Okay, hello everyone, good evening.

I'm calling to order the special meeting of the Berkeley City Council today is Tuesday, December 2nd, 2025.

Already, can you believe it?

Um, Clerk, could you please start with a roll?

Okay.

Councilmember Kessarwani.

Here.

Taplin here.

Councilmember Bartlett is absent.

Trega.

Okay.

Munapara is currently absent.

Humbert here.

And Mayor Ishi.

Here.

Okay.

Quorum is present.

Very good.

There is a supplemental on our on the dice here, folks, and we need to vote to add it.

Is there a motion to do so?

So moved.

Second.

Okay.

And is there any objection?

No.

Okay.

There's no objection.

No, all right.

Very good.

Motion passed.

We will add the supplemental.

Very good.

Okay, so on our action calendar.

Very exciting.

So I'm very excited for this special session.

Infrastructure is one of my top priorities, and it's something that we just don't get a chance to talk about enough.

This isn't about just the streets and sidewalks.

It's also about our sewers and storm drains, parks and playgrounds, pools and piers, old city hall and veterans building, places that really should be community gathering spaces that fill us with pride, but instead are decaying, unfortunately, before our eyes.

We hear you to the many community members who regularly advocate for better infrastructure in one way or another.

My council colleagues and I know that this is an issue that impacts all of us.

Upon taking office a year ago, I was well aware of the Vision 2050 framework for a sustainable and resilient infrastructure passed in 2020.

And it was also apparent that many things had changed since its passage.

The elevated threat of wildfire and other climate-related issues, the effects on the economy from the pandemic, shifts in federal policies on inflation and tariffs, the passage of Measure FF for safe streets and sidewalks, just to name a few.

Berkeley still has more than one billion dollars, one billion dollars with a B in unfunded infrastructure needs and our challenges from climate change, including sea level rise, are only increasing our needs.

Due to these changes and the significant gap in resources, I reconvened the Mayor's Vision 2050 task force to update the report and refresh the recommendations.

Ray Yep and Margot Schuler, both of whom have decades of experience in infrastructure and have worked for over a decade as volunteers.

Far over a decade, I should say, dedicated to improving Berkeley's infrastructure, served as co-chairs, providing leadership and continuity, along with many other former and current task force members, many of whom are today.

Thank you all for being here.

The task force met several times during this year and produced a concise update to Vision 2050, which they're calling Realize Vision 2050, and recommendations to address Berkeley's infrastructure.

These recommendations are comprehensive and include considerations on integrated planning, using new technologies, improving maintenance, providing new funding to address needs, and better engagement with the public.

Something that matters a lot to me.

They helped organize a very impressive team of resident experts and produce the important report in your packet tonight.

So council members.

If you could all stand, we want to acknowledge you.

Thank you all so much.

We really appreciate all the work that you do.

Um Berkeley is filled with amazing residents who have so much knowledge and information, and it's really uh such a joy that we get a chance to pull together a bunch of experts to to learn more from you.

So thank you so much.

And I'll invite Margot and Ray to say a few words.

Uh Mayor Ishii and distinguished council members.

Uh my name is Ray Yep.

I had the privilege of co-chairing the original Vision 2050 initiative back more than five years ago, along with Margot, my colleague here co-chairing that.

I'd like to tell you that the second time around is way better than first time.

And it's a privilege to have that opportunity to review what we've done and to make improvements.

So here's at least three reasons why it's way better.

Number one, the word realize.

So we call it the Realize Vision 2050 Initiative, the Realize Vision 2050 task force.

Realize means we're here to get things done.

We're here to take action.

And we follow that direction from Mayor Ishii.

And uh, so we're here to get things done.

Uh that's an important word.

Second reason the report is only eight pages long.

You only have to read eight pages, but those eight pages are golden.

So we also took initiative to not prepare a very lengthy report, make it concise, make it actionable.

So in those eight pages are five strategies, along with goals, action items, and performance measures.

You can get everything you need out of those eight pages.

Third reason is we got it done in six months.

We start it in March and delivered the report in October.

And so realize how urgent it is to address our infrastructure.

We took that to heart and made it an urgent effort to work with such distinguished and qualified members as these to get it done with some urgency and to deliver it in October that we did.

We thank you for the opportunity, Mayor Ishii, to serve on this task force.

I thank uh Margot to be co-chair with myself, and also thank the task force members, many of who are here, some who couldn't be here, for their experience and their time and their dedication to the city of Berkeley.

Appreciate it.

And I also want to thank you all and my colleagues, and um urge the city and the staff and the elected officials to really dig into those eight pages, go back to the 2020 report for all the background information for those of you who weren't involved at that time, and um and make that the basis of your upcoming really serious funding and policy and project decision making.

Um, and again, integration with nature, integration with innovation.

The climate is changing fast, and unless we change our infrastructure, we're gonna be stuck with what we've got for the next hundred years, and it won't work.

So looking forward to watch the changes.

Thank you.

Thank you again, Ray and Marg.

I really appreciate all of your work and your effort and wrangling all the cats.

It's always a big task to do that.

So, and thank you all so much, really appreciate it.

And I know you're looking forward to the the next item, so I'll move us over to item number two.

Um, I really also want to appreciate the great work that city staff do every day to maintain and improve our beloved community assets with the limited resources that they have.

Um, and I I think one of the things that's most impressive and exciting about the city manager's report um is the leveraging with previous measures, T1, uh O, U1, etc.

And measure FF is also now being collected for street sidewalks and safety.

So really just want to call that out and appreciate the city staff for doing the work of leveraging and also just for the voters for approving these items because um again, like infrastructure is something that we don't get a chance to talk about enough.

Um, and this is really our opportunity to highlight and say, like, look, we've done all this great work, and we also have a lot of need.

Um so I'm gonna turn it over to our city manager and to our city staff.

Um, and I I realize also I I neglected to thank Terrence Davis, who also joined us for the last couple of meetings for our vision uh 2050 task force.

So thank you very much for that as well.

Thank you, Mayor Ishii.

We have staff coming to the table now to go through a presentation for you.

I think uh assistant to the city manager, and Dondo is going to set up the presentation, so I'll just start talking while she's getting it set up to say that uh we're excited to be before you tonight.

Um, as was just mentioned in the previous item, there's a lot of deferred maintenance on infrastructure.

There's a lot of uh needs for fixing, uh replacing, rebuilding, creating infrastructure in the city.

Um, and there has been a lot of good work that has been done in the past in that regard as well.

So we want to acknowledge and honor that as well.

Um, you can go to the next slide.

So I want to just I'll just walk you through a little bit of what the agenda is before you tonight.

I won't read through all of this, but we will start off with more of that context and background, talk a little bit about a potential community survey for which we've already done an RFP.

Um, and then the um uh a big part of this is looking at potential infrastructure items for your consideration in a potential 300 million dollar general obligation bond.

So you'll see in your packet that you have at the end a list of projects that fall into three buckets.

One is critical infrastructure, another is public safety, and the third is community facilities and quality of life.

Um, we spent a lot of work as staff putting that together and uh our team will go through that finally, uh, not finally, but we also will talk a little bit about the um the geobond analysis, both from the perspective of a little background on what a bond is, we'll go through some potential tax rate implications.

We'll talk through timelines and then leave you all with some questions to consider, and we very much look forward to to the discussion and direction from you all uh regarding this.

We have a terrific group of staff who are going to present tonight.

Um Deputy City Manager David White, assistant to the city manager Kerry Arundando, um, our parks director Scott Ferris is several people will be online, and that's Parks Director Scott Ferris, Public Works Director Terrence Davis, our finance director, Henry Oyakami, uh, and our fire chief David Sprague, as well as our uh municipal advisor from NHA, Craig Hill.

So all those folks are gonna be online, they'll all have a piece of this presentation, they'll all be available for questions at the end.

Um, and with that, I will hand it over to Deputy City Manager David White.

Thank you, City Manager, and good evening, Mayor and City Council.

Uh, as our city manager mentioned, I'm David White, your deputy city manager.

And as the mayor well stated just a few moments ago, the city has significant unfunded infrastructure needs, more than a billion dollars.

And today's discussion is all about setting the stage to seek your direction on moving forward to determine the feasibility in pursuing a revenue measure in 2026 to generate much needed resources to invest in our infrastructure.

More specifically, as we move through this presentation, we'll be discussing a variety of projects to apply to a general obligation bond in an amount up to 300 million dollars.

In the past, Berkeley voters have approved several bond measures, and with those resources, the city has been able to modernize numerous facilities, increase the supply of affordable housing, address deferred maintenance needs, invest in street improvements and green infrastructure for a more sustainable and resilient future, and overall improve the community's quality of life.

We are going to definitely touch on all of this tonight at a high level.

In addition to the bond measures that have been adopted, there have been several parcel taxes that have been adopted as well.

Measure FF in 2020 and 2024, measure P in 2018 and 2024, and an increase to the parks tax.

That was Measure Y in 2024.

And all these have enabled the city to strengthen its emergency response, expand programs and services to expand housing opportunities and address homelessness, maintain our cherished parks and open spaces, and continue to make safety improvements to our road network and pedestrian paths to achieve our Vision Zero objectives.

As we look to the future, we are cognizant that we are cognizant that to address our infrastructure needs, we need a focused, coordinated approach, and the work of the Vision 2050 Task Force provides this guidance, along with further affirmation that to the need to evaluate the potential for a bond measure in 2026.

So, how will we gather community input?

As indicated in the staff report, we intend to launch a community engagement process in early 2026.

And while the details are still being worked out, this will be an opportunity to hear about community priorities.

In addition to that, we would like to implement one, if not two, community surveys that would be designed to gather the input of Berkeley voters.

This slide in front of you provides some of the details, including trying to connect with 500 likely November 2026 voters.

The survey itself would be designed to gauge voter sentiment about city services and to understand the priorities and potential support for a bond measure on the November 2026 ballot.

Should the City Council authorize us to proceed.

Once the survey is completed, we would return to City Council with the results over the survey.

So what have we done with resources that voters have adopted in the past?

This slide and the slide that follows highlights just some of the improvements that we as a city have been able to achieve with previous bond measures and parcel taxes adopted by Berkeley voters.

But this and the slide that follows provides a high-level overview of investments made throughout the totality of the community.

This particular slide highlights the recently completed Willard Clubhouse, upgrades to the Rose Garden, revitalized North Berkeley Senior Services Center, and new affordable housing opportunities.

The next slide builds on the previous slide and demonstrates public safety enhancements and the work we have done to address homelessness with adopted parcel taxes.

Also, a couple of green infrastructure projects that have been implemented are also noted for you.

Given the city's infrastructure needs and that existing bond measures have largely been exhausted, we spent some time developing a proposed list of projects for city council's consideration.

These projects in detail are listed in the staff report as attachment five.

In developing the list of projects, we look to a number of criteria summarized on this slide, including public health and safety, community use and equity, as well as external funding opportunities, which means that should a bond measure be successful, similar to all of our past work, we would look to leverage these resources and funds such that the investment in the community would likely exceed the $300 million raise through the proposed bond.

Finally, it is worth noting that the criteria that we developed to develop this list of projects is harmonious with the Vision 2050 task force.

What ultimately resulted from our work to develop a list of proposed projects for city council consideration is a logical grouping of projects into three categories.

Community facilities and quality of life, public safety, and critical infrastructure and accessibility.

Each category roughly consists of numerous projects that roughly totals 100 million dollars.

And now I would like to transition to a more detailed discussion of each of the categories and the projects that are proposed.

We're going to start with our director of parks recreation and waterfront, Scott Ferris to discuss community facilities, then we'll transition to our fire chief, who will discuss projects proposed under the public safety category.

And finally, our director of public works, Terrence Davis will discuss the projects that comprise the critical infrastructure and accessibility category.

Okay, well, perhaps our director of public works is having some trouble connecting, so I'll just pick up from here and then transition to our fire chief.

So in looking at these projects, what we tried to accomplish was really looking at a number of different important community investments.

So as you can see on the slide for you can go back two slides.

Thank you.

First of all, we looked at upgrading our Francis Albiar Community Center.

This is a much needed improvement to this facility in our community.

We looked at a high-use pool, which is King Pool and Locker Room, an upgrade to the turf at Harrison Field, which is critical because this will allow the field to be used year-round 365 days a year, as well as lighting and improvements to LIVO CORTS, San Pablo Sports Field, as well as we hear overwhelmingly about the need for enhanced and increased number of dog parks throughout the city.

And then there are also important park restroom upgrades throughout various parks throughout the city.

In addition to that, we looked at upgrading our open spaces as well as addressing a number of projects to address issues of resilience and sea level rise.

And this slide highlights just some of the projects that we put into that bucket and category.

The Adeline Quarter open space improvements, aquatic park, which would include improvements to Dreamland Park.

Scratch on now.

I can keep rolling.

Yeah.

As well as you can see a number of other improvements down in the marina.

A couple of projects I want to point out that are specifically designed to address sea level rise, which is the Bay Trail Marina Boulevard, as well as University Avenue Bike Park, which we anticipate will be incredibly well received.

And all the details of these projects are in the packet for council.

So now we'll turn it over to our fire chief to talk about the public safety category.

Good afternoon, Council and Mayor.

Today I want to briefly walk through the major capital projects proposed for the fire department.

These projects are rooted in the city's comprehensive fire facilities master plan completed in 2023.

That plan lays out the condition of all existing facilities and provides the city a long-term strategic roadmap for all the needed reinvestment in these critical uh pieces of infrastructure.

Most of Berkeley's stations were built in the 60s and have received partial seismic upgrades in the 1990s.

While those efforts were important at the time, our stations are now no longer meeting current health, safety, and operational standards.

They're not designed for a modern emergency response system, nor for the demands placed on firefighters, paramedics, or uh the community.

We now have conceptual designs for all our fire stations that was completed in the fire facilities master planning process.

And the need to begin with these four projects is important as it's going to take approximately 10 to 20 years to complete all nine projects in the fire facilities master plan.

This means every year we delay, we push the entire sequence of projects further into the future.

So to review the four projects before you fire station four at 1900 Marin requires a complete rebuild.

The fire EMS and community emergency response training center, currently located at 997 Cedar Street, is undersized, incapable of supporting modern training needs, and in the middle of a residential neighborhood, which is really problematic.

The city's emergency communication center at 2100 MLK, that's our 911 dispatch center.

That's the heart of all police fire and EMS dispatch operations.

And finally, the firehouse at station uh station six at 999 Cedar Street.

You'll note that uh for both the training center and fire station six, there's a note saying we hope to move this to the new fire headquarters facility.

And when the fire facilities master plan was complete, we didn't have that facility uh under construction.

So we're proposing that we uh do an analysis to actually modify uh and improve that facility and acquire the remaining third of that block to allow for both those facilities to exist there instead, which would then free up the Cedar Street facilities.

So replacing these facilities is essential to ensuring that Berkeley firefighters paramedics and dispatchers can continue to respond quickly, safely and effectively to the needs of our community.

This bond would allow the city to complete four of nine critical infrastructure projects, and we envision a second bond at some point in the future would allow us to complete the remaining five projects.

And I'll pass it off to Terrence.

Thank you, Chief.

Uh good late afternoon, Mayor, Council Community Terrence Davis, Director of Public Works.

And so in this last category or bucket, as the uh deputy city manager indicated, uh, for these public works projects, we really focused on uh improvements to the civic center, but also to accessibility uh to these kind of high use civic facilities.

And so these are not only modernization as I'll go through the list, but also really around accessibility and making critical improvements to activate some underused or um poorly used facilities just that don't have access because of uh their lack of modernization.

So this first group is um really what I would consider some of the first phase requirements of a uh civic center vision uh to really activate these three facilities that right now all lack uh adequate seismic upgrades.

So the uh Madel Sharec building, um, the um Veterans Memorial Building, and then also MLK Civic Center Annex, which is the building adjacent to 2180, um uh used as a um high need civic uh facility also houses our permit center, um, etc.

And so uh these projects would be for just bringing these uh three sites into um current seismic standard.

They're um all historic buildings and like that.

So uh that those resources would be used to bring those facilities into um compliance.

Uh the second list here is and there's some overlap between the facilities, but really modernization of these high-use civic facilities.

So again, um 2180, which is obviously a key building for city business, and you know, holds council offices and other key city offices.

Um in that building, frankly, just the interior and the envelope of that building require some modernization and some upgrades.

Um, many folks who are occupants in that building know we've recently done some issue uh improvements around our water system and also around uh the paint in the facility.

So more of those facilities in terms of investing in the plumbing, electrical, and other building systems to really bring that system to standard.

Excuse me, that building to standard.

Uh similarly, the public safety center has um is an aging facility, some of the finishes, some of the electrical HVAC of that facility also have been deferred for some time, and same case with the animal shelter and aging facility that through the years we've just um not made the adequate investments that we need.

So there's quite a bit of deferred maintenance there, very similar in terms of um drainage improvements, HVAC lighting, um, etc.

So really just some modernizations to make those facilities uh to bring them uh up to current standards and really make them uh the shiny examples of our community service that we think is so important.

So next is really focusing on our ADA and accessibility programs, two categories here.

So these are the most of these projects come from either existing customer demand.

So I'll talk about the 50-50 uh program um second, but the ADA accessibility improvements, these are citywide improvements to civic facilities, and these are derived from the city's ADA transition plan, and that consists of um the city did a complete assessment of all of its facilities and right away through that process, it did a very careful cataloging of all of the uh what we would call barriers, and those are anything in the either right-away or in our facilities that do not meet ADA standards.

And so that deferred list totals about 48 million dollars of improvements that need to be made in our right-of-way and also uh in our facilities to bring those uh facilities to ADA code and also just really improve and increase accessibility for all of our community members.

The second is the city's 50-50 program, which is our partnership with community members and part and property owners who can do some cost share with the city to do repairs in front of their properties to bring to alleviate any trip fall or other disrepair in the sidewalks, and that program right now has a pretty significant backlog.

The city um, you know, has invested in that program over the years, but through our CIP program, but ultimately we haven't been able to keep up with the demand.

There's uh quite a few that sit in queue now, so there's very high demand, but the city's match is not available to really accelerate that program, and this is uh what we think is a very um good way to make some very quick improvements throughout the city for a program that has demonstrated demand and success, but just unfortunately lacks all of the resources necessary to complete all of the projects.

And with that, I think I'll turn it back to Deputy City Manager White.

Thank you, Terrence.

I appreciate it.

And so now I want to talk about um the money side of things.

How do we achieve these visions and these projects?

And so, as we've talked about on a couple of occasions this evening, we want to talk about the opportunity to uh put a general obligation bond onto the November 2026 ballot.

And so, what this slide really is trying to do at a high level is just really call out um sort of the fundamentals of a GO bond, and I know council is well familiar with this, so I won't spend too much time on this, but just try to call out um a few different of the bullet points on this slide that I think are uh particularly pertinent and relevant, particularly to the next slide that we'll get to in a moment.

So, first of all, the costs um are based on the assessed value of a property.

Um, importantly, uh, in order to pass a general obligation bond, it requires two-thirds of voter approval, and they're typically repaid over about a 30-year time frame.

What they can be used for is specific.

Um, they can be used for major capital improvements, and in the far right-hand column of the slide in front of you, you can see a very a high level list of the types of projects that a geo bond can support, and they cannot be used to support regular maintenance needs that we have as a city.

They have to go into capital projects.

So the next slide, and what this slide is really designed uh to help us understand is what a proposed general obligation bond would mean for taxpayers with this following key assumption that we issue 100 million dollars is issued every five years, and that issuance commences in 2027.

And this slide really does two things uh for you.

First, it provides a historical view of tax rates associated with general obligation bonds previously approved, and secondly, it provides a prospective view of a proposed 300 million general obligation bond that we are discussing this evening, with come when combined with bonds that have already been authorized.

So, when combined with existing authorizations, a new 300 million dollar general obligation bond, assuming again 100 million dollars issued every five years, is estimated to require an average tax rate over 40 years of 0.0441% or roughly 44 per 100,000 in assessed value.

Based on the median assessed value for a home in Berkeley today, that would translate to an average tax rate of roughly 242 dollars per year.

I would also note the following.

This figure indicates that the resulting projected average tax rate, when combined with existing authorizations from 2027 to 2067, is less than the historical average tax rate from existing authorizations until they are anticipated to be paid off.

And that's the time frame 1993 to 2056.

Also, this figure demonstrates that the combined average tax rate for the new 300 million dollar general obligation bond plus existing authorizations is less than the tax rate in the late 1990s and early 2000s when initial bonds were issued.

All of this to say that what is being proposed is well within the range of historical tax rates that the Berkeley community has experienced.

So lastly, I just want to talk about uh the timeline of what uh is in front of you.

So tonight, obviously, we're here with the initial work session to get input and feedback from the council.

In January of 2026, I mentioned we want to initiate and launch a community engagement process.

And then depending upon the feedback we receive tonight, we've held this site potentially coming back to the city council towards the end of January in another work session.

Again, that's if needed and necessary.

With the feedback we received tonight, uh, our intention would be to start development of the community survey as soon as possible.

If we can get the consultant on board, we'd start that in January.

Because council may likely have to approve that contract, that work would begin in February.

In March, we would like to come back to you with the first results of that initial survey.

And then depending upon what are the results of that survey and the feedback we get from council, we could envision doing a second survey in April of 2026, and coming back to you in May with the results of that second survey and additional feedback from council.

And assuming that all goes well, we'd be seeking specific council direction in June to start drafting ballot language, all of which has to get done and submitted to the county by no later than August 7, 2026.

We obviously would like to get this done within the time frames the council meets.

So July 28th would be the last meeting of council when we would seek final adoption if necessary.

So that's the totality of our presentation for you this evening.

We're certainly available and looking forward to the discussion and questions from council.

Um, in this next slide, we did prepare some specific questions that we would like to uh garner uh feedback on.

So the first question is whether or not we should proceed with a community survey.

We would like council feedback on that and certainly any input and feedback of what should be in that survey that we may not be including at the moment.

And then as it pertains to the specific geo bond, a number of very specific questions that we can come back to.

Does the city council wish to explore a bond measure for infrastructure improvements?

If so, is city council supportive of evaluating an amount up to $300 million for inclusion in the survey.

Are there any additional projects that staff should evaluate and consider adding to the proposed list of projects?

And then on the flip side, are there any projects that should be removed from the proposed list?

So with that, I'll turn it back to you, Mayor.

Thank you very much.

What I want to do is start with questions from council and then do public comment and then um have us come back for council comments as well.

And thank you.

And then I'll ask you probably to pull up that slide again so we can make sure we answer those questions.

Um, thank you so much for to staff for just all of your work in putting this together.

Um I really appreciate it.

And um I'm gonna see if any of my council colleagues have questions.

Uh yes, council member Humbert.

Wow.

Thank you, madam mayor.

It's hard to believe I'm the first one to click.

Um, really, I just have one question, and I have a number of comments, but I just have one question about the community survey.

Um, would any any thought be given to asking the community about a range of amounts?

In other words, we're talking here about 300 million.

Would would it make sense to ask the community about lower amounts or even higher amounts?

It absolutely would, and that would be part of the process because we'd want to understand um what voter support is at that level, and then understand because it could be that there isn't support, and we'd want to understand what the threshold is lower.

Um, if there's direction to look higher, we could do that as well.

Okay, questions next from Councilmember Blackaby.

Thanks, Madam Mayor, and thanks to the staff for putting together this wonderful presentation and to the Vision 2050 team as well for coming with the framework that helps us evaluate this.

I uh a couple questions.

One is just stepping back one more level, and the mayor referenced it earlier, which is we've got this billion dollar plus you know, infrastructure backlog that's accumulated over time.

Um, and I I like a lot of the benchmarking in here about the tax rate.

What I'm interested is um how do we kind of benchmark the one billion dollar goal for a city of our size?

And you know, I know it's impractical, impossible, we would never drive that to zero.

It doesn't make sense to spend and drive our infrastructure backlog to zero.

Um, but one other kind of at least reference point for me in terms of how big the bond should be, or this and the next bond is what's our goal for what we want to take our backlog down to and is that the right way to think about it.

It's the way I'm thinking about it, but is that is that the right way we should think about it?

Because if we do this 300 uh million dollar bond, we've got a billion dollar infrastructure backlog now, you know, we'll accrue more infrastructure over that time period.

So, you know, is there a way to think about that, benchmark that to other cities?

What should the goal be?

I know it's a kind of a big question, but that's something I'm kind of wrestling with as I'm thinking about this.

I would like to see if our public works director has any thoughts on that one, Terrence.

Yeah, it's a it council member.

It's a great question.

Certainly we can benchmark in terms of looking at other uh municipalities in terms of what their general backlog or unfunded liabilities are and see kind of where we compare and use that as a metric.

I I don't know that we can pursue investments in capital in that way directly, and that part of the problem we'll continue to run into is that billion dollar number as we is very difficult for us to project out into the out years given all the variability around construction pricing and up, you know, materials pricing and prioritizations that shift.

So I think it'd be very difficult to chase that into the future.

I do believe that the strategy we're taking around kind of prioritization of categories of projects is important, and then measuring that over time.

And we can certainly kind of try to project out um beyond a five-year look or beyond even a seven-year look, but it if we try to get too far out, I think that that number becomes very kind of amorphous and very difficult in my experience for us to really make it real.

So we would just be pursuing this number that's kind of floating out there and morphing and changing and very difficult to predict predict.

Okay.

I appreciate that.

And then I I think I I tend to agree that uh the more tangible projects anyway are the things that are gonna uh make voters stand up and say, hey, this is something worth doing or not.

It's not, you know, people don't vote based on uh uh getting a billion down to 800 million, like that doesn't inspire much uh participation.

But it is an interesting context.

Uh at least I think it may give voters some confidence that we are on the right track or that we have kind of a that this fits into sort of a big picture strategy, or that how we kind of shape up with, you know, are the are we a little bit behind or we a little bit ahead in terms of these sort of obligations?

So anyway, I I know we don't have necessarily the answer tonight, but I would love to continue that part of the conversation at some point.

I don't think that's the big driver, but I'm I'm interested in that.

Um, and the second thing on the tax rate, the bond analysis, um, and I see Gordon in the audience, and we had a similar conversation to this over coffee a few weeks ago, but um looking at the total um kind of annual payment, and let me see what I don't know what slide that is, but the big the chart that had all the years, um, and note that this talks this this is basically talking about the um uh the debt service piece to the taxpayer, um, um and looking at how if we add the 300 million dollars of bonds in five-year tranches, what this will do to the kind of average tax rate, which is useful.

Um, I do I did find in the staff report um when we looked at the total tax bill to be really instructive, because I I do think that most people, at least the folks I talked to in my district about these sorts of issues, don't necessarily discern between the debt service part versus the parcel tax part versus the school district's part versus the counties part.

They just look at the total number at the bottom.

And so um I do think that like this is I mean, this does tell us that we've probably under-leveraged our bond capacity over time.

So there's more room.

Um, but I'll say I think most voters won't just think about it from this perspective.

Um, because one thing this probably doesn't show maybe is what has actually happened with parcel taxes since the 90s until now, which in my presumption, not seeing the data is we probably have more parcel taxes now than we did back then.

Um so anyway, so I just again I also would love to see some of this that looks at the total kind of average tax payment for a resident and also a business for that matter, um, over time.

Because again, I just think that context is gonna be really useful as we try and communicate this.

Um anyway, that's I think that's it for my questions now.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Councilmember Lunopara.

Thank you.

I have two questions.

Um I'm curious if these surveys typically include the other measures that are likely or confirmed to be on the ballot, measures that are not proposed by council, like voter initiatives or regional measures to kind of gauge voter fatigue.

Uh it would it is not standard that we would include other tax measures, whether they're citizen related, um, to be on our community survey, but it would be very typical if there were other measures that the council wanted to advance that we would include those as well in the community survey.

I guess I meant more um questions such as if this if these are the things on the ballot, would you still vote for this bond measure?

You know, I when you frame it that way, I do think that's something I'd want to bring back to our consultant because I think it is important that we'd want to um explore whether or not the cumulative effect of measures that we are aware of could impact someone's ability to vote on something.

So that's feedback I would want to bring back to the consultant to see how we could integrate that.

Okay, great, thank you.

Um, and my other question is about old city hall.

I might have missed it, but I didn't see it on the list of projects, and I'm curious if there's a reason why, or if I just missed it.

Which one?

Old City Hall.

So uh that did show up on there.

Uh it's only a piece of the project, which is where we refer to the Maddell Chirec building where we're uh talking about investing in um seismic improvements into that facility.

Okay, thank you.

That's it.

Thank you.

Okay, Councilmember Traga.

Thank you so much.

Uh I think some of the questions I had um may have been uh partially answered.

Um I wanted to ask this in a different way.

Um, so the um I appreciate your historical representation of um the projected average tax rate uh in relation to bonds.

Um I have um, you know, hard um it's actually interesting.

I recently uh received an analysis from the um our county tax assessor, um, in response to um some concerns that I think have been shared with the council as well of certain uh uh certain properties um having a property tax uh rate that seemed to um increase um pretty um dramatically um and it turned out that uh BCEPT and I think measure FF and one more were partially responsible for those increases.

Um there were some decreases as well.

Um so my question is um is there an opportunity um for the benefit of the council and maybe the public as well to do a representation of the overall tax um basis and uh how um not just the bonding um portions but uh parcel taxes as well.

Um and I I heard you I heard your answer to the previous question.

I was wondering if it was demarcated even just to city um city and BUSD based uh bonds and parcel taxes, if that is something that could be calculated as a historical average.

So I what we what we can do, and I want to bring it back to the team, but I think what we can do is in as council member Blackerby noted in the staff report, we did an analysis looking at the total tax bill.

So I think what we could hypothetically do is you know, assuming all else equal with partial taxes, and we could see what we could make assumptions around the school district and their uh indebtedness, but we could model out if these additional bonds were added, how would that impact the total tax?

But I think that's also what um was asked previously.

So I do believe that is something that we could make a set of assumptions and we could produce that and provide that information to the council um when you're evaluating this request.

I think that would be very valuable.

Um my other question um, well, my other two one was the uh within the um priorities that were um stated, uh was that basically the how you got to the 300 um million dollars, or were there um further priorities um within um the um my question is basically is what was presented um around the community facilities and quality of life, public safety and critical infrastructure and accessibility uh were those the types of projects that rose to the top as priorities or um were there further prioritization um that could be done uh within that list or needed to be done to get to the 300 million.

Um I guess I'll add a couple of things to in answer to your question.

So those are the the elements before you were also looked at in regards to the potential for them to have other funding associated with them, uh the um geographic dispersion throughout the city, um, health life safety concerns.

So we did use some of those envisioned criteria in coming up with the total um group that we put before you.

And it could definitely could be changed if you all have if there's projects, and that's one of the things we'd like to hear from you.

If there's infrastructure that you don't see on here that you feel like would be important to to include, or if there's something on here where you feel like maybe not, um it'd be good for us to get that direction and and thought from the council.

Thank you.

And then my last question was on the 50 50 uh sidewalk repair program.

Um what is the um current backlog?

I think somewhere I forward two and a half to three years.

Um, is it that is it longer?

Public works director Davis can opine on this more, but I will say that when we when we started going through this exercise of putting this all together, we had a lower amount for the backlog for 5050, and then we decided that you know what it's sufficiently important that why don't we just put the entire backlog on here so that if we were to fund this, and correct me if I'm wrong, Director Davis, if we were to fund uh the 50 50 program at the amount that we put in here that would cover the existing backlog.

Now, how long that would take is a different question, but but from a dollars and cents perspective.

And I'm sure Director Davis can add a little bit more to that.

Yes, city manager.

Um that is correct.

So that what's represented there is to fund the entire amount.

I do have uh both our city engineer and uh deputy um director should be in the room as well who can give you the specifics on the backlog amount.

I don't want to misspeak, but I know that somebody either on the the panel or uh Wahi may have that specific number.

Good evening, everyone.

Wahita Mir, Deputy Director for Public Works.

Uh currently we have approximately 1,100 locations that have been logged.

And to um Director Davis's uh feedback, the estimate that we provided would bring us fully uh compliant or remediate the issues up to 2025.

Uh that will clear out all of the backlogs and bring our uh sidewalks back to in the state of good repair, ADA compliant and so forth and so forth.

Uh thank you.

Is that your okay?

So um moving on to Councilmember Taplin.

Uh thank you, Madam Air, and thank you.

Uh Simon Rutenhagen, uh Director Sprague Davis and Ferris, Deputy Director White, Deputy Director Amiri and Kari and everybody.

Um I just have one question.

Um, will we be including the cities unions um in our community engagement?

In our community engagement as we move forward through this process?

Yes.

Yes, we will.

Well, we uh our intention is to have like a pretty robust community process, which would include talking with our labor partners as well.

Wonderful, thank you so much.

Thank you, Councilmember Kessarwani.

Thank you very much, Madam Mayor.

Uh thank you, uh Deputy City Manager White for the presentation.

Thank you to the Vision 2050 uh task force for being here and um and for all of your work um over many years, and thank you to the mayor for for reconvening that group and and having this time to talk about infrastructure.

So I I just wanted to.

Well, first I I know this is a question time, but I did want to just second something Council Member Humbert had said about um looking at a range.

So I am in support of the community survey.

I guess we're gonna do those comments later.

So I'll let me just um say that I I thought a range was um important.

And you know, I think um I appreciate getting all of the um the possible uh projects that could be funded.

Obviously, I assume we can't fund all of them for 300 million, so I think what would be helpful moving forward, and and I can say this as a question is you know, what are the highest priorities for repair?

For streets, we know that the longer we wait, the greater the cost is because you have to fully rebuild the street.

So I'm wondering, is there anything here that you know the longer we wait, the more costly it is, or um, you know, there there's a safety or health risk to the community.

I was thinking maybe of some of the climate resiliency work.

So I I think that would be helpful moving forward to get a sense of what should we be prioritizing of this long list, and then on I know sidewalk, the 50-50 sidewalk program is mentioned, and I do want us to be careful.

I have a question because I know measure FF provides funding for sidewalks at 15%, and I was just looking at the language there on our website.

It says 15% for sidewalks and pedestrian paths until the backlog of damage sidewalks and pedestrian paths is eliminated.

So I just want to be careful here.

Um I'm worried about putting sidewalks in here again when the voters just approved a significant parcel tax that a bit with a big piece of it being sidewalks.

I think we need to calculate, you know, how much are we gonna get from that?

How much will that go towards sidewalks, and is there any left over that we want to fund through this?

And I I'm kind of inclined to just not do it because we already did something focused on streets and sidewalks, but I think it's still worth the analysis.

And so I did have a question, um, sort of what um if we had thought about that when we put sidewalks in here, that what is it is it because we still believe that there's a need beyond the FF funding.

Oh, do it for Director Davis, you want to comment on that?

Sure, then uh yes, council member, we thought about that and did contemplate that there's some overlap, and we were very careful in proposing these projects with measure FF funding, having not been even deployed yet, and really having that resource for our um streets and sidewalks.

I will say that measure FF funding by formula is fairly limited, and so and we also have other accessibility and sidewalk improvement projects that we'd like to do around the city.

So this would be of another force multiplier.

But certainly, it was the council's prerogative to move away from 50 50 and just focus on other ADA barrier removers that are not currently funded.

We could certainly do that if that was uh the desire, or if it was uh uh interesting kind of um taking a look at what measure FF projected over the next few years would actually be able to accomplish in terms of funding that backlog.

But as you know, there's quite a bit of pressure on measure FF already as we contemplate the first you know couple rounds of projects, and so um it's it's very unlikely that with the the entirety of Measure FF sidewalk funding dedicated to 5050, we'd be very limited in doing other safety projects or making other improvements.

So, okay, I understand.

So I think that uh we may want to flesh that out more and get an understanding of how much can be done on the 50-50 program with the measure FF funding.

And then it sounds like you're talking about um you're talking about sidewalks, but some specific ADA upgrades.

So maybe that is slightly different.

So I don't want to take it off the table because I do think sidewalks are something everyone uses, and it's very important to have them be you know, walkable.

You know, people use walkers, they use mobility assistance devices, and they can't navigate our sidewalks right now because they're so bumpy.

So I think it's important.

I just I think we need to just be clear about what it is we want to do with this versus FF.

So that's why I wanted to ask that.

And then I I think Councilmember Treger was getting into this issue, and as was Council Member Blackaby, just the concept of like, well, how much is this really going to cost?

I know it's it's um it's complicated because there's there's certain older bonds that are expiring, and so you're saying when you say 44 per 100,000 of uh property value, that's everything, right?

That's that would be this bond plus all the other bonds, right?

Correct, that would be the average um over about a 40-year time frame.

Okay, so I and Councilmember Treger may have been asking this, like, so I think we have to think in the survey, I assume we're trying to get at voters' willingness to pay, right?

And so I think we need to be careful because this actually um could be a lot, right?

I mean, because a 1.5 million dollar home value, median home value, so this is over $500 right for that.

That sounds like a lot, but um, but I don't know if there's any way for us to think about well, how much is this?

If we don't do this in the absence of this, like sort of what is the the incremental cost of this, maybe that's what we would ask the voters.

I know we have time to develop the question, but um I I think we we just need to to clarify a bit.

I don't know how we've we've done this question in the past because I know we've we've polled for bonds in the past.

I'm not sure how exactly we get at you know, the the c the incremental cost of this one, yeah.

I'll have to take a look because we have, as you said, we have uh surveyed this in the past.

I'll take a look at that in terms of how we've talked about that incremental cost.

Okay, because I I think that's probably that's how I would think about it, you know, is as somebody who gets the privilege of paying that bill.

So um, so I think maybe that would make sense.

So I just wanted to ask you, but but for our purposes, okay.

So you're saying, and I think that I want to thank you for that chart.

As I had asked for us to have something like that, because it puts it in context of um sort of where we are and and where we have historically been with with uh paying down uh the uh the these bonds.

So that's all I have in terms of questions.

I kind of veered into comments, so thank you very much.

Just so we're clear, I want to make sure you said something about $500, council member uh, and then I think that you would say something about 242 or something.

I I just want to make sure I'm understanding the amount that voters might have to pay for homeowners might have to pay for.

So the figure I uh provided was based on the median assessed value for a home.

Um so when you know the assessed value will range from folks who've owned a home for many, many years and have a low basis to someone who just bought a home.

So the obviously the actual amount will vary widely based on what is someone's actual assessed value.

The figure I quoted was just based on looking at the median assessed value for the totality of the city.

And what was that?

550,000.

550,000.

That's the median.

Yeah, all right.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

No, I appreciate the numbers.

I know.

Gosh, I don't have anyway.

Um, so I I have some questions.

I know everyone's now thinking about their property tax bill.

Um, could you speak a little bit more about uh the community engagement that you're hoping to do in January?

So we have not fully developed it, but we've talked about wanting to speak to specific commissions, and so you know, like I said, we just haven't fully put all the meat on the bones yet, but yeah, since we want to try to do some engagement, use our commissions and try to just get out there and hear from the community outside of a survey.

Um, what are their perspective on these proposals, the projects, uh, etc.?

Got it.

Okay, great.

And um, could we also make sure that the RFP gets the firms?

I know you said it's already been out.

Does the RFP um have the firms?

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what's written here.

I'm gonna skip that question.

Um I'm wondering, I think I'm feeling really nervous about the timeline, just knowing that things aren't going to be finalized until quite late into 2026.

And so I'm wondering if it's possible for council to give direction to move forward on you know, an agreement with a firm, but then come back for retroactive approval, which I know we sometimes do with things that happen during the break.

Yeah, I think a couple things.

One, if we get enough clarity in direction from you all tonight to move forward with the community survey faster than coming back in February.

We can we can do a contract with um with the survey firm in the interim that would allow us to do that.

It might have to be a smaller contract, and we'd have to come back to you later to get council authority to increase it.

Um, but yes, we could do that.

Okay.

And in fact, that would be I would that would be fantastic if we could do that.

Yeah, that would be great because I think the later we you know get a firm, the later we get the poll, the later you know, all this stuff happens.

So that's great.

Thank you very much.

And I think that this question here is um around if we've asked these uh in the RFP if the firms have experience um resiliency and climate change related surveys.

No, we didn't ask that specifically, we just asked for their totality of experience doing community surveys, um, but we didn't focus um on them on any particular topic.

Okay, and then the other thing is some of the council members brought up the question for me about how many of these projects 300 million will cover.

I just want to make sure I understand that.

Well, the total number of projects we have listed is it's gotta be more than 31.

I mean, I think the the key point is the total number of projects listed equals about 300 million.

So this is the poll group that we're talking about.

It's a little over 300 million, but okay, that's essentially the group that we're talking about.

Great.

I just want to make sure everybody understands that because I think that's important.

Because I think this is actually the short list, not the long list of of projects.

So great.

Thank you very much for that.

Any other questions?

Oh, Councilmember Blackaby, you have a follow-up?

One last one, and it was spurred by your question.

And I noticed in the Vision 2050 report, there was a question about whether this is a 2026 or 2028 kind of decision.

Obviously, the sooner we do it, the sooner we have the bonds, the sooner we can start making investments in infrastructure, but there could be some considerations for what's the best ballot, what's the best electorate, kind of all that.

What's uh, you know, have you thought about the timing and what's driving the 2026 in particular?

Mostly the huge backlog of infrastructure needs and wanted to get on that two years sooner.

And I I will add uh some other considerations that came to mind.

So as we talked about measure T1, we're gonna do our final issuance of that in early next year.

Um, and those projects are already called for.

So basically at this point in time, we have other than measure FF, uh, we have very little new resources coming into our infrastructure.

So we're also just trying to be thoughtful about we want to keep reinvesting in our infrastructure because I think that the point was made before the more we delay, the more things deteriorate, the streets example was used that's very similar for buildings.

So we were trying to think about with all of our existing measures coming to a head or coming to an end, this would provide an opportunity to keep that machine going and keep us uh investing.

Like the last thing I would add to that is that just that things become more expensive.

So two years from now, it's just gonna be more expensive.

Yeah, makes sense.

Um, and I guess you know, the survey will also help be a guide because if the if the feedback is folks are not ready, then we get the message.

I mean, uh so again, I I know we'll be open to and receptive to that because that'll I mean getting to 67% is a high bar in any election.

Um anyway, so I know most of the timing is driven by the fact we need the resources to start doing the capital investment, and I appreciate that, but I I also assume we'll be sensitive to what we hear from the public.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Trackup, did you have a follow-up question?

Uh yeah, um, on survey development, is that something that typically goes to the council just in terms of um vetting the questions, or do you just move forward with the questions?

I think we would just move forward with the questions once we got the direction from you.

Okay, then just because this is my first time going through this particular um development of a potential bond measure.

Um I wanted to ask is in the survey, um, how typical is it to provide some contextual questions around do you feel that the city is moving in the right or the wrong direction, or do you feel better off now than you were five years ago or things like that?

It's very typical for us to ask some contextual questions like that in the survey.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, great.

Thank you so much.

I'm gonna open up for public comments and then we'll come back to council comments.

Is there any public comment?

Would love to hear what you folks think about this projects, etc.

Um I'm trying to get a sense of if anyone else is gonna speak, but I think you can have two minutes because it looks like we've got time for it.

So go ahead, two minutes.

Uh Mayor Ishii and Council members.

Uh I recall standing in front of the city council in 2022 when a similar discussion was held on a revenue measure.

I want to uh bring to your attention that a number of uh pertinent information was presented by staff at that time to council that are relevant and maybe helpful to you now.

One in particular was staff presented an asset management program to you.

This is a life cycle maintenance management program that would help keep that billion dollars at a billion dollars or going down.

So maintaining facilities as in as is as important as fixing them.

So that document was brought to council in 20 uh 2022.

And another document that was important was a program plan, and that was brought in, I believe it was in May of 2022.

That information is all still available and relevant to your discussion.

A program plan is looking at everything that you're trying to deal with.

How do you maintain it?

How do you prioritize it?

How do you sequence it?

Because what you're dealing with is just kind of like the short list.

There's a longer list.

How do you deal with the longer list?

So the program plan made a first pass at that, and also tried to address the question of the organizational requirements that you might need to implement the program.

So I think there's more to the discussion that could happen that you're having right now, and some of these passwords in 2022 would be helpful in that context.

Thank you.

Uh good evening, mayor and council.

I'm wearing my um hat as coordinator for community for a cultural civic center, DBA and neighbor, uh, three blocks from uh the park and the civic center.

Um I just wanted to say, you know, the the renovation of the Civic Center Park, I think everyone has recognized as a tremendous success, and it's laying the groundwork for renovating the entire civic center and what is possible, and we need and want to continue this.

And I want to thank Eleanor, I want to thank Terrence and his staff, Wahid, for their uh great work.

I also wanted to remember that we uh I think only three of you were here in March 22nd, 2022.

We presented an innovative seismic study.

The CCC paid $14,000, public works paid 14,000.

We got a low bono proposal that showed we could drop the cost of the seismic renovation by 51 to 54 percent.

So we've done an incredible job already showing how we can do this affordably.

We really need this money in the budget so we can get the FEMA grant.

We need to have the match.

So let's build on up our success.

Let's let's realize I know it's it's a challenging budget situation, but I really appreciate it in the list.

But I think some great foundational work's been done that the community can build upon.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, John.

I want to thank the council for taking up this and listening to what the mayor's task force has proposed.

We have a big problem around infrastructure on a long term, and as they say, in the long term, everybody dies, but there's always other people.

There's other gonna still be people in Berkeley, okay.

So we need the infrastructure, we need investment because it costs more to delay these things, and there are I I would say there's a great example of how to do bonds right, and that's the Berkeley Unified School District.

Every 12, 10 or 12 years they go out for a large bond like you're doing now.

They list the projects they're gonna do, and in 2020, the voters passed a $380 million authorization for the school district.

They don't we're Berkeley, the city tends to go out with a lot of little projects and they go out every other year or something like that.

And I think it's really important to set up a model like the school district.

The school district has less infrastructure that is responsible for than the city does, so but it issues it has $300 million of outstanding bonds where the city only has 200, so somehow they're doing a better job at dealing with their infrastructure problems than the city does, and we could learn a lot by studying and consulting with them on how they do that.

The other thing I would uh say is that there's some good news in the first thing, the staff report, particularly the leverage that they got with T1.

They got 80%.

Well, if you've got a $300 million dollar bond and 80 percent, that's another couple hundred million dollars, and that helps.

But if you don't have the money, you don't get the leverage.

And in fact, for the housing, the leverage was even much better.

It was like 400 percent.

And so the city should celebrate.

This is a good thing.

They did a good job there.

They were able to leverage taxpayers' dollars.

And so we should try to do the same thing, and hopefully we can do as well or better in the future.

The last thing uh I would like to just say is that.

Sorry, does someone want to give him a minute?

Just a minute.

Okay, someone will get you've got another minute.

Go ahead.

Okay.

The last thing I would say is that the city's done a great job on solar, building up solar capacity.

They've done a really poor job on wind.

And if you look in the report, there's a great picture in there from the Vision 2050 showing there's this huge wind power that comes through the Golden Gate and it's directed exactly straight at the Berkeley Marina.

We should put some windmills down there, okay?

Because sometimes when the sun doesn't shine, the wind blows very hard.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

So I give great thanks for all of you.

I hope you had a great Thanksgiving and enjoy your holiday the next month.

I'm really thrilled that you're focusing on infrastructure.

I really try to prevent harm.

And I've worked on projects where they didn't want to do a $300 roof leak and $30,000 later.

No, and the same thing with a window leak, and you know, the stucco's hanging on the wall by the mesh, and everything is just rotted out behind it, and you wouldn't know.

I worked on a project up on Spruce Street.

The entire house was folding, collapsing.

The hill behind it was sliding, the pipes, the sewer lines, the water lines were breaking.

It's like things are changing.

And uh Ms.

O'Keefe, things do get more expensive if you defer maintenance.

And the gentleman who said it's much better to maintain things.

I mean, I do periodic checks all the time because it's so much more cost-effective, and that brings me to the sidewalks.

And I do have an extra minute from my friend back there.

Uh he'll raise his hand, I'm sure.

Okay.

Um, look, I've fallen a bunch of times.

I'm already in kind of rickety shape.

One more fall that might, I'm starting to cry.

It might do me in.

Therefore, I get down on my knees and I grind sidewalks.

I go to the transportation department and say, how can I find out what you all use for grout?

That white cementitious non-concrete thing that you can just level off the sidewalk.

Or what about the asphalt that you use for speed bumps?

Well, they tell me that she has an extra minute, Russ.

Thank you.

You know, they give me the name of the materials, and of course, you know, I'd have to buy truckloads of it.

But I'm literally, I got spray paint in my car.

It's like at least alert people.

Okay.

So, prevent harm.

Thank you for everything that you have been doing.

A lot of the streets have been striped, painted, so that at least people know where to turn.

But speed bumps, they're not getting repainted, and you know, I'm just about losing my head almost rolls off my neck if I hit it too fast because I don't see it.

Um, yeah, so and the fire department, good God, uh buildings.

I've seismically retrofitted things, because again, we don't want them to collapse.

But the ambulances and the paramedics and the fire engines need to be able to travel.

We have idiotic, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be disrespectful.

Traffic lights.

We have one-way, we have two-way streets that are only one way barely.

It's like we've got to get prepared for when people need either medical help instead of having to literally leave town, move out of the country because they know the ambulance wouldn't get to them in time.

It's like okay.

So infrastructure is definitely quality of life, like we should be able to stay alive.

We should not have to get injured.

We should help each other out.

And I really appreciate everything that you're doing.

And again, I sincerely hope you have a great holiday, given this is the last meeting.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Bye.

Thanks, Pierre.

Hello, City Council.

Thank you very much for everything you do.

I think this is my first time here.

My name is Sophia Scoda, and in my day job, I work for all of you at East Bay Mad as the finance director.

Thank you for paying your water bills.

So I did want to say thank you for your focus on infrastructure here today.

That's also what we are doing at Eighth Bay Med.

And I wanted to say I hope that you'll consider as you look at how you're going forward with this important infrastructure fund and the bond funding, looking at parcel taxes as well as geobonds.

One of you brought up, you know, oh, a 1.5 million dollar average sale price today.

So a geobond puts the burden of the infrastructure on young families rather than more evenly across the community.

So just kind of looking at those considerations.

And there are things that can be done to kind of bracket around maybe parcel size or square footage or things like that that could be a parcel tax.

But the the geobond on a 550, you know, kind of median kind of assessed value means that you know one part of the voter uh base is, you know, kind of getting a significant benefit.

I think it makes a lot of sense for things like schools, where again that nexus is closer with who's paying and who's receiving the benefit, but perhaps a parcel tax could make sense.

Um thank you very much.

Thank you.

Are there folks online?

Uh no hands are currently raised, but this is the time to provide public comments on the discussion regarding potential ballot measures.

So if you're participating online and you'd like to speak, please raise your hand.

Oh, okay.

There are no speakers.

Uh okay, very good.

We'll go back to counsel for council comments.

Then starting with Council Member Taplin.

Uh thank you very much.

And uh please allow me to first uh express my gratitude to Mary Ishi for allowing me the opportunity to serve on the task force.

It was an honor to work with you and Councilmember Tegoub and Ray and and Margot and everybody.

Um like the mayor, I also have a great love and passion for infrastructure, and it was one of the first things I began to think about when I entered my um life as a public servant in this way.

Um I uh I strongly support moving forward with the survey, and with the expiration of a November 26 bond up to 300 million.

I'm not interested in a parcel tax for capital.

Um I would like the for the survey to pull fire projects separately and also the larger set together just to see if that, you know, if that changes or is different.

Um I do think it will be important for us to avoid the shortfalls of Measure L, um, namely a high dollar amount combined with an ill-defined scope of improvements, and to that effect, what uh what makes sense to me is to create a clear nexus around immediate safety consideration, disaster and climate resiliency, and recreational equity, and um to list off projects that I feel like exemplify that among the current list for immediate safety, uh Francis Aubreyer, the South Coast Seawall Replacement, the Veterans Building, Model Shrek Old City Hall, the 5050 Sidewalk Program Backlog, the MLK Civic Center Annex, Fire Stations 4 and 6, the Police Fire US Dispatch Center Remodel, the Harrison Street Fire Training Facility, and then the disaster and climate resiliency category, the Marina Boulevard, sea level rise and bay trail project, fire stations one to three, five, 3, 5, 7, and in the recreational equity category, aquatic park improvements, Harrison Park, Astro-Turve Field Conversion, Island Corridor Open Spaces, King Pool, San Pablo Park Sports Field Irrigation and Drainage, the University Avenue Bike Park, and the city citywide uh dog parks.

And I have a lot more time than I thought I would, but I want to just close by saying I do think it will be important to engage as wide of a sample of the community as possible, including our labor partners, the commissions, the neighborhood groups, our community groups, and I want to just offer any support that my office can provide.

And I know it will be tough to convince people, but I'm proud of what we've done, and I'm willing to fight and knock on every single door and make every single phone call, despite my millennial aversion to phone using the phone.

I can text for sure, yeah.

Um, but I say that to say that you know, I believe in I believe in the city, I believe in our staff, I believe in our community, and you know, having heard from my constituents and people throughout the city for years um about a number of these projects.

I'm fully committed to seeing these over the finish line.

If it takes one cycle, if it takes 10 cycles, I feel like I have to see this stuff done.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Humbert.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And I want to, um, there are two items on the agenda this afternoon.

I guess we're almost into the evening, um, and so I wanted to address the first one uh more fully.

Maybe I want to thank um uh thanks, really um vigorous thanks to the mayor's vision 2050 task force for this for the report and to the mayor for reconvening the task force.

I haven't had time to review the report in detail.

I know Ray says it's only eight or twelve pages, but it's um there are tremendous number of appendices attached, and and I'll want to spend some time with it.

Um, I appreciate all the work that went into it and the contribution of time and thought by luminaries such as Ray Yep and Margot Schuler, um, and Larry Henry and all of you, all of you there um sitting out there in the in the seats.

Um, I do really appreciate the emphasis on permeable infrastructure and life cycle maintenance, which both um Mr.

Yep and Ms.

Schuler have um have emphasized over over many years.

Really critical, critically important things.

I think the challenge we now face is determining how to translate the report and its broad recommendations into concrete actions in the context of highly constrained resources.

Um the report discusses what criteria we might use to prioritize projects, but it seems the hard work of identifying those priorities and potentially having to leave some projects to a future time lies ahead of us.

And actually, we're dealing with that.

I think with the with the bond.

Um, and again, thank you all for all this good work.

Um, with respect to item number two, I want to thank um the city manager and all of our city staff and uh David White for their incredible work on this effort and this report.

The information is helpful, thorough, and very well presented.

I especially appreciate the graphs of tax rates over time, as other folks have mentioned, and I'm very heartened by the timelines presented for developing these potential ballot measures.

We're really ahead of the game compared to what happened in 2022, for example.

Um, you know, there was then a really a rush for the finish, but this time if we can stick to these timelines or even accelerate them, as the mayor has suggested, I think we're well positioned to have more deliberative discussions and submit our ballot language well ahead of the deadline, knock on wood.

I think the list of projects is a great start, a really good list, but and I agree with about 80 or 90 percent of it.

Um I personally am really excited to see the 5050 sidewalk repair program listed.

The back long backlog for this program shows how valued and successful it is, and having previously myself put forward budget referrals to get it fully funded, I'd be thrilled to see the 5050 program get fully funded by a general obligation bond, taking into account the the concerns of Council Member Kessarwani about you know how we how we dovetail that with with FF.

I'd also like to see in a not necessarily on this list, I'd like to see bus shelters.

I think those are really important, and other transit improvements as we move from you know an autofocused city to one that walks and bikes and takes transit.

I have to say, and people might not be very happy with this, I'm less enthusiastic about including the seismic retrofits of the Model Shirik and Veterans Building on this list.

I strongly support having downtown projects on the list, but I also want a better future for these buildings.

And I do, but candidly, I'm not convinced the currently envisioned uses for the buildings are the way forward or justify the level of investment necessary to put them back into top shape.

Looking at the projected costs for these projects, it strikes me that at the very least it would eat up a disproportionate share of the 300 million dollars.

Right now we're struggling to keep our existing well-established cultural uses afloat.

We've already seen the closure of the Jazz Conservatory and the Aurora Theater.

Investing significant funds to create more art spaces at a time when we're having trouble keeping our existing ones filled is not fiscally wise.

And I think most Berkeley residents have other facilities that would be higher priorities.

That said, if my staff, if staff and my colleagues feel it's important to poll in those projects, I wouldn't object because if we're going to keep old City Hall and veterans in the running, I do think it's important that we get a sense of where they fall in the priority list of Berkeley residents.

Again, thank you a lot.

You know, tons of thanks for all the hard work that went into this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Moving on to Councilmember Blackbeat.

Thanks, Madam Mayor.

Um, and just again add my thanks to you for reconvening the task force to Margo and Ray and the whole team for participating and for the city staff for all the hard work that's gone into bringing us to this point.

Uh I'm excited that we are kind of on the cusp of uh moving forward with uh kind of a major investment in Berkeley's infrastructure.

Um, we uh we need to do it, we know we need to do it.

Um it's just a question of sort of how, when, uh how much and what's involved.

Uh, but I think we have a lot to work with here.

Um, so to work kind of very quickly through the questions that you left with us, uh, totally support uh moving forward with the survey.

As uh Councilmember Luna Parra mentioned, you know, I am interested as part of that research, making sure we look at this potential measure in the context of other things that are likely going to be on the ballot.

We already know that the arts parcel tax may very well be on the ballot.

Uh maybe there's a local transit measure as well as a regional transit measure, potentially a regional housing measure.

So again, I just putting the context of what we're asking for up against the other things that may also be on the ballot.

I just think makes sense.

We need to have that kind of intelligence.

Um, I also like um uh council member um taplin's suggestion, which was we might need to bucket some of the categories.

We've got kind of our three big categories of 100 million each and roll that together, but it might be interesting to look at fire separate from parks uh and waterfront separate from public works and just understand where people's uh heads are at with respect to those.

Um I'd also say if part of the survey is um I know in previous years we've gotten some public uh feedback on the types of infrastructure projects that people support.

Uh we should again ask and just make sure that what we are putting in the package kind of ranks highly on what we hear in the survey and just be ready to adjust the the list if what we're hearing from the survey guides us in a slightly different direction.

I know we will be, but you know, I just I want the data uh to kind of be our guide as we go forward.

Um on the size, um, as council member Humbert mentioned.

Um I think looking at a rate 300 million, it feels like it's not too hot, not too cold just right.

I mean, it feels okay, but looking at a range, maybe it's a little bit less, maybe it's a little bit more uh based on the survey, but also on some of these other benchmarks that we were talking about earlier.

Um, you know, what should we be, what do we need to be investing to at least stay at parity, if not actually make a dent in the one billion dollar kind of backlog.

We should that should be kind of one of the macro guides that helps us inform the size.

And then on a micro level, I think, again, looking at the average tax payment of a resident in a business, uh, and maybe by the way, it's not just the median, but also what does it look like at the 70th percentile or 90th percentile, because we'll get a wide range of this.

Um, so I think all of those sorts of things, both at the macro level as well as the individual resident kind of tax um piece should inform the size.

Um, but at first blush, 300 million seems a little about right, but again, we we might look more or less depending on what we what we learn and how we benchmark ourselves.

Um other piece um I would encourage us to test in the research is um leaning into sort of the oversight and kind of the spending management and just the responsibility part.

Um you've given a lot of really useful information already on how previous bond dollars have been invested in the results, and I think really, you know, taking some pride in that and pushing hard on the fact that we are responsible stewards and will continue to be responsible sewards and baked into the bond itself is a uh is what's the oversight function look like and what is sort of the management function look like just to show taxpayers that we will continue to be responsible and effective with the money that they're good enough to share with us.

Um I think the list of projects for now I was very comfortable.

I like the range of what was in it, but again, be open to adjusting based on what we hear and what we learn.

Um yeah, I think that's that's where we're at.

But again, I appreciate this opportunity to participate to hear from members of the public and to move forward because I think again this is um it's an important um it's an important step for the city.

We know we have a lot of work to do, and um, look forward to embarking on this journey.

So thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember O'Keefe.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, first I just want to echo, I think everyone else has had a chance to say this.

Um I want to echo the thanks for all the hard work that's gone into both of these items, and also thanks in advance for all the work that's coming, because this is a huge undertaking.

Um, but it's also it's fairly worthwhile.

Um, this is one of the most impactful things that any of us may work on if it if it happens.

So good job.

And uh thanks in advance.

Um just regarding the polling, I just want to echo the suggestions that have already been made that we really um are careful to make sure we get information about how people feel about additional taxes in the totality of everything that's happening.

I know that's already been said, but I think that's a really a really important um lesson.

And you know, I wasn't around for measure al.

But whatever lessons there are to learn from that, I'm sure we're I hope we learn and act on on those, because I think um yeah, I really hope this works out.

Um so that's my only comment about that.

Uh, in terms of the project, I agree this is a great list.

Um I appreciate the sort of spread of different different kinds of infrastructure and different ways that it could improve people's lives, um, you know, from safety to quality of life to um sea level rise.

Uh a lot of really good projects.

Um the only suggestion I have that's sort of more categorical, though I have some specific examples, is I'd like to see some more um like placemaking kinds of projects.

It's it's easy to overlook it because it's it's creating something new as opposed to refurbishing.

But um there are a lot of places in our city, and I'll give you two examples from District five, because that's my area.

There's a lot of areas where there's sort of like nothing, and there could be something.

And that's that's a category that I I want to make sure we don't overlook.

And one example is um, my predecessor uh former council member Han has suggested, has um submitted, I think twice a budget referral to redesign the top of Solano.

And you know, Solano up there, it's it's a it's a stupidly wide street.

You know, it's it doesn't, it's not a high traffic area.

Cars don't need so much space, and that whole area could be redesigned to be a really lovely pedestrian plaza that would really enhance the area and the experience of every single person enjoying that.

And um I'm actually going to resubmit that budget uh referral again, and now that there's maybe like a glimmer of hope that maybe one day it could happen.

I think um things like that are um shouldn't be overlooked, and then another example also in district five is that that weird, like triple street area on Shatdock at Rose next to the CVS.

If you guys know what I'm talking about, where the farmer's market is.

Like, what is that?

Like, why are we using our space that way?

That could be that could be a place for people to like stand and sit and lie down, maybe and really enjoy it.

There's no reason for that there to be three different streets.

So there's there's probably a lot of examples of that around the city, but I I want to make sure we kind of think about creating as opposed to just um, you know, making fixing.

Those are my comments.

Oh, oh, I'm sorry, Alex will kill me if I don't say we also need bathrooms at Indian Rock Park.

There's actually there's that there's a uh quite a bit of demand for that, so throw that on the list.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And actually, can I have you pull up the questions that you have for us?

I realize we don't have those up.

Um council member Trakeb.

Uh thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um the benefit of going fifth is a lot of what I was going to say has already been said uh in um more eloquently than I would have said it.

Um I wanted to just touch on some uh a few points.

Uh first of all, I would be remiss in also not uh expressing my gratitude to the mayor uh for appointing me to the task force to uh council member Taplan for co-convening it, and for uh Ray and Margot for spearheading it so ably.

Um, and I did skim the uh report uh and have confirmed that all the changes that um uh my chief of staff who I also want to thank for her participation in the task force um have been incorporated, and it's a really good document.

Um and I I think the most important uh piece that I really wanted to call out, uh, because so many times this is not the case, but in this case, um uh there was an informative statement by staff that um what is being proposed as uh this potential bond measure is in alignment with vision 2050.

I think that's really important, that gives me a lot of confidence that this really is a plan that is uh more than just a concept, it is actually also going to be implementable.

It is not going to be gathering dust on a shelf like so many plans, unfortunately do.

Um I do want to um I appreciated all the public comments.

Um I I wanted to uh appreciate what Ray said about uh documents um that past councils uh looked at that guided past councils and that can also guide our council as we embark upon this process.

Um and I can say the same thing about measure L.

Um I I think we're all better off for uh Measure L having been attempted, and I just want to uh voice my appreciation uh to the past uh mayor and council for also having the vision around that.

Um it has already been said, um, so I'm just going to um put a finer point on it.

It is important uh in the polling to look at uh, yes, definitely what is the Gaudilocks range?

Is it 300 million?

Is it something more or less, but also really um trying to get at how pervasive the it all adds up argument is because I certainly have constituents um that are feeling it and I am uh I am empathetic to um homeowners particularly newer homeowners that um have felt uh the weight of um tax increases and other uh property assessment increases on their property tax increases on their bills um but also it is important to try to quantify as best we can what is the cost of delaying it further and that gets me into um a point I wanted to make and this is uh one area where I'm going to depart with much respect to my colleague uh uh council member Hambert uh I believe that uh the rehabilitation and the seismic uh uh the seismic improvements of uh buildings like Madel Shirec and uh the veterans uh memorial building are hugely important to to me uh to my constituents and I think to the Barkley community because uh these buildings are the foundation and cornerstone of um uh a city's democracy frankly and so how we um how we're able to maintain them um is is going to be important and it's going to reflect of how we feel as a community about uh what we value um so I want to at least get that pulled um and I will say I I wish that we had been able to start that had measure L passed um there were reasons it didn't um it we we would be on our way um and I will I have a 30-second comment about sidewalks I'm uh I for I understand council member Casabani's point um and I I would support whatever gets us to um closing out the backlog on the 50-50 sidewalk improvements this is a top five area we hear from from our constituents I myself have um tripped and fallen on our sidewalks so I certainly um appreciate um how important it is um to me as an able-bodied person who has um the privilege to get up um and and especially to those who are not so thank you so much and I look forward to supporting this process as it continues.

Thank you.

Councilmember Bartlett thank you madam mayor and uh and thank you um finance team and the infrastructure team for putting this together and doing the work on this I know it was a lot of work and thanks to the city staff for uh putting together and since it's omnibus um wide wide reaching uh effort here and I do I do support uh the litany of elements within here um by and large um very wholeheartedly uh I think we should do a survey and I know our surveys in the past have been uh really well done uh we have some good people in our arsenal um be good to work them again um you know so looking at the list of elements here and being cognizant of the the fiscal pressures that you know our taxpayers are are confronted with right now uh in the the current uh economy um you know when one the one that failed measure ill uh it passed in my district but I remember when I was when I was advocating for talking to people I could feel the reticence I could feel the like I was trading a personal favor for them to vote for it it felt like uh and of course it did fail right outside of my district it passed my district of course um but it was not easy I went out through a lot um so uh I feel there's a lot of a lot of competing elements here mentioned council member uh black you mentioned this as well these other measures so thinking about that um and in terms of persuading people to to sort of pull the trigger on yet another another debt load for their families um you know I'd like to encourage us to to sort of uh wrap our language around uh the more transformative elements at play so um next level the next iteration of the really serving the future as opposed to the the the purely maintenance uh style language because that's less exciting for people um and so and the to that instance i you know which makes me think about the civic center projects um it looks like they're they total close to 50 million dollars of the of the 300 um and it seems like the the rep the the the seismic retrofitting of the buildings is great it's necessary however is that the final use of those buildings and and this is wrapped up in a larger conversation around the civic center in total like what is the new civic center going to look like will it have a water fountain like we have up there in the hills like we want like I want um will they have you know these new buildings new outdoor theater all etc.

There's a vision for the civic center that I think demands its own sort of special finance district and so these buildings within it um will probably need to change or evolve or or be retrofit to suit a new purpose uh which might be better off to just break that off into its own finance district and there are many many forms of uh increment districts available to us now uh they're very flexible uh we deployed one in the Adeline corridor uh for the um the development there the IFD worked on so well with the with Jordan planning department um that's my suggestion there to free up 50 million dollars uh to make the sidewalks better everywhere for everyone um and whatever else we need to do um and also embracing the the the coming um hospital shortage i understand we're gonna be losing uh significant amounts of uh medicaid funding medicare funding so we're gonna have um a dearth of people without access to health care um these will be ordinary seniors that live in our district uh people with uh conditions and so it'd be interesting to think about uh embracing sort of an evolution of the senior center model to be a place where people can get care as well we have what three of them four of them how many do we have three senior centers two just two okay we need three uh so it's so I you can you can you can envision um a scenario in which this extra 50 million dollars that comes out of the civic center goes into making the the South Senior Center and the North Senior Center and the future third one somewhere uh into a real place where seniors can go and get care and get treated and there's there's all these new forms uh we explored this over at our building university um that's my suggestion and that's more I think more exciting for people because it spells out a future vision of the city um that takes us to another level um and of course uh always be reminding us of this um Mr.

City Manager you know you were there uh 2017 we passed the um the Berkeley inclusion and diversity index uh some called the Bindex not my nickname uh and this is a supplier diversity program that has to stand legal muster and its purpose is to help us partner with new companies and new developers and new entities when we do these massive expenditures and so rather than going with the same firms we use with these this 300 million dollars uh let's get new people in new local businesses women owned businesses people clear on businesses who've been shut out these last decades so that's really important thank you thank you council member council member Kessarwani thank you very much madam mayor um thank you uh again um deputy city manager so uh in terms of comments so I I think this I already made it clear but I'll just repeat myself so I think we should proceed with a community survey um I generally think that the list of projects is reasonable and um you know, I I've been thinking about it more as here hearing other folks talk.

I'm thinking about um you know, what we expect in November 2026.

There will be a number of revenue measures.

I think one important one will be the um the sales tax increase for public transit um I know there's talk of other ones.

We heard about we've heard about signatures being gathered for the arts in Berkeley.

And so I um I think we just need to be careful on the amount.

I know I I expressed a range.

I think I'm more interested in testing for lower amounts actually than going higher because I'm thinking about the totality.

But of course, you know, in the survey, we have the option to do various things.

And so I just wanted to make that clear that I I think we we may need to look at something lower.

And and in terms of exploring something lower, you know, obviously we will be guided by the results of that survey, but I I just wanted to note, you know, and I I um I was remiss earlier when I asked about prioritization because there I do want to acknowledge the tables towards the end of the report where there is some prioritization.

You have the department priority and you have um whether the project is an immediate safety consideration.

And so I I think others have talked about polling fire facilities separately.

I I want to I think fire facilities, and there's a couple there are a couple of others that are considered an immediate safety consideration.

Um so I think maybe we could poll on those, and I think that would bring us to a lesser dollar amount, because I think we need to be just really clear with the voters on what the need is and why it's necessary.

I think you know, as someone who was here for measure L, and that was, you know, it's it's hard to say not successful, because it if it did get far greater than a majority, it needed two thirds, and that was what was difficult.

Um, measure FF came back as a citizens initiative and was targeted for streets and sidewalks and was successful.

I don't believe it got, well, I don't want to, I need to check on how much it got.

I don't know if it cleared two thirds.

So that so it also didn't clear two thirds.

So I think we're talking about a very tough threshold with two thirds trying to get two-thirds.

So so I think we need to be very targeted with it, and I I think we can test for that with the survey.

So I just want to encourage us to do that.

And one way we might want to break out one way we might want to um sort of test uh a subset of this is with that perhaps with that safety consideration and see see what um what the the public is feeling about that because I I think there's there's the revenue measures that will be on the ballot, but there's also just the um the general economic uh climate, which I think is very tough for people right now.

So I think we need to be sensitive to all of that.

Um, and let me see if there's anything else here.

Um, no, I I I don't have anything that I think should be just completely removed.

Um, I did just want to reiterate, I think what I'm looking for is just like a better understanding of how much we can do on the sidewalks with measure FF and then what's remaining.

And you I know we talked about ADA upgrades, which I think just getting a little bit more understanding offline from staff about you know what we're talking about there uh would be helpful for me.

Um and uh that's all thank you very much.

I appreciate that we're having this discussion that we're having it quite early uh so that we can not be rushed next year when when we have to do a lot more work if we're gonna put this on the ballot.

So thank you very much.

Apologies for laughing.

I'm just like, ah, I feel like we could do this sooner.

Um but I appreciate your comments.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Uh, Council Member Linopara.

Thank you.

Um, and I I want to also thank everyone involved in all the work on this.

I know it's plentiful and dense, and I'm very appreciative.

Um, along with my colleagues, I think that we should proceed with the survey.

I would love to see a tiered survey as well with numbers below and above 300 million.

Um, and I only have a couple things to add.

I wanted to mention the success of the telegraph and chanting public restroom, partly funded by T1, and would love to see the inclusion of more public restroom projects like that in the survey and the measure.

Um, and I also agree with Councilmember Humbert that we should be prioritizing the 50-50 sidewalk program, and Councilmember Tregov that we should be prioritizing the 50-50 sidewalk program.

Um I also wanted to add that our office has been thinking through and working with AC Transit on a parcel possible parcel tax revenue to raise funds for AC transit lines and infrastructure, infrastructure in Berkeley specifically, and hoping to restore some of the Berkeley lines cut during the pandemic and in realign um as well as to improve frequency on high ridership lines.

Um I wouldn't want this to impede on our other priorities.

So I would love to add some questions around this on our survey.

We're still working through the numbers and we'll continue to work with staff on that, but I'm hoping that we can include some guidance around including this measure idea in our motion.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Any other comments from council members?

Okay, I have a number of comments.

So I apologize in advance.

First of all, I'm just curious, staff, if you could just address Sophia's question earlier about why we're recommending a bond versus a parcel tax.

So with a parcel tax, um, that could uh be used for wider array of uses like maintenance, but we would have to ultimately bond against, so we can only bond against the revenue that comes in.

Um so it's a bit constrained in that way.

So once we go with the parcel tax, let's say it generates revenues of $8 million.

We're we reach a cap in terms of how much we can bond because that will create the ceiling for debt service.

Um so the bond doesn't provide us with that opportunity, but we can come back and flesh that out more for you as well.

Thank you.

And then also um I I know a bunch of uh council members have brought up um concerns around um funding for the veterans building and the old city hall, and I'm wondering if you could just speak to why now we're looking at this uh around the seismic retrofitting for for those buildings.

So a couple of reasons.

There was one uh reference earlier that we have uh proactively applied for a FEMA grant that does require um a city match to that, so it would be very timely if this is an item that we're supported by the council and Berkeley voters to be able to support that mission.

Um we have a long-standing vision uh for that area of the city and its core to you know supporting downtown's revitalization.

So, you know, we're very attuned to the need to continue to reinvest in that part of the city as well.

So that also is part of our thinking as well.

Thank you.

I appreciate you you covering that.

Um first I want to say about this, um, yes, absolutely.

I think we should proceed with the community survey.

Thank you all so much for doing the work to get us here.

Um, I also want to acknowledge uh what some of my colleagues have brought up about the tax burden and that there are many people who are struggling financially and are concerned about an additional cost.

Um and at the same time, I also want to acknowledge that in the in the graph that we showed earlier that that actually, you know, as bonds kind of expire, um, there are opportunities there for us to sort of replace them as opposed to just thinking of this as like we're adding asking for more and more, actually, you know, it it kind of reaches uh equilibrium at some point.

Um, I want to address also what my colleagues were saying about measure L or measure L because I understand that you know there's some nervousness around that, and um, and and I acknowledge that that for some folks it you know it might be kind of sore, and I I get that.

And I also have a lot of faith that our council's really united on focusing on this issue of infrastructure.

Um, I think this council is like very pro-infrastructure and cares a lot about these different things, and um, and I think that our community has shown that they also care about infrastructure and um that these projects here have the themes, you know, community facilities and quality of life, public safety and critical infrastructure and accessibility, and I think that these are things that people can get really excited about.

Um, and then I also want to acknowledge something that was said about FF.

Um I know that maybe it didn't get a full two-thirds, but just keep in mind that there was also an opposing measure, so that might be something to keep in mind if you're a little bit concerned about about the amount of votes received there.

Um I wanna also encourage us to be thinking a little bit more broadly when we're talking about this poll.

Um, I think it is still important to include the 50-50 program in the polling, and I agree with my my colleagues about um thinking about a range here.

I really want to make sure that we're bonding as fully as we can because I also think even though there's some nervousness, we don't want to just leave money on the table.

The purpose of doing this poll is so that we can see what people's level of comfortability is, right?

So, and I think similar to what Councilmember Blackby was saying, you know, we're talking about following the numbers here, right?

So we're it's not that you know we're gonna do this poll and we're gonna say oh people are really concerned let's just do it anyway right I mean we're gonna use this as information to figure out how comfortable are people how high can we go and I'm saying this as someone who recognizes um you know we talked about being newer homeowners I'm a newer homeowner and I understand that that means that we'll have you know higher tax bill um I I also want to just again say the importance acknowledge the importance here of having this so that we can leverage these funds, keeping in mind that okay if we are able to get this 300 million dollars that I know that our staff is awesome and they're looking for grants and opportunities to be constantly leveraging.

I know that Carrie you've done an excellent job of that so just to call you out and say you know I know you and others on staff have done that already so we really want to have these funds available so that we can take advantage of of the leveraging.

And just in my general feedback let's see I'm also supportive of this amount we talked about the range and in terms of the projects I really appreciate this themes this idea of themes.

I think these are really essential themes to just general Berkeley lifestyle I'm really a dog person so I'm excited about the dog parks.

Let's see plus one to making sure we're considering the impact of other taxes on a potential bond which I know is brought up many times.

I'm also interested in knowing how strongly voters in the survey feel about projects that prioritize adapting to climate change and resilience and again just going back briefly to the Model Shurik the old city hall building and the veterans building there's just really so much opportunity here that I think is really exciting.

I know many people have complained to me about the downtown these are really central buildings in our downtown and two buildings that are completely underutilized really could just be a home for arts and culture and entertainment and and just you know with with the with respect um I want to say that you know given that there are current struggles in the art community I think that's why we as a city should be prioritizing a home for that that's really stable knowing that some folks might lose their physical home in terms of their performing art spaces but still need a home to do their performances and we really don't have uh facilities that are large enough in our city to have larger scale events the veterans building really was that that space um oh and just keeping in mind that there really is a safety risk we have Berkeley community media that's actually in there right now we used to have our our winter shelter there right now our winter shelter somewhere else so these are all opportunities that are missed by not having these buildings um have you know besides retrofitted um I want to ask uh let's see voters oh um I I'm interested I understand what people are saying about separating out but I really want to advise against that um I do think that it's stronger I don't feel that these things are far enough apart from each other that they shouldn't be included together and I actually think thinking of this as infrastructure as a whole as one issue is really gonna make the bond stronger.

I think separating out fire of course fire is going to be successful no matter what I do think that having these things together will will help to unify this as a singular issue of infrastructure in our city and I want to make sure that the city manager knows that I support moving forward with a contract to start the survey process and potentially get it out in January and come back to council to just approve that retroactively so that we can move forward with our timeline.

I know this is earlier than normal and at the same time I want to make sure we have enough time because it's gonna be important that we get community buy-in and that we talk to people and we start moving forward with this process.

And then I also think it's really important to incorporate questions about accountability and oversight as part of the questions.

I know that that we haven't polled as well about that in the past.

So I really want to make sure that that we're clear with our residents and the voters that we're gonna have strong accountability and oversight measures.

So okay, thank you for bearing with me.

I know there's a lot of comments.

I really appreciate you all have been steeped in this for like last year.

So thank you all so much for your time and for everyone for for being here coming from the Vision 2050 realizing Vision 2050 task force.

And uh thank you so much for staff to just the presentation and all the work you've put into this.

Okay, great.

Do you need you don't need anything else?

You're good, right?

Um I think we are with, but I do have one question.

The general feedback is all is all in line with the report, and I think we're all all good with that.

The one question I wanted to ask Council Member Lupara is you you raised the uh potential for polling also on uh parcel taxes support increased AC transit routes, and I I wasn't totally clear, so I wanted to just talk with to hear your collective feedback but from you first about like is that something you were wanting to have be like a separate poll that we start working on right away or bring back more information to the January 20th meeting and then give us direction then.

I just wanted to get a little bit more clarity on that.

Yeah, I I have no um, I don't if if this is not the best place to add it, we definitely don't have to add it now.

Um because the item asked council to bring forward other measures that we were thinking about.

I just I thought that it would be a good idea to bring it up now.

Um, but I'm also happy to workshop it more if that's if that's easier for staff.

Depending on what the rest of my colleagues think.

I would say what's most important to me is that this doesn't delay our poll.

So I would say like, you know, if everything's ready to go and you've got all the pieces.

I'm personally okay with including it.

I just want to make sure it doesn't delay anything.

That's where I'm at.

And I think it's also a question of how deep the dive is.

It's it's one thing to sort of it's one measure among other things that could be on the ballot, but as we know, when we go when we're testing our infrastructure piece, we're gonna go very deep into the components and maybe split sample various pieces of it.

And yeah, we probably can't in a 15-minute survey do the same level of detail on another topic.

So I think it'd be more just sort of a maybe kind of a thumb in the the wind kind of a terms of how it's doing relative to our infrastructure thing and whether it clutters the ballot in a way that would make ours more vulnerable.

Anyway, that's my perspective.

But yeah, I I feel similarly as like a one or two question insert.

Okay, I think that's fine.

If it's a couple just a couple of questions to test test the waters on that, that seems reasonable.

If it's a deeper thing, then that's a different poll.

But yeah, that's the help you thank you.

That's helpful.

Thank you.

Councilmember Traeger.

Yeah, and I um uh definitely support the intent here and would also support testing the waters.

I just I want to um just plead for some caution too.

Um, you know, if it's in the context of other potential ballot measures or priorities, including saving the arts uh with and that campaign has conducted its own internal polling, but um it's it um I just don't want us to go down the road of doing something for one particular um potential measure that is not this one, uh, at the in the absence of doing it for general uh priorities that um that are additional to these.

Thank you.

Councilmember Bartlett.

Thank you.

I was gonna say uh regarding Councilman's uh Luna Pro's idea.

I'd rather than I would suggest that rather than you're taking a lot of time to come back with this, just include um a transit component to this infrastructure piece.

And that's just that's that.

This is bus shelters, bus plazas, bus elements, right?

It's a transit column for for consideration in this milieu because it fits.

I don't know if people want it, but it fits the um thematically.

I think what she's talking about is something larger scale, is that right?

Yeah, I mean, I uh infrastructure is is part of the idea, but it is a larger concept of um bringing back the lines that were that were removed during the pandemic and increasing frequency on highly used routes, which I don't think necessarily would or should fit into this bond, especially because it has the opportunity to to tank it, which I don't want that to happen.

Um, I see you're suggesting we fund another jurisdiction's business.

It would be a very very specifically to the city of Berkeley and lines that only cover the city of Berkeley.

Council Member Humbert.

Oh, sorry.

Councilmember Humbert.

Yeah, just kind of following up on um what council member Bartlett was just discussing.

I think it does make sense to add a transit and pedestrian realm improvements element to our polling.

Um, you know, bus shelters, things like that, you know, making transit um easier and safer and and more enjoyable.

I'm I'm thinking about the transit plaza at downtown Berkeley surrounding the BART station.

It's it's a wonderful, it was a wonderful improvement.

You know, I I think that would fit in as a as you know another infrastructure element, and you know I think this this should remain focused on infrastructure.

So those are my thoughts.

Thanks.

Yeah, Councilmember Chaplin.

Um I do just want to point out that um we have been discussing facilities that are identified in current existing plans, and that these are projects that have um advanced to some degree through their uh completion process.

So I am a little reticent to poll on um potential uh theoretical projects uh staff has not contemplated or presented.

So, yeah, that's separate.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, I see what you're saying.

Uh yeah, so that that these other items have been part of a process and included before, so you're concerned about including them.

I would agree with that.

Um I think it is important that we take into account the work that was done to prioritize um these current items, and I appreciate your comment.

Um I don't do you have clarity around, I mean, I'll say a couple things.

I still have a little bit of um measure L regret around including both housing and infrastructure in one big poll in one big measure.

I know that's not what's being proposed, but I'm just saying that I do have that.

Um that said, I think we could work with the polling firm that gets selected to say, hey, we are curious about transit.

Do you feel like adding a couple of transit questions to this survey would throw things off or put put people off in a way that influences the rest of the survey negatively, or do you think it's fine to ask a couple of transit questions?

If they say, yeah, we think that's fine, then uh it sounds to me like you all would be open to that being a part of it.

And if they say it seems like a separate thing, we could come back to you and tell you that and you could give us further direction.

So since this is Councilmember Lunapar's situation, I'm gonna let her go first.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Yeah, I I think we might be getting a little confused here because there's two diff different things that we're talking about.

Um the transit measure is an entire the idea is an entirely separate thing from the bond versus the idea of bringing in transit infrastructure into the bond.

So I just wanted to clarify that we're talking about two different pieces here.

Yeah, and I I think given what you're just you've just said, Paul.

Um I would be inclined since we don't actually have anything in front of us right now.

I think it would probably make sense to move forward with this survey without including anything about this AC transit potential measure just because I feel like it would be easier if we had more clarity around what it looked like to figure out if it made sense to include it or not.

And since we don't have that, I I think it's better to see if we can address that separately.

But I'm open to having that conversation at another time once there's more information.

Okay, yeah, that's fine.

I guess um, yeah, my thought process was also around the the funding and if that would be a whole other budget proposal.

I don't know if we want to think through that, but I I'm generally totally okay with that.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Okay.

I think that's it.

Um, we should end this meeting because we have another one.

All right.

Is there a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Second.

Is there any opposition to your adjournment?

Okay, we are adjourn