so much alignment
between what you all and the council are looking for
and what your community members
have said they're looking for.
That's encouraging for me
both going out there and looking for candidates
and that's also encouraging to candidates
who are interested in the role
who can get a clear sense of what they might be
looking at stepping into a role like this.
So that is very encouraging.
So I'm gonna stop sharing my screen
so that I can see the other things
that I have pulled up for you.
I do wanna walk you through kind of where we are headed next.
So as I mentioned, we have been spending time
doing a lot of community engagement early on in the process.
And at this stage, we have scheduled interviews
for an initial round of virtual interviews
that'll be the candidate's first opportunity,
top candidates to interview on July 17th.
That will be the subcommittee we'll meet prior to that
and put forward a group of candidates to those interviews.
The makeup of the participation in those interviews
is still being finalized,
but will involve community members as well as the PAB.
And finalist candidates selected by the subcommittee to move forward from those interviews will be put forward to a closed session interview with all of you at the end of July, we are currently finalizing that date.
And I believe that we are close, so stay tuned for for that date, but that's kind of where we are.
and from there I will be working through the mayor's office to finalize processes with
your select candidate.
Hopefully the outcome of the interview with the full council is that you'll arrive at
a candidate you'd like to make an offer to, and I will assist in that process and work
through the mayor's office and your city attorney, et cetera.
So that's where we are.
Currently the recruitment has recently been opened.
we are taking applications. It will remain open until at least June 24th. It's a national search,
as you might have guessed, and we do a pretty robust outreach campaign. Currently, we have
44 applicants for the role, and I would say there are some very interesting folks in there. I
definitely think that there are some strong contenders in the mix, and so I am encouraged
and optimistic about the candidate pool so far and that is where we are at the moment.
I would love to know if any of you have questions about the process.
Any other questions for my CASL colleagues?
I am not seeing any questions.
Okay, and then I did want folks to know that Lauren is also basically doing the same process
and we have a great link to
that right now.
We're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
conversation with our staff
and we're going to be having a
in the past we had also talked about making sure that we have a full PAB. I think that we only have
two vacancies right now and I think those of us who have vacancies actually there our folks are
already in the process but they need to go through background checks and paperwork etc and so
those should hopefully be coming on soon and so I just wanted to let folks know about that because
that is really important, Lauren, for the person to know that they will have a full
PAB to work with because before we had many vacancies. And then I have been
meeting basically weekly every week or one and a half weeks or so with our
Interim Director of Peace Accountability so just so folks are aware of that and
they're working with her very closely on the budget process and checking in to
see if she needs anything administratively. And then the PAB
regulations was also brought up so I did just want to mention before I forget
that that is also moving through I think that there's just one issue that's
remaining and I know it's very challenging because there are so many
folks in those meetings to to get internal alignment but we are moving
forward with that as well so just to give you all some updates and that's
also important Lauren because those PAB regulations I think having those
settled before the new person comes in or very soon after will make their job
easier and have they'll have more clarity in the work that that they'll be doing and how to do it so
just wanted to share that with everyone. Okay I think that that is it for this item so thank
you so much Lauren thank you for being here so late in the evening and we will be in touch with
you soon. All right thank you so much mayor and thank you to the council it's been great meeting
you all and like I said I look forward to meeting you all in person when I'm done there for interviews.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay so we did move item 28 to the June to the
meeting on the 16th but usually what I do is if there's comments on the CIP
an item that we removed I just want to see if anyone has any public comment on
that. Anyone online? Oh, sorry. There's one commenter online. Yes, the Fogle. I just suppose we also didn't take public comment on the item previous. Yeah, this. So this is for public comment director, please. Accountability. We should take that first. Okay. Kathy Fogle. I wanted to speak to the CIP. So we'll come back to you.
Cathy, I'm sorry about that.
No worries.
I don't see any hands raised for the director.
Okay.
Okay.
Please, accountability.
Thank you.
So we'll go back to Cathy then for comment on CIP.
Am I?
Yep, go ahead.
Oh, you can hear me.
Okay. Yes.
Great.
Hi, my name's Cathy Fogel and I live on McGee Avenue.
McGee Avenue between Cedar and Rose Street
is a failed street.
Four years ago, the street had a paving condition index of 11.
Now it's probably a seven.
The street is dangerous.
It's rutted.
There's dirt and gravel everywhere.
Bike riders can't use it.
My neighbor's car's dash cam switches to emergency mode
when she drives here.
The road is so bumpy and uneven, her car
thinks she's in an accident.
Street sweeping doesn't clean the street.
It just raises up gravel and dust.
Fifty-four neighbors and I submitted a letter and photos of McGee Avenue for the intended agenda item. It's in your supplemental agenda. We'll resubmit it for the next meeting.
McGee Avenue is currently in staff's recommended 2027 to 32 five-year paving plan using measure FF funds, and funding for these streets is included in the capital improvement plan.
Please do not remove McGee Avenue from the final five year paving plan measure FF and CIP plans McGee Avenue desperately needs paving.
McGee Avenue is included by staff in the five year plan because of need some streets need to be prioritized simply because of need McGee Avenue is one of those streets please help us and ensure that it can be paved. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Kathy.
Anyone else wanna comment on item 28,
which is the CIP, the Capital Improvement Program?
We won't be hearing that item this evening,
but if folks are on still,
I wanna give them an opportunity to comment.
Okay.
I think that's it then.
Is there any other public comment
for items not listed on the agenda?
Yes.
As the commissions are beginning to go hybrid,
my understanding is they will not be posted,
but the staff's secretary can receive requests
for the recording.
I really, if there's any way that the website can manage it,
it's more transparent to post it.
People may wanna listen to meetings,
because they're otherwise engaged at that time.
And once you have a controversial issue,
do you really want to take up that much staff time
with the number of requests that can go
to a staff secretary asking for the recording?
It just seems as if it would be much more efficient
to just post those recordings so that people can go back
and listen to meetings on issues that they're interested in.
Thank you.
Carol, Carol, thank you.
I mean, we talked about this
that the land is committee meeting, remember?
That's actually not correct information.
Well, the city clerk's office said that.
Okay, sorry, Carol, we're not gonna have a back and forth,
but is there anything you wanted to add to that just?
The meetings will be posted.
Yeah, okay, so, and, okay.
Is there any other public comment
for items not listed on the agenda?
There's two hands raised.
First is Kelvin Ward for non-agenda public comment.
Yes, thank you. My name is Calvin Ward. I'm a community organizer with live live free California and I wanted to to show my support for continued funding for the Berkeley's community violence intervention program.
So when we talk about public safety, I realize,
I think a lot of us realize that we have to invest
in what's actually working.
This program has helped to save lives,
interrupt cycles of violence and create pathways
to healing and stability for individuals and families
most impacted by gun violence.
The results speak for themselves.
We've seen significant reductions in violence
and homicides in the Berkeley area.
And so I respectfully urge the Berkeley City Council
to continue funding this proven strategy
and demonstrate that community-based solutions
remain a priority.
Public safety is strongest when communities
and government work together to save lives.
Thank you.
Thank you, Calvin.
Collar with a phone number ending in 2-1-1.
As far as the parking problem,
I recommend strongly using bus number 16,
and 65 for anybody living in Kensington,
like I do, for Berkeley Health.
It takes 10 minutes to go any place, safe, and quick.
And if you're in the parking lot,
there was an automatic referred to group language,
including Hebrew, Arabic, and does not include Yiddish.
Yiddish is European language.
By the way, John Hopkins, in the first field of work,
and Israelis.
Israelis came 0% to 2%.
Also, Al-Qazar, they come from Central Europe, Ukraine,
and so on.
Palestinians came 78%.
Well, the same people.
We never have a choice when it comes to this horrible Earth.
So let us pray for bits.
Let us think.
Thank you, and great, have a good night.
You had very good meeting tonight.
Good night.
Thank you.
Last is Kelly.
Can you hear me.
Yes.
Okay.
As far as the Zoom recordings of the meetings,
those are not available unless they are requested.
I have been requesting them so that I can watch the Zoom recording.
There still are some problems with commissions that do
not record their meeting and that would be the hack.
I requested the recording from the HAC meeting and they evidently didn't do it.
I was able to get the recording from the planning commission and I was able to get
the recording from the Landmarks Preservation Commission.
So this is inconsistent.
It's also inconsistent in terms of being able to save
the Zoom transcript during the meeting.
And I would like to see this made consistent
across all boards and commissions
that the Zoom recording is saved
and that it is available for the time
that you defined in your ordinance
and that the transcript is always available
to be recorded during the meeting
if someone so chooses to do so.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else have public comment
for items not listed on the agenda?
Nope.
Okay, is there a motion to adjourn?
So moved.
Can we take the roll on that please?
Okay, to adjourn the meeting.
Council Member Kessarwani, she's gone.
Taplin?
Verily, aye.
Bartlett?
Yes.
Tragob?
Aye.
O'Keeffe?
Yes.
Blackaby?
Yes.
Unapara?
Yes.
Humber?
Yes.
Yes. Okay. The meeting is adjourned. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you all so much.
Recording stopped.