Thank you.

Hello, everyone.

Good evening.

I'm calling the meeting to order.

It is, oh my gosh, Tuesday, June 9th, 2026, and it is 6 09 p.m.

Clerk, can you please start us off with a roll?

Councilmember Kisserwani.

Here.

Taplin, President Bartlett.

Currently absent.

Oh, Keith.

Here.

Black B.

Napara here.

Humbert here.

And Mayor Ishi.

Here.

Okay, quorum is present.

Okay.

So for the report out from the closed session.

The City Council met in closed session on June 8th, 2026, pursuant to government code section 54956.9 subsection D and provided directions to outside council and approved a settlement by compromise and release as to a workers' compensation matter assigned claim number B E R 230046 and WCAB 858-5885.

Okay, very good.

Ah, I just realized it's the first meeting of the month.

And so I will read us the land acknowledgement statement.

The City of Berkeley recognizes that the community we live in was built on the territory of Huchun, the ancestral and unceded land of the Chochanyo speaking Alone people, the ancestors and descendants of the sovereign Verona Band of Alameda County.

This land was and continues to be of great importance to all uh of the Ohlone tribes and descendants of the Verona Band.

As we begin our meeting tonight, we acknowledge and honor the original inhabitants of Berkeley, the documented 5,000 year history of a lady at the West Berkeley Shell Mound and the Ohlone people who continue to reside in the East Bay.

We recognize that Berkeley's residents have and continue to benefit from the use and occupation of this unceded stolen land since the city of Berkeley's incorporation in 1878.

As stewards of the laws regulating the city of Berkeley, it is not only vital that we recognize the history of this land, but also recognize that the Aloney people are present members of Berkeley and other East Bay communities today.

The City of Berkeley will continue to build relationships with the Lijan tribe and to create meaningful actions that uphold the intention of this land acknowledgement.

We are now moving on to some matters.

So I will actually call forward Stephanie Allen.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'm here tonight on behalf of the school district gardening program.

It's called Cans to Carrots.

And as you know, funding for education has been devastated in this state and this country.

So we have to do a number of things in order to keep programs going.

The gardening program exists at every school in the district, it's very popular with the children.

And we recently began a campaign to collect cans, which could then be turned into the recycling center for money to help fund the program, but also to teach children about recycling.

The program got kicked off with the essential help of city manager Paul Budenhagen.

We wouldn't have been able to do it without him.

On behalf of the program from our students, our staff, thank you very much.

I don't know.

That's so cute.

It has carrots.

Okay.

Go ahead, Paul.

I don't have anything to say, but I want to make sure.

Thank you.

Yay.

It was very helpful.

Oh no, we wouldn't have gotten started without you.

Thank you.

Yeah, everyone is welcome to bring an award for Paul during ceremonial matters.

Okay, well, it's actually time for your comments, so I'll give you a moment to walk on over in case there's anything you want to add.

Oh, no.

Thank you.

Anything for your city manager comment section?

I'm still so uh stunned.

And please, thank you.

No, I don't have any comments other than thank you to uh to Miss Allen, and I want to thank her also for the outstanding work that they've done on the Kids to Carts program.

It's a really important program.

So thank you.

Very sweet, thank you.

Um, and so oh um we are also actually adjourning in memory, so apologies.

Um, for Alan Toby, which was requested by Councilmember Traegum.

And so um, would you like to read?

Go ahead, Councilman.

Thank you.

I'm uh yes, I would like for us to adjourn in memory of Alan Toby.

Uh I we also have uh his wife uh Ruth here, um, and we have his son uh online, who may say a few words.

Um we were all um very saddened to hear that Alan Toby passed away on February 24th of this year following a long and courageous struggle with Parkinson's.

Uh but the terrible disease did not define him.

The zest for life and commitment Alan put into everything he did define him, and this is his story.

He was born in Brooklyn, New York on December 11, 1944.

He graduated from MIT in 1966 with a bachelor's of science in literature and biology and went on to earn a master's of divinity degree from Luther Seminary in 1970.

In June 1968, he married Ruth Jensen in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and they raised two children, Chandra Toby and John Toby.

After hearing Ron Dellum speak on the UC Berkeley campus for he and Road to study sociology, he volunteered for Dallums' first congressional campaign, beginning a lifelong commitment to civic engagement and progressive causes.

Alan became active in the Berkeley Tenants Organizing Committee, which promoted the city's rent control ordinance.

He was also a founder of Stop Institutional Creep, a community effort that sought to preserve a historic residence at the corner of Ridge Road and Scenic Avenue, where the graduate theological union building and library now stand.

Alan's work at Wine and the People, a Berkeley store specializing in home winemaking and brewing supplies that also produced its own wines, led him to advocate for legislation allowing brew pubs to manufacture and sell their beer in Berkeley.

He was both an inspiration and an instigator in Berkeley's becoming a pioneer in the legalization of microbrewing.

Professionally, Alan built a career in management and marketing for high-tech companies.

In retirement, he continued his commitment to public service and environmental stewardship, serving on the boards of the Sierra Club and Berkeley's Livable Berkeley organizations.

And the Sierra Club is when I first got to work with him as a fellow member of the Sierra Club's Northern Alameda County Group Executive Committee.

I got to watch how beautifully he brought together people that normally wouldn't agree or even talk to each other, and how prescient his commitment to housing for all was, getting them to actually do it together.

At his West Berkeley home, Alan was well known for bringing neighbors together and strengthening community ties.

Among his many local accomplishments was being the squeaky wheel that led to the city's installing a stop sign at the intersection of Gilman and Palauta, which he would tell me was one of his proudest achievements.

Throughout his life, Alan championed big ideas, but never lost sight of the wise learning that for those ideas to be embraced, it was on us to meet people where they were at.

We will always remember him for his dedication to social justice, environmental advocacy, community building, public service, and his slogan of choice for the people.

Alan, you truly epitomized always being there for the people.

Presented We have, I think John, hopefully.

Yes, I'm here.

Yes, we can.

Excellent.

Thank you for those very kind words.

Um good evening.

I'm uh I'm John Toby, Alan's youngest son, uh, proudly born and raised in Berkeley.

Um, Deputy Mary Trega, members of the council, thank you for honoring my father today.

Um, Alan believed a city reveals what its people value, uh, the shape of a street, the scale of a building, whether a neighborhood stays walkable.

These are choices about what kind of life people are allowed to have.

Uh, he lived in Berkeley for more than 50 years, and he became part of its fabric.

He paid attention to it.

He argued with it, he defended it.

He believed in the city that was something you participated in, not something you occupied.

He loved his little neighborhood of West Bray most of all, a neighborhood where people knew each other because they were so often on foot, passing each other's porches.

Uh, as Igor said, he spent considerable energy fighting for a stop sign at the corner of Gilman and Peralta, a simple stop sign, because he understood that small things are where real life happens.

Kids crossing the street, neighbors walking home, the ordinary details that tell you a place is cared for.

Through Livable Berkeley and his writing for Berkeleyside and other venues, he carried those values into the wider city.

Affordable housing, preservation alongside progress, a Berkeley that made room for people instead of pushing them out.

Guiding idea was simple.

In the words of one of my favorite chefs, Jose Andres.

You should build longer tables, not taller fences.

He had very little patience for posturing or for process used as theater.

If he thought something was standing in the way of a livable city, he said so.

Sometimes diplomatically.

Thank you.

Um, thank you very much for sharing that, and thank you to Councilmember Treka for bringing forward our adjournment in memory this evening.

Um now move on to public comment on non-agenda matters.

Okay, so uh public comments on non-agenda matters.

We'll draw five cards for in-person speakers, and um, then the first five hands raised on the Zoom will be allowed to speak uh one minute um per speaker.

Uh so I'll draw five cards.

And if you're on the zoom and you want to give non-agenda public comments, again, only comments on items that are not on the agenda, then you can raise your hand on the zoom, okay.

All right, the five in-person speakers are uh Teresa Gonzalez, Belique, Louder Milk, Andrew Fisher, Cornelius Smith, and Celeste Marks.

So you can come up in any order, and you'll have one minute for speaker, good evening.

Mayor Ishi, uh City Manager Boot again, and uh members of the city council.

My name is Teresa Gonzalez.

I am the state director of Livery, California.

Um, I'm here to urge you to fund the Berkeley Gun Violence Intervention and Prevention Program to address the funding gap for FY27, uh, to make us whole because we weren't in the FY27 budget either.

Um, and also be a baseline commitment for continued operations through FY28.

The results speak for themselves.

Uh, when we initially came on and submitted our proposal, we were striving for a 10% gun violence reduction.

We landed at a hundred percent um in 2025.

In addition to that, we just um sent over some information for you all today.

Uh the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform um published um the first of its kind Berkeley gun violence um the cost of gun violence report.

Um it has been proven that I have one virtual.

Oh, I have a virtual minute from Santina Gonzalez.

I have a Dinah, hi Santina.

Are you yielding your time?

Yes, I'm yielding my time.

Okay.

The National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform documented that one single fatal shooting cost Berkeley taxpayers three point two million dollars.

In 2024, Berkeley had three fatal and five non-fatal shootings, the non-fatal over 700,000 dollars.

A combined taxpayer cost of more than 13 million dollars was spent in 2024.

In 2025, the cost was zero, and we gave that money back to the taxpayers because they deserve it.

That was a 13 to 1 return on a one million dollar investment per year.

We also extended and were fiduciary responsible and extended our funding for a whole nother year without asking you all.

So we really got for two million dollars, three years worth of program services.

Um we asked for continued support and integrity.

We appreciate all of the support that you all have showed us thus far, and we ask that we don't just focus on cost savings but the impact of human lives and the ripple effect that it has on our entire Berkeley community.

We thank you for this resource and the continued investment also in prevention efforts.

Thank you.

So we don't have to see this anymore.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll rose the I didn't hear it beep the second time.

I was meeting my minute to speak.

I'm Dr.

Stephen Alpert.

During the last council meeting, Mayor Ishi interrupted by public comment remarks.

Information provided by the First Amendment coalition indicated your interruption was a violation of the First Amendment to write to the right of free speech.

The Ninth Circuit has ruled that criticism of specific members of governing body is a violation of the First Amendment.

Your interruption was, quote, just a reminder not to refer to individual council members, refer to us as a body.

Moreover, I was not addressing council member Humbert, but instead clearly clearly referring to misinformation on this website as displayed on this poster for government code 54960, a formal cease and desist letter was forwarded demanding that this council acknowledge the violations and make an unconditional commitment not to interrupt any speaker addressing statements or positions publicly made by individual company members or other city officials.

The council has 30 days to comply with all matters of this cease and desist letter.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Come on up.

I'm here on behalf of Berkeley High School and Live Free.

I'm a school safety officer and mentor at Berkeley High.

I'm speaking on behalf of Live Free because on numerous occasions, Live Free have come in and helped me mediate situations with young men and women in conflict.

And the reason you need live free in your budget, it makes the community safe for all community members young and old.

One of the last time, like me in Live Free, have you been to court for a kid or giving money out your pocket or clothes?

It's not a tax write-off for me, it's how we were raised.

You reach one to teach one.

So you need live free, and you need mentors to make sure the community is safe, not just for the kids, but for you all sitting up here.

If you notice in social media, it's a lot of young people losing their lives over social media and conflict, substance abuse is rampant.

So we need live free in order to make it safe for everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor, Honorable Mayor, and City Council members.

Nice to meet some of you.

Know who our faces are in the community.

My name is Andrew Fisher, and I'm here to say a few words on behalf and in support of the Live Free Organization.

I've lived in Berkeley for close to 50 years.

I've built a small business here along with my wife that has grown and flourished in this community for 20 years and counting.

Our kids currently attend BUSD, that community.

Much like you, I'm thankful for I live, and I feel a strong sense of pride, especially seeing the city's evolution over the course of my time here.

There is another, there's no other place on earth like Berkeley, and I think the surrounding communities.

As part of this community and with an interest in keeping to what I think are our core beliefs of compassion and leading and lending a helping hand to our neighbors and our excuse me, people in need, uh, I would like to strongly encourage you.

Honorable mayor to fund live free.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Malik Loudermill.

I would like to pass my minute over to uh Reverend Angela.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Reverend Angela Jernigan.

I am in uh resident of West Berkeley, and I am here to really morally insist that the city find the money to maintain the baseline for live free funding.

Um this is a program that pastors and community leaders fought hard for to get to this city for a decade.

And we finally got the funding, finally put it in action, and it ended gun violence in this city in one year.

It is the cheapest way to intervene in gun violence.

If you just look at the numbers, numbers alone, it is the cheapest way to maintain the peace.

It is also morally inconscientable to not fund a program that we know saves lives.

Please read the letter that I and a dozen other clergy and community leaders signed for you.

Thank you.

Okay, we have uh speak going to speakers on Zoom now.

First one is uh Russell.

Hi, everybody.

Uh Russell Beach here.

Uh, the murderous rampage by the dinosaur all around the Middle East and Palestine in Lebanon in Iran is going on and on and on, and I insist at some point in the near future, that a Gaza genocide relevance day be brought forward to the City Council of Berkeley.

Uh Thomas Vassey had guts enough to bring up the USS Liberty attack by the Zionist entity uh yesterday in Congress.

It was a great speech, 25 minutes.

I should just listen to it.

They need to be stopped.

Gaza needs to be remembered, and I would ask you very politely at this point to consider that for the future.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Russell.

Next is Sandaia.

Can you hear me?

Yes, yes, yes.

Om Shanti.

Om Shanti means I'm a peaceful soul.

My name is Sandhya, and I represent Anubuti Meditation and Retreat Center in Navato.

Anubuti is part of the Ramakumari is a wonder worldwide woman-led non-profit organization with centers in over 140 countries and affiliated with the United Nations through economic and social council, ECO, SOC, and UNICEF.

Our mission is to empower individuals through meditation, self-awareness, and spiritual values to create a more peaceful world.

Today I'm delighted to invite you and your family to our wellness wonderland family fair on June 20th, celebrating the International Day of Yoga and the spirit of family and community.

This free event is being organized in collaboration with several Bay Area organizations and will feature wellness booths, yoga, meditation, Ayurveda, holistic health, scientists and speakers, exploring well-being and consciousness.

Cultural program and activities for all ages.

So much.

Thank you.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yes.

Well, first and foremost, hello to you all.

So hello, my name is Tavio Smith.

First and foremost, I want to say that I am a proud member from Berkeley, along with my family.

I've been here for many generations.

Wanted to say that the Live Free Program is extremely important to me and my community, and honestly, it should be to you too.

Todd Walker, Mark Hokes, last mentor and role model, showed us as a kid.

Violence wasn't the way.

The lessons that he taught us was if we wanted to go down that road, there's only two ways that we're gonna end up either dead in the streets in a violent way or in prison, um, with that lifestyle.

So we are here to police our community.

So I just want you guys to let us police our community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Last is a phone number caller.

Uh phone number ending in 211.

Well, first of all, I'll actually make sure each ask a prayer for this beautiful woman.

She was murdered by her boyfriend in California Street.

This is awful.

This is awful.

This is Berkeley.

Berkeley is a peaceful town, town of peace.

Roy Hundred manager, but you look at it.

I think I recommend a friendly meeting.

People in Berkeley actually needs more than ever.

We'll be in the business for 53 years.

We've seen our country dismantled.

Demolished.

I can't describe it.

I've been in Berkeley for 63 years.

I have never expected the beauty and the elegance of the city and the state and the country.

That may uh Senator Messi was great.

Uh this government that US is liberty.

I was a getting in Egypt when I was my head was bombed in 1948 and 1956 by 1976.

Egypt defeated uh, thanks for your comment.

Uh that's it, as last um comment.

Okay, thank you very much.

We will move on to the consent calendar.

Um, I should note that it there is another opportunity for non-agenda public comments at the end of the meeting.

Thank you.

Yes, yes.

Um, do any of my sorry.

Yeah, I'm so sorry.

I got deleted from my agenda somehow.

But yes, are there any public comments by employee unions?

30 days are suited.

Okay, anyone online from an employee union?

Okay, all right.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

My gosh.

Um okay, anyone have any comments from the consent calendar?

My colleagues.

Yes, council member O'Keefe.

Um, I have uh other comments I'll make in a second, but I want to recuse myself from one of the items.

Um item 22, uh hot tub item.

I don't know, do I have to leave the room or something, or can I just say I'm recusing and then not talk about it?

Yes, we'll have to take uh two votes on the consent calendar.

We'll take one vote separately on item 22, and then another vote on the remainder.

Okay.

Sorry about that, everyone, but trying to try to do it right.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Um Councilmember Kessarwani.

Thank you very much, Madam Mayor.

I'd like to be recorded as donating $100 to item number 19.

This is the uh poet laureate program, and 100 towards item number 21, which is the Holocaust Remembrance Day program, and um I would like to be added as a co-sponsor to item number 22 to streamline our approval of hot tubs.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Uh can we move on to Councilmember Humbert, please?

Miss that.

Thank you, madam mayor.

Um I'm gonna um uh draw attention to items 18A and 18B policy recommendations for the city of Berkeley regarding event producers and civic events.

That's A and companion report is B, policy recommendations for the City of Berkeley regarding event producers and civic events.

Um I just want to make confirm that um uh and when we vote on uh the consent calendar, we'll vote on adopting um the recommendations in the city manager's companion report eighteen B.

Yes, uh we would be adopting this um for the purposes of adopting 18B.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And then with respect to 19, which is the Polit Laureate program, I'd like to contribute 100 to my discretionary office account, um, also a hundred dollars to 20, which is the Chavez, where it's a tribute site or formerly named that.

100.

Um I would like as to item 21, um the 2027 Holocaust Remembrance Day program.

Um I'd like to contribute $500 from our uh G8 discretionary account, and then with respect to item 22, one final item uh on the consent calendar having to do with amendments to Berkeley Municipal Code section that relates to hot tubs.

Um I'd like to add council member council members Bartlett, Kessarwani, and Trugoob um as co-sponsors um on this item for their requests.

That's all I have.

Thanks.

Thank you very much.

Councilmember Bartlett.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, um item 19, uh Berkeley Poet Laurie program, I'd like to uh donate $200 from a D13 account to support this wonderful program.

Um 20.

Uh thank Councilwani for this.

Um, Mary Ishes is yours.

Thank you.

Uh for the 200 as well to the Chavez World Tribute site.

Um, should be wonderful.

Uh, item 21, the uh 2027 uh Holocaust Remember's day program and the 200 dollars to support this uh wonderful annual event.

And um I think that's it.

But lastly, for the live free people that are here, uh one of just recognize you and thank you for the work you've done.

Uh it's many years working on this and now finally got it funded.

It's working tremendously.

I want to thank you for all your work.

Thank you very much.

Councilmember Lunapara.

Thank you.

Um, I'd like to donate $200 each to items 1920 and 21, and thanks to the authors.

Thank you.

I'm trying to do math while I'm calling on you all to add these numbers.

Okay.

Um, Councilmember Traeger, Vice Mayor Traeger.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, and thank you to our staff and administration across all departments for your work on many complex items.

On there are several items uh that I'm excited about in terms of continuing our partnership with business improvement district, such as the North Shaddock Association and Visit Barkley on item 10.

Um, which is a contract um that will um ease uh the burden to dispatchers and provide more consistent responses for uh public dispatch.

Um I want to thank staff very much for bringing forward this item.

Um our office has uh been receiving um input from constituents about sometimes there is um less than consistent um response that they receive uh when they call, and I think this is a systems issue, um not a people issue, and I think this will really help.

And I also want to appreciate uh staff's uh comprehensive uh write-up uh of the sole source and the single source justification.

I think this is a gold standard for um what I uh appreciate seeing um in items before us where there is a single uh contract or vendor to be uh um selected from um moving on.

I would on items 18A and 18B, um, while I will be supporting uh a motion to approve A team B, which is the companion report.

I want to thank the Civic Arts Commission as well as staff.

Um we all share the desire for a more equitable, transparent, efficient, and predictable special event program in Barkley.

Um our office has also been working on an item in support of these goals that will serve as a complement to these efforts, and I want to thank uh the commission for bringing this forward today and staff for uh working on well assessing the feasibility of implementation um and trying to really um get through what are the things that we can do on this front right now.

Uh I would like to contribute a hundred and fifty dollars each to uh items 19 and 20, and I would like to thank my colleagues uh as well as the mayor um for putting together item 22 um 21, thank you.

Uh 21, which is the Holocaust Remembrance Day talk, and those are all my comments.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councilmember Taplin.

Thank you, Madam Mayor and good evening, everybody.

On item 19, I would like to be recorded as relinquishing $1,000 for ID13.

And I uh if there's room, I would request being added as a co-sponsor.

Sorry, which item was that?

Uh 19, the poet laureate.

Ah, yes, yes, please.

We'd love to have you join us.

Thank you very much, and we appreciate your work on this front.

On item uh number 20, I'd like to be recorded as relinquishing $250.

On item 21, I would like to be recorded as relinquishing $500 for 2013.

And I would, um, if there's room requests to be listed as a co-sponsor on this one as well.

The 2027 uh Holocaust.

I think that you should that we should have space on that one.

Is that correct, Councilmember Traegu, Vice Mayor Traeger?

I believe so.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Those complete that completes my remarks.

Okay, back to Councilmember O'Keefe.

Thank you.

These are my real comments.

Um, first of all, I'm told I was supposed to say why I'm recusing, it's because I have formed an intent to purchase a hot tub.

So it's kind of obvious, but I have to say it for the record.

Um, so I shouldn't vote on it.

Um, my real comments are um I would like to be recorded as donating uh 200 to item 19, uh item 20 and item 21.

Thank you very much for bringing those forward.

And then lastly, I want to just really um express some appreciation for item 18, the whole concept of it, A and B.

Uh, because I really feel like um our civic events are really under threat right now for a number of reasons, and they have it's hard to defend them because they don't really it's it's hard to quantify or point to their value, but I think we can all feel it that they really they have a really intangible um value to our community.

So anything we can do to help promote them, keep them promote them, keep them um from dying out and maybe even have more one day.

Uh that'd be great.

So just happy to support item 18.

Thank you very much.

And I'm so sorry, Councilmember Brockabee, I missed you because uh your little hand is being covered by my captions.

I'll just jump up and down next time, no problem.

Thank you.

Um I'll be quick.

Uh again, I wanted to echo thanks to the economic development team for their work on the telegraph bid and the North Shadow bid as well as uh the Visit Berkeley bid.

Um that work is so important to our business climate business activity business activity in the city.

Uh so just appreciate uh these items coming forward.

Um uh item 18, similarly to my other to colleagues.

Uh, I really do appreciate the Civic Arts Commission bringing this forward, helping us think through how best we can support um our events activity in the city.

Um, and I do support the feasibility analysis that the city manager recommends to make sure that whatever we pursue is thoughtful and and rooted in um economic cost and economic benefit.

But again, I see them connected.

Um, and so I just wanted to thank everybody's work on those items, and then on the um relinquishment items.

Uh I'd like to be recorded as um contributing $500 to the Berkeley Poet Laureate program, um, five hundred dollars for the Huerta Chavez Huerta tribute site, and $1,500 to Holocaust Remembrance Day.

And thank you to my colleagues.

Thank you very much.

Um, so I I did just want to mention um that I'm very grateful for staff's ability to continue leveraging um dollars.

On tonight's agenda, we're going to be submitting a grant in the total of $315,267 from the state of California for FY27 through FY29 for the maternal child and adolescent health program.

The city is estimated to provide 123,550 in matching funding fund revenue and drawdown 105,089 in state revenue each fiscal year.

Thank you so much to the Civic Arts Commission for their policy recommendations.

And as was mentioned by Councilmember Humbert, we will be accepting this report.

And lastly, thank you so much to everyone who put in funding towards the Poet Laureate, the tribute site, and the Holocaust Remembrance Day for FY 2027.

And I think that that is it for me.

Okay.

Do we have any public comment on consent calendar or information items only?

Come on up.

Good evening.

Um my name is Daniel McChesney Young, and I am the Ecology Center's Farmers Market Program Manager.

I am here this evening to speak in support of items 18A and B.

Um, and just say that I appreciate the city staff's commitment to working with event producers, and especially thank Peter Redou and Carrie Arradondo for their thoughtful consideration of the event producer's bill of rights in item 18A.

Um the Berkeley Farmers' Markets advance the city's cultural, economic, climate, health, and strategic goals.

We look forward to the continued city support to ensure the future of Berkeley's farmers' markets and other special cultural events.

Thank you.

Anyone online to speak on the consent calendar information items only?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Money, were you coming?

I want to thank Councilmember O'Keefe about the comment on the civic organizations and the arts and culture.

That's what Berkeley's all about and the Indigenous People's Day Powell Committee.

I'm honored to be a part of that.

Choctaw, Mississippi relatives that I have.

I've been in Powell committees in Yakima, Washington, Seattle, and here, and we want that to thrive and continue.

So we really appreciate the council support of that and live free and prevention of violence.

My sister, my aunt was killed in her bed, and my cousin as well.

Violence when it arises to that level, prevention is everything, and this program is saving lives.

So I really appreciate also Councilmember Bartlett's comments.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Anyone online for consent calendar information items only?

Yes.

First speaker is Lisa Bullwinkle.

Hi, good evening, everyone.

Um I want to thank you so much for your contributions to the poet laureate program.

Susan Felix, who was our art ambassador to the city, really encouraged me to kind of push this through the Civic Arts Commission.

And lo and behold, we've raised almost $5,000 too for our next poet laureate.

Thank you so much.

Also, I want to thank the city staff for their amazing work and positivity in going forward with the event producers policy.

This was no small task, and we're really excited to see how much joy we can bring to the city by producing events in collaboration with you.

And so I thank you again, especially Peter Ridou and Kerry and the city manager.

It's just been great trying to get this done, and I think we're there.

Thank you, Lisa, and thanks for all your work.

I know you do a lot too.

Next is Cameron Wu.

Good evening, everyone.

Thank you for taking my comments.

I come to you tonight to speak as a private citizen of Berkeley, not as a art commissioner, which I am on the Civic Arts Commission.

But I come to you tonight as private citizens.

I'd like to mention kudos to the mayor and the Berkeley City Council for contributing to Berkeley's portal program with passing item 19 tonight with Berkeley's longary tradition.

It would be a shame to leave to lose this valuable program.

It's a modest sum, but one that is greatly appreciated.

Also thanks for all the work you've done and the hopeful passage of item 18.

Little T events, producer's comments, and revisions.

Much needed.

Thank you for all for your hard work.

Thanks again.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks, Cameron.

Next is Kelly.

Thank you.

Can you hear me okay?

Yes.

Loud and clear.

Okay.

Um I have a problem with Hello Cost Remembrance Day.

As it is as if the Showa, the Holocaust, was so horrific that it is the only genocide to remember.

We don't recognize the NACPA and the current genocide that we as a country participate in through financing an army.

We recite at our meetings, the land acknowledgement, but we don't state that we live in a country created through genocide and ethnic cleansing.

I'd like us to live in a city, a country, and a world where we condemn all genocides instead of blinding our eye and excusing some depending on who is suffering and who is committing them.

Thank you.

Next is a caller with a phone number ending in 211.

You should be able to unmute.

Hi.

Uh sent it on four.

Go down, walk down telegraph.

About four out of five sub fronts are closed, shut down forever.

Something with that whole have this place empty.

Second, with the facts Holocaust, human memory is very short.

Hitler killed over so many beautiful Jews in the dark.

Nobody else.

No, with TVs every day you watch little kids in Gaza in Lebanon, getting cut in their heads.

They take 70,000.

No, it's more like half a million Palestinians are dead.

But always automatic.

Don't how can you just make semantic?

It's sent Palestinian.

Don't do it.

I think just do it.

Let's head or do.

Um it's worth it.

It's a critical.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh next speaker is Alex Knox.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members, Alex Knox, Telegraph Business Improvement District.

Thanks for the Office of Economic Development and their critical work to ensure that you know we're able to continue operating and and put um uh you know put these steps through uh motion and I'm I'm also very pleased to report that just today uh we approved and finalized our new strategic plan for the telegraph district, which uh we will be un uh veiling and and publicizing over the coming weeks, but really establishes uh uh ambitious um forward thinking vision for the telegraph district.

I'll be pleased to share that with you.

Um uh as also a contributor and uh collaborator on the policy recommendations from the Berkeley event producers I want to say that I I you know really thank the group of of people that came together to bring those recommendations together um but really I recognize and thank the city manager's office thanks Alice for their good faith efforts thank you next is uh Russell thank you everybody uh Norman Finkelstein wrote a book called uh the hot house industry where he details how it's become big business and a way to guild trip people out of money um I suggest that for the sake of balance the city of Berkeley does the Gaza genocide remembering to stay at the same time the other Holocaust remember to stay goes on uh otherwise it's probably in the uh the process become the oppressor the first chance they get and the Palestinian people have been oppressed for 78 years so for the sake of balance consider the gods of remembrance gossip remember to stay thank you very much okay next is Della Luna yes I agree with some of the speakers um seeking balance in regards to Holocaust remembrance day there should I mean we don't want to only just remember one genocide it just honestly doesn't make any sense to take that stance but I was wanted to speak about number 18a and 18b and I'm really glad to see that this um is on the agenda and I guess being passed I hope it's being passed and um I wanted to say I hope it means that the bathrooms will be open again for the farmers market.

For years we've had access to bathrooms at the Saturday farmers market specifically and we've used the park with no problems and it seems in recent years the way the city has tried to manage that space has only just made it worse and the numbers are going down at the market and the vendors are upset like everything's just cranky and so I just hope that you can restore it to a space that's actually an event that's normal to be at like a regular Saturday afternoon.

Thank you.

And the last speaker is M Jervis Hi everybody Matthew Jervis thank you everyone I wanted to speak in uh obviously we're uh excited about 18 A and B and the direction of the conversations that have been going about the event producers and the partnership with the city uh the community really expresses itself in these amazing events that we're able to put on and I'm looking forward to partnership with the city and making more of them so thank you very much for your help and uh and all the uh city staff and event producers that have uh come together in this very constructive uh conversation thank you thank you that's it okay thank you um all right so um is there a motion to oh sorry I see that councilmember taplin has his uh thank you very much I wanted to thank the mayor and the vice mayor again for their authorship of the Holocaust Representative program item this is a very important event I'm very proud that this council has continued to support this event and even today in 2026 we see an almost daily basis the grim reminder of both the impact and the presence of noxious anti-Semitic thought and conservatorial thinking and with that I move adoption of the calendar second uh so that would the consent calendar perhaps yes so uh minus the, yeah, minus 22, and then we can ask council member O'Keefe to step back.

Is that okay?

Yes.

Okay.

And okay to the secondary as well.

All right.

So this is um.

Well, this is when you would be recused on this is everything except everything except twenty-two.

Right.

So, oh yes, you're correct.

Sorry.

So there's every items one to twenty-one.

Council member Kessarwani.

Yes.

Uh Taplin.

Bartlett, yes.

Trago.

Aye.

O'Keefe.

Yes.

Blackaby.

Yes.

Lunapara.

Yes.

Humbert.

Yes.

And Mary Ishi.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to wait?

Let me just.

Okay.

Is there a motion to approve number 22 on the consent calendar?

So moved.

Second.

Can we take the role on that, please?

Uh for item 22 on consent.

Councilmember Kessarwani.

Yes.

Taplin.

All right.

Bartlett.

Yes.

Tragob.

Aye.

O'Keefe is recused.

Uh Blackaby.

Yes.

Lunapara.

Yes.

Humbert.

Yes.

And Mary Ishi.

Yes.

Okay.

That motion carries as well.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

So we are moving on to the action calendar.

We have a number of public hearings, so I'd like to open the public hearing for item number 23.

Oh, Councilmember O'Keefe, you can come back.

Um, is changes to the environmental health fee schedule.

And I am so sorry that we were not able to hear those this item and the next two at the previous meeting.

So I will let you hop right in.

Thank you, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Scott Gilman.

I'm the director of health housing and community services.

I have the pleasure of introducing our deputy director, Tanya Bustamante.

Approximately six months ago, Tanya became responsible for the environmental health division, and she has a brief presentation to review our fee proposal.

Um, thank you, Scott.

Good evening, honorable mayor and council.

Good to see you all again.

So this evening I have a brief presentation to walk you through our environmental health permit fee increases.

Can you just put it a little closer to you?

I don't know why it still sounds a little quiet.

Can you hear me better?

That's better, yeah.

Thank you.

All right.

So this evening, I will provide you with a beef a brief background of our environmental health food safety program, provide you with a rationale for our fee increases, and also talk a little bit about the fee increase impacts.

So to start off with our background, food safety and inspection really comprises the bulk of our environmental health division's work.

The environmental health division is responsible for permitting and inspecting all food facilities, and that includes school kitchens, retail and non-retail food establishments, mobile food vendors, temporary event booths, restaurants, bars, farmers markets, and so on and so forth.

The division's approach focuses on the prevention of foodborne and food-related illness by emphasizing the importance of education on key food safety principles, and also by following the federal food and drug administration retail food program standards.

Follow-up inspections occur when a facility doesn't meet minimum standards of the California Retail Food Code, which is a subset of our California Health and Safety Code.

So our current fees have remained largely unchanged since 2011.

Fees were never set at 100% of the full cost of our operations.

Additional facility categories and fees were added to the division's fee schedule back in 2016, 2021, and 2024, but those were really to reflect newly created categories of food facilities as defined in the California Retail Food Code, but existing fees overall were not updated or increased at those times.

The proposed fee structure outlines fee increases that are needed to sustain our division operations.

Additionally, the proposed fee structure reflects a 40% increase in inflation and cost of living.

So I'd like to give you a little bit of our, I'd like to give you a scope of our food facilities, which make up the majority of the types of facilities that our environmental health inspectors inspect in Berkeley.

So the City of Berkeley inspects approximately over 950 food facilities.

We also have non-food facilities, which include pools and spas, body art, cannabis and tobacco distribution, etc.

So to help you understand the difference between risk categories in our food facilities, it really is largely dependent on the type of food that is prepared and served, and also the food preparation that is involved.

So a low risk facility, for example, might be, might include something like a cafe that serves prepackaged foods.

A medium risk facility might be something like a yogurt shop, whereas a high risk facility might be might include something like a sushi bar or restaurant.

The environmental health division team has only four field and four active field inspectors currently, and the city requires six to meet its inspection targets.

I'm sharing with this with you because our high risk facilities require more inspections, and typically those are the ones that we get the most complaints on from community members.

Our proposed fees are based on a comprehensive fee study.

So facilities are categorized based on the type of facility that they are, the risk level, and also the square footage.

Fees were calculated based on the staff time that it takes to complete inspection activities and services.

And we also take into consideration complaint investigations and follow-up re-inspections.

The recommended increases and the creation of a new fee structure will increase the division's revenue to more appropriately cover the costs of delivering both mandated state and local and non-mandated services to the community and adequately inspect our over 1,100 facilities that we have in Berkeley.

Mandated services include our mandated facility inspections for all of our establishments, noise permits, stormwater inspections, etc.

Non-mandated services include things like general nuisance complaint investigations, noise studies, expanded food program services.

We often provide technological assistance and consultations to food business owners.

We also do community outreach and education and special event guidance beyond the required permitting.

The fees will defray the costs of the division software transition, which is currently in process.

We are transitioning to a new platform, which will increase accuracy and transparency of our facility inspection data.

And it will also help to fund our new packarding program costs, which the division hopes to implement next year.

Actually, I just want to add that these last three bullets are specifically in response to the city auditor's recommendations directly related to their audit findings.

We are actively working on a new platform that will enable us to make our facility inspection reports more readily available to the public, and of course, we're keeping the city auditor apprised on our progress.

Expanding our capacity and modernizing the division's operations will enable them to be more responsive to our communities' needs and more transparent with the outcome of the services that we provide.

Obviously, these fee increases will have impacts on our businesses in Berkeley.

Our Office of Economic Development is available to assist business owners in connecting to resources that can help sustain and grow their business in Berkeley.

That concludes our brief presentation and happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you very much.

I think we have a number of questions for you, starting with uh Councilmember Taplin.

Sorry.

Thank you so much.

So I don't know if this is a question for HHCS or if Eleanor might be online.

But I absolutely recognize the need for this fee increase.

And while I recognize that there will be almost a year for restaurant owners to plan for it since fees were already assessed this year.

I am curious if there are any concerns about small business owners being able to pay the fee, and just what the rollout plan is around education, change management, and potential opportunities if there are demonstrated hardships to either have an installment plan or other possible ways to get to the intended goal while also trying to hold on to the small businesses we have.

Well, I can certainly speak to the outreach and education piece.

Uh we do plan to work with our business owners and in fact our field inspectors, for the most part have a very good rapport with the business owners that they do interface with.

So we plan to do a mailing with all of them.

We plan to do face-to-face interaction and communication between our field inspectors and business owners to address their concerns and hopefully work with them.

And I'm not sure if Eleanor can add anything from the Office of Economic Development perspective.

Did you want her to respond?

Is she here?

I know she's online, but I don't know if she has anything to add.

Oh, I'm here.

Um, thanks for the opportunity to talk.

It's been great working with HHCS on the site, and we stand ready to support small businesses as they're getting information about the changes and um helping them comply with the new policy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, moving on to Councilmember O'Keefe.

Did you skip someone?

Go ahead.

Yeah, I wasn't.

I did.

I just pressed it.

So Councilmember Bartlett, then Councilmember O'Keefe.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you for your presentation.

Can you go back to the the chart of different cities and their fees?

This one.

So this is interesting.

Um as we go through this.

Um I'm curious, and maybe Eleanor can answer you can as well.

Why is San Mateo so high?

Do you have any idea?

That's a good question.

No, we just surveyed what their current fees were, but why they're so high.

Um we don't have information on that.

Okay, just curious.

We don't have that many restaurants there.

Okay.

And so, it's fine.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember O'Keefe.

Thank you.

I think it's San Mateo County that has a lot of restaurants, the whole county, right?

Um, I haven't been to San Mateo, the city.

Um, my question has to do with the um status.

Uh, you mentioned it in your presentation, the status of the um making available online the restaurant inspection information.

I know that we had um we had a presentation about that quite some time ago.

I don't remember how long ago, and um it was forthcoming then.

So, do you have a date?

I know it's a little off topic, but you brought it up, and I'm curious.

Yeah, it's been it's been a long road, but we hope to um launch it at the end of summer, early fall.

Okay, and I just I guess I remember I had a question last time that I'm still curious about.

We don't have to get into it, but my understanding is there is a PDF of all of the current um like maybe it's I'll talk to you about it offline.

Actually, it's not important for right now, but I thought there was an easier way.

But anyway, we'll look forward to that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, yeah, I was curious.

Uh actually on this chart as well, if there was a reason why our retail grocery store inspection is so much higher than Alameda's, because I feel like it's largely on par otherwise.

Do you know?

Can you speak to the last time that Alameda raised their fees?

Yeah.

So you'll see on the chart Alameda's fees were effective in 2021.

And so we believe that that they're going to be adjusting fees as well.

We don't have you know confirmation of when that's gonna happen, but I think that's part of it.

Well, it's just that that that one in particular is is like half of ours, even our older fee, you know, we also have an increase it, but it's not going up that much between what existed before with us and now.

So um anyway, I'd be interested in understanding that a little bit better.

And then the other question I I had was about um ongoing increases.

Uh do we have anything in place for that?

We don't have anything in place, um, but we do plan on um being better about um keeping keeping pace with the economy in terms of increasing our fees if we need to, um, and also keeping pace with the rest of the Bay Area jurisdictions.

And cost of living, of course, is is a factor as well.

Thank you.

And can you can you speak to any other features in this new program, this new system that would exist to just to understand that a little bit better?

I know that more transparency for the public is great, but I'm wondering if it also provides any services for those that are being inspected as well.

Um I don't fully understand the details, so we could um get back to you on that, but I do understand that there will be a public facing portal um that the community members will be able and business owners will be able to easily access.

Okay, thank you.

And then oh uh Vice Mayor Traeger, did you have something?

You wanted to ask a question?

I think council member Black of V may have had his hand up, but I do have a follow-up question.

Oh, go for it.

Sorry, I can't see you anymore, council member.

So go ahead.

I'm I'm hiding.

Um, thanks, Director Gilman, Deputy Director Bustamante.

Um I just had a couple of questions just to understand some of the big picture numbers as well, and the city manager may want to jump in here too.

Um, so on an annual basis, again, we're in budget season, so I'm kind of trying to put this in the context of the budget also.

Uh it's my understanding that the general fund reimburses EHF, something on the order of about 980,000, right?

To kind of level set the that fund.

That's correct.

Okay.

And then so this, these new revenues or these new fees would generate an additional 666,000 in revenue annually.

Um estimated, but then we'd also be hiring two new resources to fill out some of the inspection program.

And so the net the net revenue generated would be more on the order of about 229,000 or something, right?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay.

And so the general fund would still be uh shipping in on annual basis kind of 750,000 plus.

Yes.

Okay.

I mean, this question for the city manager is the is the goal of this fund that it should be self-sustaining ultimately, or is that the right way to think about it?

Is the goal trying to get that to basically to zero out so that the general funds contributing zero, or do we think this is is there a reason that the general fund should be making it?

I mean, is it is it by design that the fees should be covering the cost of running the program, or is this always gonna be the case we're gonna have general fund contribution?

It's a good question, Councilmember.

Yes, our goal is to get the fees up to the point where there's support where they're fully supporting the program.

Um as the the director and deputy director have said that fees haven't been raised for a long time, so we're kind of in a catch-up mode, but that is the goal.

Okay, okay.

Um, you know, I know we're pretty deep into this particular budget process, but I this does feel like an area means we're heading into the next fiscal year that you know, you know, the county does a I think a pretty decent job at this work.

Should this be something that we at least look at?

Are there some of these functions?

Because again, this just feels like is what we're getting in difficult budget situations, the difficult kind of budget scenarios that we're in now, you know.

If if this is a function that the county is providing to every other city in the county.

Um, yeah, I don't and again, I don't know what kind of cost we would sort of sort of bear to make that transfer, but I at least think this should be on the list of things to look at.

I know we're probably not gonna be able to do it between now and June 30.

That doesn't seem like that's that's prudent, but I know we're also probably not gonna completely finish the job at sort of totally closing the structural deficit between now and June 30.

So I think I just want to come back to this because this just feels like I appreciate all the effort and the work.

We're getting better, we're getting closer.

But if this is just sort of a number that we're still gonna be 750,000 in the red from the general fund, if this is just something we need to leave on the table and look at next year, what would it look like if we transferred some of this over?

So I just I want to at least leave that out there for consideration.

But again, I appreciate the effort and I appreciate that this is gonna help us close the gap sum and also gonna help us get better service in the short term because we'll have inspectors that are then I think again filling the gap that we haven't had up to full staff per the auditor's report.

Um I don't know again, the city manager wanted to comment on that, but that's again just looking at the numbers, it's kind of that's the question that kind of strikes me.

We could certainly hear your request, and that's something we could certainly start to delve into is doing more analysis of that and understanding the cost and benefits and understanding the you know, both like you're saying, both the cost to the general fund as well as whatever gets raised through the special funds, as well as understanding the benefits of having staff who can do this work so that we can present the picture to you.

Yeah, appreciate, yeah.

Again, between now and June 3, I don't think we'll have time, but just leave it for future.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councilmember.

Uh Vice Mayor Traegov, and then I do want to move on because I I know we have a couple more uh fees in particular and quite a few more things to cover.

Understood, I'll be as concise as I can.

Um, I for this slide, uh, the Bay Area comparison with the county.

Um, can you confirm whether this is on a unincorporated areas of the county with the exception of San Francisco, or is it a median throughout the county?

The service is provided by the county.

So Berkeley is one of the few cities in the state that has its own environmental health division.

Okay.

So these are all full counties.

Okay.

Um, so I want to echo council member Blackaby's um comment about just continue.

I know we've been in dialogue around this piece, and I would like to continue.

Um, so my other question um on table two with the new fee schedule, uh, it looks like the um this is with the with the two additional FTEs in FY27, the um expense increase would be about 10k.

Uh well, it's just a step function, but this is the plan um would be to um present the um high well the positioning of the two FTEs under AAO one, and I'm wondering what that means in terms of expense projections given if it's AOL one that's mid fiscal year, then it probably takes time to hire those positions.

Um, can you speak to whether the expense increase will actually be for 36,000?

That is our anticipated projection.

Um we took into account how much it costs, um, how much an R a registered environmental health special ex specialist costs, and so that's that those are our projections for two FTE.

Okay, so I if possible, I would like to bring back this discussion uh certainly before a decision is made on hiring um additional FTEs.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, is there any public comment on this item?

We are on item number 23 changes to the environmental health fee schedule, anyone online.

Uh no, there's no hands raised online, okay.

Um, very good.

Are there any other comments from our council members?

Yes, council member Humbert.

Thank you, madam mayor.

Yeah, I have a few.

Um, you know, I recognize that no one likes fee, and this is good.

This is gonna address uh a number of the the fee increase uh matters that um we're hearing tonight.

Uh I recognize that no one likes fee increases.

I understand why to Berkeley residents and visitors, it feels like being nickel and dimed.

And I know this is especially unpleasant when we're dealing with rising inflation and uh amazingly rising gas prices.

But that said, we need to keep our the city fees um on parity with inflation and actually reflect the cost of providing these services.

So I've appreciated council member Blackaby's and uh council member Tregoob's comments uh in that regard.

Now, unless residents are willing to approve much higher taxes that would enable us to subsidize these items, we need to adjust these fees, and that's also generally the fairest way of doing it.

And I want to wind up where it's it's cost neutral.

We live in a city with a lot of wonderful amenities and high level of services.

Now, people may sometimes not feel that way because the garbage can is left uncollected or a median gets overgrown, but that doesn't change the overall picture that Berkeley does a lot more than most cities at size, and to keep that up, we need to keep up with costs.

So I plan to support this and the other fees that we have before us tonight, and we'll have some additional comments about the parking fees specifically.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Any other council member comments?

I did just want to add that as well.

That that I know that it is really challenging for some of our small businesses, especially our our restaurants, to um have these fee increases.

And so I do really want us to look into some kind of regular increases so that we don't have these jumps.

I think that that creates a lot more uncertainty for our small businesses and um and I will be supporting this as well, but I do want us to look into that and and also understanding cost but and benefit analysis of having this in-house versus the county.

And um, yeah, I want to just also thank you for the presentation for the information.

The comparison I think is very helpful for us to understand.

And with that, I will see if there is a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Second, can we take the role on that, please?

Okay, to close the public hearing, Councilmember Cassarwani.

Yes, Kaplan.

Bartlett.

Yes.

Hi.

O'Keefe.

Yes.

Blackaby, yes, Unapara.

Yes.

Humbert?

Yes.

And Mary Ishi?

Yes.

Okay.

Public hearings closed.

Okay.

Is there a motion to approve the resolution?

So moved.

Second.

Can we take the role on that too, please?

Okay.

To uh approve the changes to the environmental health fee schedule.

Councilmember Cassarwani.

Yes.

Taplin.

Bartlett.

Yes.

Hi.

O'Keefe.

Yes.

Blackby.

Yes.

Unapara.

Yes.

Humber.

Yes.

And Mary Shi.

Yes.

Okay.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you all so much.

Okay.

Moving on to item number 24.

So by the way, my goal is to get through 24 and 25, hopefully within the next 30 minutes, we'll see.

And then take a brief break.

So moving on to item 24, repeal and reenact.

Berkeley municipal code chapter 14.52 to adjust the Go Berkeley parking management program, change parking permit fees, establish a new schedule for parking violations, fines, and late payment penalties.

And we're sending resolution number seven one, six two seven-n S, which is also continuing from May 19th, 2026.

So again, apologies for you all having to come back again that we weren't able to get to your item before the end of the evening, and I will pass it over to you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor.

Uh Council members Wahira Miri, interim director of public works.

Tonight, we have uh with us Mark Helmbrick, our transportation manager, and Elliot Schwimmer, our Go Berkeley uh subject matter expert guru.

Uh what we do have a brief presentation for you guys tonight, and I'm sure there's gonna be a lot of healthy questions afterwards, so I'll hand it over to Elliot to start the presentation, and then from there we'll be happy to field any questions and inquiries.

Thank you, good evening, mayor, vice mayor, and council members.

My name is Elliot Schwimmer, senior planner.

Tonight we are presenting a comprehensive proposal to adjust Berkeley's parking management program to ensure the long-term fiscal sustainability of our parking funds.

Council is being asked to take four key actions tonight.

First, to repeal and reenact chapter 14.52 of the municipal code to allow for extended meter operating hours from 6 to 8 p.m.

Operate meters on, operate uh meters in new commercial areas of the city, and authorities a translate transition to cashless hardware to reduce long-term costs.

The second action is to authorize public works to pass through parking vendor service costs to the customer.

Third, we are proposing updates to the residential parking permit fee schedule for 2028, and fourth, a long overdue realignment of our parking violation fines to keep pace with inflation and align with nearby jurisdictions.

To start, I want to provide a quick picture of what the city's parking program looks like today.

For on-street parking, the city operates 1,945 single space meters and 242 multi-space pay stations, generating 8.8 million in FY25.

On the off-street side, the city owns and operates three parking garages, Center Street, Telegraph Chaining, and Oxford Garage with 1,239 spaces in total.

The garage has generated 4.9 million in FY25.

Combined parking generated 13.7 million last year with on-street meters accounting for about 64% of that 13.7 million is what funds our parking services team, including parking enforcement.

It also funds our meter hardware, garage operations, and the 1.9 million dollar annual debt service on the Center Street Garage reconstruction.

As you'll see, it's not currently enough to cover all costs, which is what brings us here tonight.

The core issue is this.

Without action, the city's combined parking funds are projected to carry a deficit of roughly one million dollars by the end of FY27.

The near term strategies council approved in January 2026 make progress, but they're insufficient on their own.

Second, our parking infrastructures aging, mechanical coin and receipt mechanisms are the primary cause of meter downtime and manually collecting physical cash from nearly 2200 devices, requires significant staff and armored transport costs.

Third, evenings and Sundays consistently show high parking occupancy in our commercial districts, but those are the hours when our meters are off.

So we're not able to manage parking during these times.

Regarding RPP, the residential preferential parking program, the current price for a permit is the same regardless of how many permits you have, but this does not promote the city's environmental goals.

These aren't just financial problems, they go directly against the four goals of the Go Berkeley program, making it easier to find parking, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from circling vehicles, improving turnover for local businesses, and making streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.

Our first recommendations address parking demand after 6 p.m.

and on Sundays.

Currently, meters operate Monday through Saturday, 9 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

We're proposing to extend that to 8 p.m., two additional hours every day, and to add Sunday operations from 9 to 8 p.m.

as well.

The data is clear.

Parking demand in Berkeley Berkeley's commercial cores remains high during evenings and on Sundays.

When meters are inactive during peak demand periods, we lose both revenue and the ability to manage turnover.

Drivers circle longer double parking increases, and blocks fill up in ways that lock out short-term customers and delivery vehicles.

These two changes are projected to generate approximately $1 million in net new annual revenue after accounting for the added enforcement costs.

I'd also note that Berkeley would not be unusual here.

San Francisco operates some meters until 10 p.m.

and on Sundays.

Oakland began Sunday operations from 12 to 6 p.m.

citywide in January.

Walnut Creek, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Monterey also operate on Sundays.

On zone expansion, we're proposing to install about 30 new pay stations in high demand commercial areas that currently have no meters.

Our data shows that these areas regularly exceed 85% occupancy, and that's the threshold at which parking availability effectively breaks down, and cars begin circling looking for spaces.

Adding meters to these blocks encourages turnover and ensures a space or two is consistently available.

Net new revenue is projected at $317,000 in the first year, following a one-time capital cost of $296,000.

On the cashless transition, we're seeking authorization to replace aging meters that accept coins and print receipts with tap to pay units.

Coin jams and printer failures are our top causes of meter downtime.

Eliminating physical cash also removes roughly $95,000 in annual costs from armored transport, fewer parts, and less maintenance.

We'd start with a pilot, survey users after 30 days, and expand district by district based on feedback.

An important equity note all new hardware would allow prepaid debit card functionality.

While we are working on a clipper card integration, prepaid debit cards could also be used right off the bat, which are available and reloadable at dozens of retail locations.

This preserves access for residents who don't have credit cards or smartphones.

And just to note, our public survey showed 70% of the 670 respondents support this approach.

This map shows the 27 block faces we're proposing to bring into the Go Berkeley program.

All locations showed occupancy within or above the program's target range of 65 to 85% on one or both sides of the street.

You can see the blocks cluster into a few distinct areas.

North Berkeley commercial corridors are on Hopkins and Fifth Street, the West Berkeley Industrial District along 8th, 9th Potter, and Hines, and several blocks along San Pablo, Milvia, Addison, and Telegraph in the central and southern parts of the city.

Some blocks are significantly over target, even over 100% occupancy.

So there are functionally no open spaces, and the block is generating congestion rather than managing it.

Introducing meters at these locations is not about raising revenue in isolation.

It's about making these corridors function the way the rest of the meter network already does, with consistent turnover and at least one or two spaces reliably available at any given time.

Every time someone pays a Berkeley parking meter by credit card, the city pays the processing fee.

That costs about 456,000 per year.

We're proposing to pass that cost through as a transparent customer paid service charge of 35 cents per transaction.

This is consistent with the convenience fee model already used by in the city of Berkeley by Park Mobile, which is our mobile payment parking provider.

The charge will be displayed on the screen before the credit card transaction is confirmed, so drivers can choose to cancel if they prefer.

After transitioning, the city would still owe a reduced annual service fee of about $50,000 to our vendor, but the net savings to the parking meter fund would be approximately $406,000 per year.

Forty-seven percent of public survey respondents supported this change, and only 33% opposed it.

The residential parking permit program is operating as at a significant deficit.

We spend about $4.1 million per year administering the program, primarily the personnel costs for our 21 parking enforcement officers, supervisors, and administrative staff, and collect only about 2.85 million dollars in permit and citation revenue.

That's a 1.3 million dollar annual gap.

We're proposing a new graduated fee structure for the FY28 permit year, taking effect May 1st, 2027.

The key change is that permit fees would scale with the number of vehicles registered at an address.

The first permit would go from $85 to $100, the second permit would be $125, and the third $150.

Visitor passes and other permit types would also see modest adjustments as shown.

The rationale is straightforward.

Households storing more vehicles on the public right-of-way are using a disproportionate share of limited curb space.

A graduated structure creates a gentle incentive to use off-street parking where it's available while keeping permits accessible.

This change is projected to generate approximately $615,000 in new annual revenue.

And I do want to note that this item is responsive to a council referral.

Our parking fines tell a similar story.

For most violation types, the last comprehensive update was in 2010, 16 years ago.

Since then, cumulative inflation measured by the consumer price index has been about 49%.

The result is Berkeley's fines are well below those of neighboring cities.

The expired meter citation in Berkeley is currently 43 dollars.

In Oakland, the same violation is 64.

In San Francisco, it's 108.

When the financial penalty for overstaying a meter is low enough that it feels like a competitive parking alternative, compliance suffers, and so does availability for the next driver.

We're proposing to adjust fines upward in line with cumulative inflation since each fine was last set, meaning increases of between three percent and forty-nine percent, depending on when a particular violation was last updated or added to the schedule.

An expired meter would go from 43 to 64 dollars.

Street sweeping violations from 49 to 73 dollars.

These levels would still keep Berkeley meaningfully below San Francisco.

And here's the full picture.

The recommendations before you tonight are projected to generate 7.1 million in new annual revenue with $2.3 million in new costs and five $500,000 in cost savings for net annual increase of about $5 million.

Without these measures, the combined parking fund balance is projected to fall negative to negative $1 million by the end of FY27.

With them, the combined balance is still projected to be negative, but the trajectory of the balance would change in FY28, building up a balance instead of depleting it.

The key point is that this package is self-reinforcing.

Operational changes increase curb access in busy commercial districts, generates revenue that funds better service and supports continued cost recovery.

The rollout for the Go Berkeley changes would be phased to prioritize education.

It would begin with a citywide sign replacement program in early FY27.

We would implement a pilot period for the new evening and Sunday hours during this month, depending on parking enforcement, staff capacity.

Warning citations may be issued during the additional hours, giving motorists time to learn the new rules before financial penalties begin.

The full transition to cashless hardware would then follow over a three to five year period.

Tonight, staff is asking council to take four actions.

Adopt first reading of the ordinance amending BMC chapter 14.52, adopt the resolution transitioning parking meter transaction costs to his customer service charge, adopt the resolution implementing the new graduated RPP fee structure for FY28, and adopt the resolution updating the schedule of parking violations and fines.

Thank you for your time.

My colleagues are here as well, and we're happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much.

I think we have a number of questions, starting with Vice Mayor Trackab.

Thank you so much.

Um, I have two, three, four, five.

I have six questions.

Um, one in the report um there's a mention of an increase to a surcharge for additional annual or semi-annual residential permit, and I couldn't quite understand what that describes and how it's different from an additional uh just paying for an additional parking spot.

Yeah, that's the surcharge for the fourth and beyond residential permits, which requires a waiver form and um moving on.

Um how um uh can you describe uh the extent to which this proposal is coupled with other principles of Go Berkeley uh in particular around um enhanced wayfinding and signage to uh educate drivers on the existence of our two parking garages uh as it concerns the downtown?

Okay, um it's a good point that park the curbside parking and garage parking policy are interrelated and they need to be managed together.

Um we are looking at other options for increasing signage to the the center street garage in particular, but this item does not include any wayfinding signage for garages, okay?

Thank you.

Um can you speak to um planning for um or is there going to be any heightened enforcement in residential areas?

I'm just thinking about the downstream impact if I'm circling around and I see a parking meter where I'm not used to seeing one without other options, I might look for a different parking spot off in a residential area.

So, how um how will um this program be calibrated to account for those kinds of downstream impacts?

This item does um propose a significant increase in parking enforcement staffing.

Um if that's your question, I mean there would be increased presence in RPP areas as well as um go Berkeley meter areas.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Uh can you speak to the um planned education process when switching to cashless operations?

And I am in particular thinking about those residents who or non-residents who don't use don't use a card use only cash.

I understand there's clipper compatibility, but how will they be educated about that?

Um the pilot period, so I mean anticipating doing a community message and getting the word out about the pilot period very significantly working with um news organizations like Berkeley Side to get the word out.

Um I think with the community message, a website, and the pilot period, you know, hopefully folks would start to catch on and and um observe that there are other options if they don't have a bank account or a credit or a debit or credit card.

Okay, thank you.

Um, two final questions uh sticking with the pilot around or the report mentioned that um the transition to uh a modernized uh set of parking meters will be um uh it'll be on one uh particular block.

I was curious if that block or area has been identified for the pilot.

Um and also it then said um the program would expand based on positive feedback.

So what would constitute positive feedback?

Um I know this is not the most popular um thing in the world talking about parking fee increases.

So how would the data be disaggregated to be specific to the new and improved parking meters themselves i i think a survey would be critical to seeking feedback on that specific block for the this is the cashless meters um the pilot period is is really for items one a and one b which are the the hour extension in the sunday parkings that would be the first month where um there'd be a pilot period to understand and to get the word out but then the the cashless meters would be on a a block specific um roll out time frame where we would survey just the the limited number of people on that block to see how they're experiencing it and try to also do like dash uh flyers to try to understand how drivers are are feeling that so it's a combination of business feedback and drive a motorist feedback thank you is there a general area you've identified right now for pilot yeah okay thank you um and last question is um I was looking at the chart on uh figure well so figure two um I see where um by FI 31 um if we approve this it's projected to almost get the uh fund balance the combined fund balance to break even um I'm curious uh that this off street fund six to seven balance um which looks steady state um between figures one and two um is the intention to kind of keep like are there plans to stabilize the funding for um that balance or will it continue to run increasing deficits it's kind of wondering beyond FI 31 the off street fund is challenging um because the garages I mean it's all under the Go Berkeley program so it's all managed based on demand so 65 to 85 percent target is our sweet spot um if occupy exceeds that we raise rates if occupancies below that we're supposed to lower rates and for the garages uh two of our garages are significantly below um the target range and so for those garages we you know the program guidelines would say that we should lower the rates which would not build back uh the revenue in that fund so it's it's a little challenging that's we're not really able to increase rates in those garages to to recover um the balance there also yeah we also um the have a 1.9 million dollar annual debt obligation for the center street garage which is depleting that fund balance every year or has been yeah when does that debt obligation run until I believe it's 2046 okay thank you those are all my questions okay council member bartlett and then um council member backaby you're next thank you madam mayor thank you um could could could we pull the the chart back up that um council the device mayor was referencing sure it's about a number or two on here is that the chart in the the report yeah with the seven million dollar ultimate uh earnings then your presentation oh in the presentation two away from the end I think yeah yeah that one slightly numbers on the page uh page eleven yes here we go um so I'm wondering if I'm curious at the the rate of noncompliance is this factored in into into revenues.

So number of tickets issued, the anticipated issuing.

Is there some sort of a formula that you did the time has shown uh are likely to be issued?

We we do not account for an increase in compliance due to the changing um fine amounts.

So this is just purely the number of um citations issued times the the increase in the the rates.

Okay.

Is there is there any you know any data at all around anticipated noncompliance because I can imagine you know moving the a whole new day and two new hours each day um in highly demand areas there'll be some tickets.

Yeah we go ahead yeah I would put it at that there'll be a shift in non-compliance from current hours to the later hours right I mean there's a non-compliance that happens as you get to the end of the the regulations already and those those times are going to shift with this um yeah.

Okay.

But no no hard guesstimation as to what that could be right?

No we haven't quantified that okay and I'm curious about the the survey respondents uh this 44% was it that support these increases who are who are these respondents we don't have identifying information of the respondents I mean it's there's 669 respondents that were citywide presumably um from a community message from the communications department okay team okay and uh did you uh have any specific input from any uh interest groups like the small business community the seniors people like that requests yeah nothing specific from the senior community but we did get specific requests for parking meters on certain blocks from businesses and those blocks are proposed to um have meters okay thank you so much thank you council member backey thanks mayor um go ahead and leave this slide up I had a couple questions about this slide as well um do all of the the figures here so the 5.3 million dollars of net change does that does all that revenue accrue to the various parking funds no no so the parking funds will see the extended hours to APM Sunday operations zone expansion um the cost savings from the cashless transition the transaction charge pass through but then the bottom two RPP fees and parking fines those accrue to the general fund okay got it um so question of the city manager and I know remind me I think again I'm back putting back into the into the budget process um currently I think we have an assumption in fiscal 26 that we're transferring about a million from the general fund plus or minus to the parking fund to keep them solvent is that is my recollection about right there yes it is okay if we were to pass some of these new measures how would that affect what we're able to do in the budget would we be able to dial that will that would that also give us some room in the fiscal 26 and fiscal 27 budget if we were to pass these increases.

It wouldn't because we're phasing these in over time so they wouldn't hit right away okay okay um I wanted to zero in real quickly on the Sunday operations um so observing sort of all of all the line items on the chart this is the one that gives me the greatest pause because it almost feels like you know we're squeezing basically we're it's we're incurring and again I just want to say I appreciate staff I know we've had a back and forth on this on the last couple days so I just thank you for indulging me in all the questions because I'm really trying to understand like where are the biggest bangs for our buck in terms of doing this work and clearly um you know the bottom two line items actually the bottom four line items are the most straight ahead like we're not incurring any additional cost we're either saving money or we're generating new revenue um I will say of the top three line items.

The Sunday operations feels like well I'm not really sure if the juice is worth the squeeze, right?

I mean, we've heard a lot of people who have concerns and I share concerns about it's nice to have a day a week where we're not worrying about paying for parking.

I mean, again, that's you know, that's not the biggest problem in the world, but it is a nice benefit.

It is nice to be able to go and go downtown or go to other businesses and and go to SALS or do whatever you do on Sundays and not have to worry about paying the meter.

And I'll also just observe that it's costing us 1.3 million to generate 1.4 million in revenue, which is again a very modest return for the infrastructure and the added operational costs relative to extending hours to eight or expanding the zones to places where they the parking meter should be expanded.

Um give any thought just kind of back to the team.

I mean, any thought about why the cost for the Sunday operations, you know, runs relatively high relative to those other options and why the margin is so small on the Sunday piece.

In the chart in the staff report, there's some one-time costs um that are listed in here.

Um and so after year one in this um this projection changes.

Um, so there's three hundred and currently in this report three hundred and sixty-three thousand dollars uh to outfit uh parking enforcement vehicles with uh license plate reader uh technology, and so that would come off um afterwards, and then right now we're um also loading in quite a bit of the parking enforcement into Sunday, and the reality is item one A, one B and one C all consume a bit of that additional uh parking enforcement cost.

So, got it okay.

Um, well just uh I'll come back to this in deliberations uh because again I I I appreciate the thrust of all this.

Um that's the one I think of all the things on here that I'm I'm the most um the most reticent about.

It doesn't f it feels like that's not a clear slam dunk easy win, and so um so I want to come back to that in deliberations, but I appreciate all the time and effort in pulling also this together and just getting into into a better position where we will be more solvent and the parking funds will be more sustainable for the long term.

So thank you for doing all this work, and that's it.

Thank you, Councilmember Humbert.

Yes, thank you, madam mayor, and I want to thank um Mr.

Schwimmer, Mr.

Helmbrecht, and Director O'Meary for all your hard work on this, and thank you, Mr.

Schwimmer, for your your presentation.

Um I also want to talk about Sunday.

I really just have questions about the Sunday enforcement.

And I I appreciated Mr.

Helmbrecht's answer that, you know, then the first year there may be uh you know 132,000 dollar upside, but in subsequent years it should be more significant than that, right?

Is there any estimate of of how that might go up?

I mean, I suppose it's fairly easy math, right?

In terms of what's in the report, we loaded all of the costs of outfitting the enforcement vehicles in this line.

And so it'll go up by 363,000 at a minimum.

So that's that's that's fairly significant.

And it's also the case, is it not, that on Sunday, I mean, I have to say, people store their cars in um in areas where meters are not operational, and that can affect turnover in terms of you know um accessibility for people who are shopping on Sunday, and Sunday's a big shopping day these days.

Maybe it wasn't uh a century ago when all the shops were shut, but um it is now, so I mean that's the other factor really to consider, and and I think you have considered it, is is turnover making parking parking available um and not just allowing people to store their cars and cause shoppers, for example, to have to park blocks and blocks and blocks away.

Is that right?

That's kind of a leading question, but yeah, no, that's exactly right.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, those are those are my questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Lunapara.

Thank you.

Um, and thank you so much for the presentation.

Can you um go back to the RPP slide?

I'm curious if you have any information on nearby jurisdictions um or comparable jurisdictions that and their RPP costs.

How much how much they um charge for RPP?

They're yeah, they're comparable.

I don't have that information in front of me, but we can get it get over to you.

Okay, thank you.

Local cities are very comparable, and obviously, San Francisco is much higher.

Do you know how much San Francisco would be approximately?

To be quite honest, I'm trying to recall from memory, but it was quite a bit of double, if I recall correctly.

But again, to tell you's point, just the surrounding it's comparable.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um Councilmember Taplin.

Uh, thank you very much.

I just have one question.

Um, I'm wondering what other jurisdictions also have Sunday parking.

Yeah, um, we hadn't yeah, we know it's in the presentation.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

Um, so Oakland began operating some parking meters on Sundays in January.

Um, Sacramento, LA, Seattle, Washington, D.C., Chicago operate until 8 p.m.

or later, and then it's walnut creek.

Um, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Monterey, they all operate on Sundays.

They they have a some of them might have different operations for Oakland.

I think they started later in the day, so ours is a little bit different as far as operating hours, but the day is consistent.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you very much for that.

Yeah, so it's not like uh completely novel concepts.

Appreciate it.

All right, any other questions?

Okay.

Um, my one question was actually about since we are removing the ability for people to use coins, and then we're having this card fee.

I'm just wondering if there's a reason we can't just build the card fee in.

Okay, yeah.

Because it's kind of like saying, like, oh, if you if you're using a card, but then you have to use a card, you know.

We have a bit of work to do on this.

We're having a meeting with Clipper momentarily.

Um, we've also talked to uh passport as part of our back office um integration of our parking system about being able to essentially refund uh the cost of any cards uh when you go to use the card, right?

So, like your first parking um might be discounted by the three dollars that the card costs.

So we're we're working on being able to resolve that issue, um, but we have a little bit of ways to go, and this is gonna be a long build-in.

We have a lot of meters out there with coins.

Um we've got a long way to go on this one.

We're trying to get direction that we can go in this direction, then we'll bring information back.

Okay, I'm not sure if that answered my question, but uh that's okay.

Let's uh let's move to public comment because I I we're already at 804, so we're way off my we're way off my estimation.

If you have public comment on um item number 24, which is the one about parking, please come on up.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Uh, of course, I'm concerned about the small businesses, but at the same time, we have to implement all these fees.

It goes for the last presentation too, and fines.

We have this budget deficit, we have to preserve essential services, we have to have our fire, we have to have our police, we have to have our repairs accessible, we have to have homeless housing.

I consider that an essential service, and um I hope that uh 1383 will be enforced, the waste law, that's something that's going on in forced.

The um, and that's up to the local jurisdictions to uh have a compliance plan.

There is uh also um the smoking, that's another possibility for fees.

I see people smoking publicly.

They're not getting citations, it's also happy in multi-residential housing.

Uh, there is the uh rental housing safety program that landlords are advised they have to uh uh inspect units by July 1st, but then the city doesn't really it it says right on the city website that there's nothing you have to file with the city.

You should have to file something with the city if we want people to do it.

And then there should be a fine if you don't.

Instead, it's a very selective enforcement if just somebody happens to call up and it's complaint triggered.

So there are things we're not doing.

I can say I'm personally impacted by the um go-go-grandparent uh situation, the transportation, and yet I have to say objectively, it had to be done because we all have to get it.

Sorry, Carol.

Can we can we keep it focused on this item?

Well, I'm talking about fines and fees, and so that includes the parking.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Did you have a comment on this item?

Do I need to put on a speaker card?

No, come on up.

My name is Andrew Marowitz.

I'm item number 28.

You'll love me.

Um I heard this, I heard the environmental fee for restaurants.

Uh it occurs to me that the city is just reaming through people financially.

I'm sorry, just I know you were talking about the restaurant fees, but that was the other item.

So if you have a comment on the parking fee, then parking fees added to the environmental fees, figure those restaurants, those owners of those restaurants, operators' restaurants.

They're gonna have to either pass it along, which is gonna drive out the customers because they don't want to spend such high rates, they have to pay their minimum wage to servers and whatnot.

You're gonna kill restaurants.

They're not gonna want to stay in business, they're gonna go somewhere else, or they're gonna just stop.

It's just a short-sided version of we need more money.

This is how we're gonna do it.

But there's not a long view of what the impact is, and it's just to pay for salaries.

Why not instead, for instance, uh the city has 13 paid holidays per year?

Why don't you go back?

And that's more than any other city in the state.

Why not take away one paid holiday and pay for all of this?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone online have comments on item number 24?

Yeah, more than less than.

So we have uh first speaker is Michael Katz.

Good evening.

How long do I have?

Two minutes.

Thank you.

Um, I urge you to follow Councilmember Blackaby's lead and at least get rid of the first three items and the card fee, if not the whole item.

Um, I hope you'll have the wisdom to do that.

Whenever this amorphous public comment or public survey happened, what's going on now is insane inflation due to Trump's war and Trump's tariffs.

And nationally, there is a democratic and progressive message to pursue affordability and reduce the pain on people.

This city just seems to keep going in the opposite direction with sales tax hikes that would make our regressive sales tax one of the highest in the country.

And now this, which could kill off a whole bunch of restaurants, which are dropping like flies already.

And the thing I find most glaring here is there's no change in the double parking fee, which I think is $60 base.

So the cost of an unexpired meter would be higher than creating an active hazard by double parking, which I'll come back to if I have time.

Um, you know, if you look at what's happened with uh tax measures in the East Bay last week, it doesn't look good for the people putting up with these kinds of additional pain.

And if the city is losing money on parking management, maybe this university city should be smarter about what how it's managing parking.

Um the most cynical thing I see in this measure is the claim that this would somehow make cyclists safer by reducing double parking.

There is no double parking enforcement in this city, as far as I can tell.

I ride a bike every day.

This is the worst hazard to cyclists.

It's much worse than moving vehicles because it forces us into oncoming traffic.

If we actually enforce double parking, $60 a pop at least, $263 a pop in transit only lanes, and those are all the way up Durant in the restaurant cluster where there's some of the worst abuse.

PCOs could be sighting vehicles all day on Shaddock Upper University Durant.

Put all that money in the city budget, and thank you.

Thanks for your comment.

Your time is up.

Next speaker is Kelly.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes.

I just find this whole thing so completely annoying.

And I think council member Bartlett was really getting to the right questions.

The big question I always that I have looking at this is who is making the money from managing the parking meters.

9 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

every day is annoying.

Sunday is a particularly bad day.

Can't we give people one day of rest?

I hate that I'm tracked everywhere, and now I have to use a card to pack to park, so now I'm tracked again at another spot.

So we're gonna have to we're gonna create anger and annoyance in with Berkeley residents and visitors for a hundred thousand dollars on Sunday.

Is it really worth it?

Um yeah, I thought as the last speaker said double parking that that's a big issue.

It looks like you know, this is gonna push people to use Uber and Lyft and DoorDash a lot more.

It is just um, and then charging us for using a card when we have to use a card and we can't use coins anymore.

It's just everything with this is just totally wrong.

I'm sorry that public works is pushed into trying to and charged with making um parking a uh profit center for the city, but I I just think this is totally the wrong direction, and you all need to reconsider here what you're doing, and just push this off for another day.

So that's all I have to say, right?

Thanks, Kelly.

Next is Della Luna.

Yes, I would like to follow up that speaker.

I like that.

Push this off for another day.

This one doesn't seem like the right time.

Costs are going up for people everywhere, so why just like hammer in a couple nails?

Um, and a Sunday should be free, and it people should definitely be able to go to church for free.

So the later starting time at Oakland has makes sense, but I'm trying to imagine people in church trying to go out to pay their meter so they don't get a ticket.

Also, I the fees that the staff showed it doesn't show the the tiers of those fees.

Like, sure, it's 49 dollars, but that's for I think 21 days, and then it goes up quite significantly.

And so I don't think that you all really got to see the like full impact of all of those fees in their tiers, and so if someone couldn't pay a $60 ticket, then it goes to like $128 or $229.

It's really astronomical the way it rises.

Um, but overall, I wanted to first speak about Sundays, but overall I don't think that this should pass.

Sunday is kind of like a more relaxed state where people where I would go downtown or go hang out and go to shops and kind of meander rather than being on a mission or running errands um downtown, and so taking that away again.

I think it would harm the restaurants, like another person spoke about, but I do feel like you're putting you're not um the impact that this would have on the business districts would be negative.

So the overall net I think is not positive for Berkeley, and just think about Sundays, seeing that really only tying to like 100,000 revenue.

But it really didn't lift my spirits as in yay, we got this, that this is like a plan, but also I feel like we have to not only just generate revenue but make sure we're spending the money appropriately that we do have the funds.

So I think there's other ways.

It seems like you just want to gouge constituents, like how much you call it revenue, but you're just taking money out of our paychecks just to exist, just to go to the market, or just to go downtown, and we have to pay just to exist in the city, and I feel like you should find other ways to thank you, Della.

That's it.

That's the last speaker.

Okay, thank you very much.

Comments from my council colleagues, starting with council member Bartlett.

So it's certainly.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Humbert.

Uh, thank you for the presentation.

And uh, is it on that?

Okay, I'm I'm double uh double mic'd here.

Um, thank you, madam mayor.

Um, you know, I thank you for the presentation, thank you for the diligence here.

I know this isn't um you know, is not in a vacuum.

Uh you know, this proposal uh comes from a severe need.

We have uh we have a strong deficit, we are underwater in many ways, um, and we have responsibility to stabilize our budgets.

Uh, however, uh, I'm concerned about this particular approach.

Um, you know, relying on parking enforcement to to raise money is regressive in nature, it just is.

And at a time where people are being uh nickel and dime everywhere they turn, at a time where their streets are jammed full of rideshare companies, delivery companies, and they're not bearing the burden.

These corporations are not bearing the burden of this of this economic need.

The residents are, and these residents pay incredible rents and incredibly high property taxes, and we want them to pay more taxes.

So, honestly, I feel they pay enough already, and I think that the freedom to live in your community, your very expensive community comes with the ability to drive around and do stuff.

Now, the small businesses that we have, I get a million emails every week.

Ask for help, ask to support them, stop by them, bring them customers, or do anything to help them stay open because they're all struggling, they're all on their last legs, and I'm worried that this um this approach of uh impacting the ability to park near them and go see them, uh, will impact them worse and make them shut down even sooner at a time where jobs are threatened, as we know by the encroaching technology, the war in Iran and the threat to the stability of the dollars at play here.

Uh, we have a lot of headwinds here, and I'm not sure that uh we're supporting our people by drowning them in these fees.

Um I'm curious about the the ratio uh if there's any projections about this or thought about loss of business revenue, uh opposed to the seven million in parking and fines and fees increases, right?

If that measures up, and also I'm curious about the quality of life of persons, and that's sort of an intangible aspect um that is hard to measure, but I can tell you people feel it.

Um so but and to work with you, you know.

I would suppose uh would propose um uh sort of a middle ground here, uh a two-year pilot, wherein we measure the results here, see how it's happening, check on um the compliance rates, the impacts of businesses, the the result of this, and also tied to real economic metrics, and then a deeper understanding of the need to continue these metrics because the the driving patterns we all know will be changing.

I was in a lay last week.

Every other car was an automated transport vehicle, it's coming here next.

So we may not need this much enforcement.

Our whole our whole street strategy will evolve, and in two years we'll have a clearer picture.

So rather than commit these seniors getting caught out there trying to pay these fees to go to Walgreens and commit these uh small restaurants to having no business and people going to Emeryville and going to uh four street private parking lot that's free or going to other places to evade our our overwhelming penumbra of cost to the business here and do and live your life here.

Um I suggest we look at this in two years.

Councilmember Taplan.

Thank you.

I'm gonna say like pretty much the exact opposite of all that.

Um but I first want to can you clarify how long we're in the hook for the parking garage?

2046, 2046, so that's not gonna go away.

Um we're talking about public space being used for car storage.

Just because there are not currently fees does not mean that parking is free.

The city pays to maintain it.

People who don't drive pay to maintain this parking, and for the people saying we should put this off another day, putting things off for other days is how we got here with the deficit in this fund, the deficit in the marina fund, the deficit in the general fund.

And this isn't this isn't a business.

It is a fund that is supported by revenue collected and the associated use of this operation.

And it makes no sense to operate a deficit.

It makes even less sense to willfully operate a deficit.

And I get that it's hard to do new things, and people want everything to be to be free, and people don't want to pay for parking, and they might get upset.

But some of the choices we have to make are difficult and they are necessary.

And if we don't make those choices today, the choices we will make tomorrow will be even more difficult.

So I will be supporting this, and I will make a motion to adopt this off recommendation.

I'll second that motion.

Thank you.

Yeah, Councilmember Humbert, you're up to us anyway.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And first I want to uh associate myself 100% with the comments made by uh Councilmember Taplin.

He hit the nail on the head.

Um consistent with what I said before, I understand that people feel nickel and dime by things like additional metered parking days and longer hours uh for to pay at parking meters, but at the same time, we're talking about using 200 square feet of public space to store a private vehicle.

That should carry a cost for the reasons that council member taplin articulated, especially during high demand times.

Free Sunday parking is a long outdated holdover from a time when most businesses were closed on Sundays, we had blue laws, people were more likely to be at home or at worship.

Sunday is now a very busy day for most commercial districts, so it makes sense to charge for parking for curb management.

In fact, my experience in downtown and in the commercial districts is folks from the surrounding residential neighborhoods park their cars and store them uh all day Sunday, and that displaces um, you know, potential shoppers.

So, you know, arguably, and I think this is probably correct.

Um, if we move those cars around and make parking available, uh, the merchants on Sundays will will likely do better.

Um, I also want to point out that the answer to the question that I my leading question um during the the question period um that the hundred thousand dollar delta, the you know uh for Sunday, you know, the hundred thousand dollar, you know, essentially um, not profits but um positive uh uh fund inflows, that's only the first year.

After that, it's it's it's three hundred thousand plus.

So that's very significant.

Um that's not that's not chicken feed.

Um parking availability and turnover are important for reducing circling, congestion, carbon burning of automobiles, and making it easier for people to quickly find parking and all-day parking that also contributes to double parking for pickups and deliveries.

That's another problem.

Um I understand that businesses are concerned that paying for parking may dissuade people from visiting on Sundays, but if we look at Emoryville, which has paid parking in a garage, which is decidedly less convenient than street parking, it seems people are relatively willing to pay for parking, especially if finding a spot is relatively easy and charging for street parking in the way we do it helps ensure spots are available on any given block.

So overall, I'm supportive of the Sunday parking component.

Um I also want to address the the higher RPP fees.

Um people may balk at higher RPP fees, especially if on a percentage basis we're looking at something like a 50 to 100% increase.

But again, we're talking about being able to privately used 200 square feet of our public roadways.

A roadways belong to everyone and could instead be used for green stormwater infrastructure, bike lanes, or just even expanded sidewalks for pedestrians.

And in what other situations can you essentially get 200 square feet of private storage space for the equivalent of 10 to 13 dollars per month for perspective, 150 feet of private self-storage space on San Pablo Avenue currently costs 418 dollars a month.

Granted, those are enclosed storage spaces, but even if we raise RPP to 150 dollars a year, that would still be something like a 98% discount on what an equivalent amount of private storage space goes for.

And many buildings in Berkeley charge hundreds of dollars a month for private parking, even at these higher rates.

RPP remains a really kind of an amazing bargain.

So for all these reasons, I plan to support this item.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Kesarwani.

Thank you very much, Madam Mayor.

Thank you for this presentation.

You know, this has been a long time coming.

I think Elliot, you were maybe here, was it 2019?

Oh, you were not here.

Okay.

I apologize.

Well, I was here when we were trying to increase these fees um earlier in my in my first term on council, I believe it was 2019, and we were not able to do so.

And I think um there are costs associated with that, right?

We are underfunding our enforcement for one.

Um we have areas of our city where your your report tells us we have um high demand, people are circling, uh, people are unable to get a parking space uh where they feel that they need to be, you know, maybe it's close to a business, and so um so I think we need to properly manage our streets, and I I wanna remind all of us.

I think some of us have already said this.

The streets, you know, are a that's a the public right of way.

That's a public good.

And so when we give it away for free, uh sometimes that's appropriate because the demand isn't there, but what you're proposing here is to charge uh you know a fair reasonable fee to encourage turnover so that we can have more customers come to these businesses and encourage people to move on and and have less circling.

So I think it's better for the environment, it's better for our management of the public right-of-way, which is a public good.

And I'm going to say something that some people may disagree with.

You do not own the street space in front of your home.

That's not yours.

That is the public right of way.

And you don't own the street space in front of your business.

It that belongs to everybody who's trying to move around our city, and and I know this this council has a commitment to to enable everyone in our city to move around safely as well.

So I think this is a really important thing.

It's a long time coming.

Um I also want to talk about RPP.

I I think um I was the one who did that referral to ask for the graduated fee increases for RPP, uh, because we, you know, in my district, we hear stories of people owning multiple, multiple cars, like seven vehicles, that they are parking on the public right-of-way, the public good.

So, if people want to choose to do that, you know, that is their choice, but we need to have that be reflected in our costs, and as we all know, we are facing a deficit.

I think this parking fund you said had a million dollar um deficit.

So, so we we need to rectify this, and and I do understand this is hard.

I I think people have very strong feelings about parking, and um, you know, I think this is just something that's that's been a long time coming and is a necessary change.

I hope we can continue to expand once we when you know, in areas where we see that there the occupancy is going above that 85 percent target threshold.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilmember O'Keefe.

Thank you.

Um, a lot of what I wanted to say has already been said.

I really want to associate myself with Council Member Taplin's comments, especially, um, and I'll just highlight um a couple things that were mentioned by other council members.

One is I've I've really always thought it's ridiculous that we don't charge for parking on Sundays.

This is irrespective of the revenue benefits to it.

I just think this isn't the 19th century, this isn't Europe.

Like we're a modern secular place, and as Councilmember Humbert pointed out, you know, it's not even a uh a day when a lot of stores are closed anymore.

So it doesn't make any sense for us to not charge for parking on Sundays.

I think this is a great idea.

Even if it was revenue neutral, I would say it was good just for the sake of logical consistency.

It's good policy.

Um so I wanted to say that.

And then also, um, this has already been mentioned a little bit, but I I really want to emphasize this is compatible with our city's climate goals.

You know, I'm I'm actually usually one to defend parking and cars.

I I think it's a completely valid choice.

I don't think there's anything wrong with people wanting to drive.

However, it it does have a cost that people don't pay when they drive, and it makes perfect sense to make driving a little bit more expensive.

I think that's a very, very appropriate way to discourage driving and thus encourage other kinds of mobility that have less of an impact.

And I just want to remind everyone that um people with um disability placards don't have to pay for parking.

So that's that's one group that you do want to look out for, especially when you're saying things like that, but they they're not um affected by this.

So that's an important detail.

Those are my comments.

I support this.

Thank you very much, Vice Mayor Cheekham.

Uh thank you.

Um, and thank you again, um Director Amiri and to your team.

Uh uh I have to preface my um uh my statements with uh a comment that I uh I echo um uh my colleagues uh remarks that uh public streets are our shared resource, and parking on the public right of way is a privilege.

Um and uh for that reason alone I generally support um this necessary increase in fees um just to address um some speakers and uh we are in a tough budget situation, but even if we weren't, the cost of putting this off for another year would be 1,349,486, and that's in fiscal 27 alone, and it would balloon to 5,418,155 in fiscal 31.

Um as the downtown council member, uh, it is certainly my experience um walking by uh downtown that there is uh little to no available parking on Sundays, and um largely the same vehicles are there for longer than I think they would otherwise be.

Um that said, um this is the area where I do have the most discomfort.

Um to be clear, I still support this.

Um I do think the rollout needs to be particularly gentle and well calibrated here.

Um, and I will note that Oakland did introduce Sunday parking, but only in the highest demand area.

So I really would like to uh roll this out um in a gentle way.

Um I also would like for us, and this obviously does not it can't happen now, um, but I would like to have a discussion in the future to assess our fine schedule for severity.

Double parking and parking uh along uh red corps should be um assessed, the fine for that should be assessed um at a level that is um significantly higher than um simply uh while we're staying a meter by a few minutes um and as Director Amiri uh knows, because um he and his team joined us for um an inspection of an intersection along with council member Keefe a few days ago.

Uh and we heard from residents that um uh parking on red corbs happens.

Uh it happens in my district, it probably happens in every district.

Double parking happens uh frequently, and it is not getting enforced.

So I actually also support this because the enforcement I think will go up across the board.

Um, I would uh like to make sure that we continue to think about wayfinding and signage.

The center street and Alston uh garages are far short of their capacity, including at peak hours.

That needs to change.

I think we can change it if we continue to educate the public about their existence.

Um and I know uh it's challenging to keep the costs below the cost of street parking, uh, looking at our six to seven fund balance, but um I I think we need to really have a um just take a deeper dive on that.

Um lastly, uh I would like to um this is not part of the motion, but I would like to encourage uh staff to do very targeted engagement with the business community, particularly uh business associations where these changes are being proposed, as well as the chamber and visit Barkley across all districts, and then uh I would love to see if there's a way to schedule a one-year review.

Um, so probably at the end of FY 27 to see how implementation is going and any lessons we can uh glean from it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Blackby.

Great, thank you, madam mayor, and thanks again to staff uh for all the work um on this proposal.

Um I'll say I I support the vast majority of what is here.

I think again making the parking funds more solvent, we know is critical.

Um getting ourselves on firmer financial footing is critical, making sure that we're getting circulation we need in our key commercial corridors.

That's all critical, helping us reduce the amount of cruising around that has an impact on on uh on emissions.

Um I will say I just I'm still I'm just not comfortable that I'm comfortable ready to move forward on Sunday.

I'll just note that you know Oakland's proposal on Sunday is 12 to 6, it's not nine to eight.

Um, you know, I I'd be supportive of something that is potentially more limited in scope.

We're looking at particular neighborhoods, but not all neighborhoods in terms of the of the meters.

I just think we could we could study this more.

I'm just not convinced that the economic benefit is there relative to everything else that's in here.

I mean, if you look at the I also say that extending parking meters from six to eight on days when we're already enforcing the meters until six is not as heavy a lift, right?

I mean, that's that's not as big an expectation change, I think for people.

Um adding meters in areas that are new and emerging commercial areas, not a surprise, and we should do that, right?

I mean, all of the RPP fees, the updating the schedule of parking violations, all these things make complete sense to me.

Um I just think that on Sunday we could we should apply a scalpel as opposed to kind of a hatchet here and and study that more.

And frankly, we could I think look at everything and let everything run and have a much better understanding of how much economic activity, how much revenue that we're generating from all of the other things before we sort of look at again what to do with Sunday.

So the numbers to me just don't quite add up in the same way that the others do.

Um maybe if we had more time to sort of understand and dig into the economics a little more, I could support it, but I'm I'm sort of not at that position right now.

So I think so I'll offer uh an amendment to the main motion uh to again accept the main motion but strike one B, which is the Sunday parking for now, and give us more time to study it and deliberate before we um decide whether to move forward with that piece of it.

You're offering a friendly amendment, not a friendly amendment, I'm just making an amendment to the main motion.

Yeah, we let's uh see first of all if there's a motion to close the public.

So moved.

Sorry.

Um can we take the roll on that, please?

Close the public hearing.

Councilmember Kisserwani.

Yes, Chaplan, yes, Bartlett, yes, Trago, O'Keefe.

Yes, Blackabee, Luna Paras, yes, Humbert, yes, and Mayor Ishii.

Yes.

Okay, public hearings closed.

Thank you.

Um a bunch of lights just popped up.

So I'm gonna go first with um Councilmember Taplin.

Um, thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um so since I made the motion during the public hearing, should I remake the motion now?

Yes, I move that we adopt the soft recommendation.

And I second that.

Thank you.

Um, and I did wanna I think you know for the Sunday thing, it's gonna have one-time costs, so that's like doing it later wouldn't change that.

And part of what we're doing is getting data through the survey or through the engagement to assess further expansion.

So I don't see why we wouldn't be able to assess the impact of the Sunday charging, why we would not be able to do that as part of what's already recommended, but it wouldn't make sense to me to delay Sundays just to like have more years of the deficit growing to then have the same upfront uh one-time costs to then have to collect data we could we could have collected at the onset of adopting it.

Oh right.

So voila.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Lunapara.

Um I agree with what Councilmember Taplin has said, and and Councilmember Kissarwani, um, and others, and I just wanted to point out that I think we're talking about how this is going to affect people driving on Sundays and how how and how this isn't fair for people driving, and that really makes no sense to me, especially because when we're talking about the most um economically disadvantaged members of our community, they don't drive.

Um most of the time they take public transportation, which isn't free on Sundays.

So that I just wanted to point that out as a another reason why I think this is a no-brainer.

Thanks.

Thank you.

And so just going back to what you were saying, Councilmember Blackabee.

So you were proposing an amendment.

Do you want to amend amendment to the main motion to again accept staff recommendation except strike uh one B on the Sunday component?

I will not accept that.

No, I'm not offering it as a friendly amendment.

I'm just saying I I want to make an amendment to the main motion that we vote on first and then back to the last we're making a motion to amend the main motion.

I'll send it.

I see.

Okay, a second from council member.

Yeah, so a count.

Okay, so council member um Bartlett is seconding, so um, let's just take a vote on that.

There's no okay.

Uh so that's amending the main motion to remove which part of the motion.

One B, one D.

Just the one D piece.

Okay.

Okay, so this the motion is to whether or not to amend the main motion to remove um one B from the staff recommendation.

Um Councilmember Kissarwani.

No, Taplan, no, Bartlett, yes, Tregob.

Abstain.

O'Keefe.

No, Blackaby, Unapara.

No, yes, Humbert.

No.

And Mayor Ishi.

No.

Okay.

Motion fails.

Okay.

Main motion is not amended.

Okay.

Um, I oh, yes, Councilmember Lunapara.

Thank you.

Sorry, I forgot to mention that I also um think that the RPP costs should be higher.

Um, especially in future years.

I was looking up um Oakland's and it's around 160.

Just an idea.

I think San Francisco is about 215 annually.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember O'Keefe.

Yeah, I just want to piggyback on that.

I think that the second and third ones should be way expensive.

I think that was smart to um change it a little bit, although I think the difference that you're proposing is pretty minimal.

But I think that you know, one is should be pretty accessible, but yeah, more is uh a luxury good.

And actually, while I have the floor, I just want to make another comment I forgot to make before.

I just really wanted to thank um staff for um identifying Hopkins area for new meters.

I was actually planning to ask for that before I realized you had already done it.

So I think that there's a really important um needed improvement for that area.

So I just wanted to say thank you for that.

And I'm happy to be supporting that small aspect of this as well.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Trackup.

Thank you.

Um so I I also I just wanted I did it before, but I wanted to once again echo my gratitude to staff.

This is a very well-calibrated, I mean it's it's well thought out.

Uh everything is well thought out.

We may um agree or disagree with the numbers and these are projections, but I um absolutely understand um the decisions that were made based on um the conclusions you reached.

And so with that said, uh, while I am I'm gonna be supporting the main motion, um, I'm not loath to propose any changes to it right now.

Um, as part of uh what will hopefully be a one-year review of the program, I would like for us to look at a more highly graduated fee schedule for RPP, as well as um increases to the fine schedule for things I already outlined that to me and I think to most people are a bigger deal than what we're staying a parking meter, such as parking uh on a red uh curb or double parking.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you, Councilmember Taplin.

Uh thank you.

Um, and I I wanted to wrap up my part of this by just really thanking you and your team for your diligence and also I also wanted to commend your resolve.

I've seen this team tackle many contentious issues with clarity and and uh alacrity and fortitude.

And I'm really uh grateful to all of you, and thank you so much.

Yeah, um, oh sorry, Councilmember Humbert and then Council Member Kessarwani.

Yeah, all I want to say is exactly what Councilmember Taplin just said to you.

Thank you so much.

Uh thank you.

Yeah, go ahead, Councilmember Kessarwani.

Thank you.

I you know, I just wanted to clarify um just like the fiscal bottom line.

So with RPP alone, even with these changes, you're saying that you're projecting a 1.3 million dollar deficit annually at these fee levels.

Is that accurate?

Um that's slide nine.

Yeah, I I believe it's a the 1.3 million dollar deficit is existing, and so it would go down.

So it's the 615,000 in net new would chip away at that.

Uh I'm sorry, I just couldn't hear you that well.

Couldn't you just say that again?

Yeah, but um I'll pull up the slide.

So that's yeah, I mean you're you're right, it's still 1.3 million dollar deficit moving forward.

Um we plan to to revisit this next year as it's been brought up and every year.

Um, okay.

So I just want to make sure.

So you so you will be coming back annually to do these increases and and it sounds like there's some support, although we haven't taken a formal vote on that, but but this concept of doing an even more graduated um greater increase for the second and third vehicle, that may be an option.

Okay, I just wanted to clarify that.

And then so then on the the meters, that you're saying a 5.3 million annual surplus or benefit.

Do I have that right?

So so you have the annual revenue and the annual cost, so you're you're left with the 5.3, correct?

That includes everything.

So that includes the RPP fee increases and the parking fines.

Oh, okay.

So that's cumulative.

So just within RPP.

So is there a reason why we would want the RPP alone to be self-sustaining if it's part of this larger um I don't know if it's all one fund or is RPP a separate fund?

It's not a separate fund.

It's it's not, it's not its own enterprise fund.

Oh, okay.

So so it's technically not a problem that that area is running a deficit because it's not um on the t on the whole.

Exactly.

Okay, okay.

That I just want to clarify those points.

Thank you very much, and I do appreciate um that we are going to look at these fees on a more regular schedule.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I'm gonna be supporting it this evening, and it's a big part because basically what we're doing right now is we're subsidizing parking in our city by a million dollars a year.

Um, and so I want folks to really make sure they're understanding that.

Um the other thing I want to say is that I know I hear a lot of folks say that there isn't enough parking um in downtown, and I think it's because they don't know we have this parking lot um that is really underutilized um on Center Street, you know, between center and Addison?

Alston?

Oh my gosh.

Thank you.

Addison, thank you.

Between center and Addison.

So, you know, folks, please go park in our parking lot.

It's there, it's it's uh bright, there's always spaces available.

And um yeah, thank you.

And then um, I just generally wanted to also add my support because of climate reasons and also because as we are talking about uh parking management, um having one to two spaces kind of available uh enables more flow, and that is better for our businesses.

So I want to make sure folks understand that too.

Um I understand that that an increase in parking costs people money, and I also want to remind folks that people don't have to drive.

Not everybody has to.

Of course, there are folks who need to take cars, and I understand that, but there are many people who don't need to take cars.

They can take public transportation, they can walk, they can bike, and I believe that this will also help to encourage that.

So I will be supporting uh the motion.

And with that, I will see if we can take the role in that, please.

Okay, this is to adopt the staff recommendation on uh item 24.

Um council member Kessarwani.

Yes, Taplin.

Bartlett, no, Trega.

I.

Yes.

Unapara.

Yes.

Humbert.

Yes.

And Mayor Ishi.

Yes.

Okay, motion carried.

Thank you.

Thank you all so much for your presentation and for your work on this.

I could tell it was a lot of work.

We are gonna take a break until nine o'clock.

Um, and just so folks understand.

So we have one more fee, and then we have, oops, sorry, yeah, which is number 25, and then we have an appeal.

Um, we have a conversation, which is discussion about the desired qualifications for the next ODPA.

Um director, which is repetitive, I'm realizing, and then also the CIP.

So that's a pretty significant number of things left.

I just want to flag for folks.

So thank you.

We will take a break for the next 10 minutes and come back at nine o'clock.

Recording stopped.

I want to make an announcement and say that item number 28, I don't believe we'll have time for it this evening because there's a significant presentation involved, and I'm sure folks will have a lot of questions.

So we will be moving that one to the meeting on the 16th.

And um, and we are moving on right now to item number 25, which is the zero waste plan checks and compliance inspections fees.

Um, and that was also continuing from May 19th, 2026.

So, also apologies to you all and your team for not being able to hear that item at the previous meeting and you having to come back tonight.

So, thank you very much for being here.

Um Mayor, why don't we make a motion to move item um 28 because it's a public hearing, so oh yeah, yeah.

It just quick, yes, thank you.

I would like to um entertain a motion to move item number 28 to the meeting on the 16th.

So moved.

Thank you.

Second, okay.

Thank you very much.

Can you take the role in that?

Okay.

Uh Councilmember Kessarwani.

Yes, Taplin, Bartlett, yes, I'll keep Blackaby, yes, Luna Para, yes, Humbert, and Mary Ishii.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

All right, I'll pass it over to you.

Good evening, Mayor, Council members, uh, interim director of public works.

Um, tonight we're presenting uh the proposed zero waste fee updates for council's consideration.

These fees are intended to better align cost recovery with the staff time and resources needed to review, inspect, and support compliance for zero waste related requirements, including plan reviews, construction, and demolition compliance, special events and related programs.

I'll have uh staff intruders themselves and then uh Letitia will jump into the PowerPoint presentation and we'll be happy to answer any questions from there.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Leticia Hauregui, Solid Waste and Recycling, a little closer.

Yeah, thank you.

Solid waste and recycling division uh manager for public work zero waste division.

Tonight we are presenting a proposed cost recovery fee for zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection services that are already being performed by staff in support of state mandates and local ordinances.

The purpose of this item is to establish a more sustainable funding mechanism for the existing services while continuing to support local businesses in Berkeley's environmental and climate action goals.

And hi, I'm Johnny Delar.

I'm the senior field representative for the Zero Waste Division.

Um, so I do conduct some of these inspections and plan checks.

So I'm here for support.

In this brief presentation, we will um cover our staff recommendations, the proposed fee revenue table, and fiscal impact assessments.

Staff recommends adopting a cause recovery fee for existing zero waste compliance activities.

These activities include construction and demolition, recycling reviews, trash room and space allocation reviews, special event waste reduction plans, foodware ordinance inspections, and SB 1383 food recovery compliance activities.

These are all existing support services currently being provided by staff, the bottom line is that staff currently performs a significant amount of technical review and compliance related work without a dedicated cost recovery mechanism.

In 2025 alone, staff estimates spending over 3,000 hours conducting plan checks and inspections with annual cost exceeding approximately 400,000.

Current plan checks and compliance inspection costs increasingly impacts the declining zero waste enterprise fund.

Without a dedicated recovery mechanism, these costs continue to be absorbed within the zero waste enterprise fund, increasing fiscal pressure over time.

Staff is recommending a flat two hundred and fifty dollar fee per activity to support partial cost recovery for these existing services.

Our funding gap, the projective deficit without action is four hundred and nineteen thousand dollars combined for zero waste plan and inspections.

These are specialized one-time technical review services that support construction projects, special events, food recovery programs, and the implementation of local ordinances.

These services are separate from direct refuse collection services funded through existing rates.

Without a dedicated cost recovery mechanism, these costs will continue to be absorbed within the zero waste enterprise fund, increasing ongoing fiscal pressure on the fund over time.

The proposed fee amount is based on an average of approximate two hours of staff time required for review, coordination, inspection, documentation, and follow-up.

The objective is to establish a reasonable cost recovery mechanism for specialized services already being performed by staff.

This chart details the increase and growth of compliance checks and planned reviews from fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2025.

The number of plan check checks and inspections is growing steadily over year over year with no fee implementation or cost or cost recovery mechanism in place.

It's an estimated annual revenue of 419,000 dollars per year.

The purpose of this recommendation is straightforward to establish a recovery mechanism for these specialized services, is based on 2020 2025 activity levels.

The proposed fee structure is estimated to generate approximately 419 annually.

The proposed fee would support direct cost recovery and help offset operational and staff costs currently absorbed by the Zero Waste Enterprise Fund, while supporting the city's continued implementation of required state unfunded mandated programs.

Staff is recommending implementation effective July 1st, 2026 with fees incorporated into existing permit review and compliance service processes.

So before we jump into the staff recommendation slide, I do want to go on the record uh indicating that staff will be adding the following language to exhibit A of the resolution adopting the zero waste plan check and compliance inspection schedule.

The language that is being added to exhibit A is as follows.

Notwithstanding any other provisions of this fee schedule, fees associated with solar permit applications shall be applied in a manner consistent with government code 66015 where applicable.

The zero waste plan review and compliance inspections shall be adjusted, reduced, or waived as necessary to ensure the total permit related fees do not exceed the maximum amounts permitted by state law.

With that said and recorded, we'll move forward to staff recommendations.

So tonight, staff has provided feedback, presentation data to support.

We're asking council tonight to uh support uh adopting the resolution establish establishing zero waste plan check and compliance inspection fees and also authorized public works to implement fee collections effective July 1st, 2026.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

Excuse me.

Thank you all so much.

Um does anyone have any questions?

Yes, Vice Mayor Trackup.

Uh thank you so much.

Uh yeah, I had more, but I'm going to uh focus on I think three questions.

Um, one that uh just the statement you read, um that is a government code section that uh is a photovoltaic system fee cap.

Uh what is the relationship between this cap and uh zero waste collection fees?

So the relationship may be that um there might be an overlap.

Um I'll give you an example.

If a someone pulls a roofing permit, and in that activity um generates waste that needs to be the recycle or disposed, but that roofing permit, it's tied into some a solar permit, um, then that's where there's an overlap, and we need to make sure that we stay within the cap as we adjoint our our our fees to the um to this code.

Got it.

Uh thank you for clarifying that.

Um, uh the report mentioned that certain inspection responsibilities uh appear to have shifted to public works due to staffing shortages.

Um do you anticipate this being a permanent change?

Yes.

Okay.

And if these fees are adopted, are there any additional compliance education or technical assistance efforts that staff would like to pursue in the future?

At this at this time, we're pursuing um there are other compliance um inspections, but those are covered under our uh regular rates under regular schedule collection services for our, you know, our resident community and our business community.

These fees are for a small group of um of general contractors, architects, these are for ancillary services, things that are typically um we're not able to recover the cost because they're not covered under the regular schedule service rates.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Other questions from my council colleagues?

Councilmember Blackby.

Thanks.

Real quick, um, question C manager.

Have have we ever had to deploy kind of general fund transfers to the zero waste enterprise fund to uh kind of make the fund solvent cover these negative balances?

Is that happened in the past?

No, it hasn't, council member.

Without this, is there a chance that is this is the fund kind of diminishes?

We might have to consider that in the future if we didn't pass something like this.

Yes, that's that's one of the things we really want to prevent from happening.

Is any kind of a general fund transfer as we're already struggling with the budget and other general fund transfers?

So, yes, okay.

Thank you.

That's it.

Thank you.

Other questions?

Is there any public comment on this item?

Item number 25, which is the zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection fees.

It says I mentioned in the previous comment, it we really do have to look at 1343 and starting to enforce it, um providing warnings, and then fines for non-compliance, and that goes with not only businesses but also uh apartment buildings.

We need revenue right now to save our essential services.

We have to do this.

Nobody likes paying more money in an uncomfortable time, such as we're in right now.

Uh but it's just it's just the reality.

We have to do these things.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other public comment on this item online?

There's one hand raised.

Um caller with a phone number ending in two one.

Caller with a phone number ending in two one one.

This is for item 25, zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection fees.

All right, well, I guess not.

We'll uh okay continue on.

All right, thank you very much.

Are there any um comments from my council colleagues uh starting with Vice Mayor Trackab?

Yeah, I uh I will move the staff recommendation as amended.

Uh and I would just um I I hope that this increase will uh bring the fund balance to uh cost neutral um, but it is uh exactly cost neutral, and so um I you know just uh wanted to if this if expenses continue to outpace uh revenue even with this fee collection, um, I would be interested in this coming back to us at the end of next fiscal year.

Thank you.

Councilmember Tregoob's speaking motion.

Vice Mayor Tragoob's speaking motion, and we need a motion to close the public hearing as well.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to close it?

So moved.

Second.

Can we take the role on that, please?

Okay, close public hearing.

Councilmember Kessarwani.

Yes, Taplin, Bartlett, yes, Trago.

Aye, O'Keefe, yes, Blackaby, yes, Lunapara, yes, Humbert.

Yes, and Mary Sheet.

Yes, okay.

Motion carries public hearings closed, and there's a the motion has been made to on the item.

Yes, let's take the role on that, please.

Oh, what?

Okay, are you ready?

Okay, this is uh to adopt the um resolution for zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection fees with the um inclusion of the language that was written to the record for exhibit A.

Um, on the motion, Councilmember Kessarwani.

Yes, Taplin.

All right, Bartlett, yes, Trego.

Aye, O'Keefe.

Yes, Blackaby.

Yes.

Munapara.

Yes, Humbert.

Yes.

And Mary Ishi.

Yes.

Okay, motion carries.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Um, thank you so much for the presentation.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you for coming back.

And um moving on to item number 26, which is appeal of the housing advisory commission decision to deny the appeal and affirm the determination by the building official for 1615 Fairview Street regarding the applicability of exterior elevated elements inspection requirement.

Okay.

Uh, this is for staff.

So uh you're welcome to pull up a chair.

If you'd like to sit right there, you can.

Um, so the way that this is going to go.

So we're opening the public hearing for this item.

Um, and we will have a presentation from the planning staff, and then an appellant comment period, which will be seven minutes, and then public comments, um, one minute per speaker.

Um yield up to a maximum of two minutes.

We will then take council questions, close the public hearing, have council comments, and then take a vote.

And uh, there are three different options below, which I will get into later.

So we're gonna start off with um presentation from the planning staff.

So if you'd like to sit while you wait, please feel free and or if someone can get you a chair, that would be helpful too, I think.

Yeah, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor.

Good evening, Council members.

I'm Jordan Klein, Director of Planning Development.

Uh, joined at the staff table by Jeff Jensen, the assistant building and safety manager, and Galadriel Burr, who's a community services specialist in the special projects unit of building and safety, and she will be making the presentation.

Thank you, Jordan.

Good evening, Mayor, Council members.

So I'm just gonna jump right into it.

I know it's a long night.

Um, let's see.

Apologies.

My first slide is not.

Okay, all right, my apologies.

So in immediate response to the balcony collapse at 2020 Kittredge Streets on June 16th, 2015, which resulted in the death of six students and seriously injured seven others, an emergency ordinance was adopted requiring inspection and certification of weather exposed exterior elevated elements for all buildings containing three or more dwelling units.

In 2018, the state adopted inspection requirements under the California Health and Safety Code, and these were subsequently codified under Berkeley Municipal Code 19.40.

Both state and local laws require that all buildings containing three or more dwelling units with exterior elevated elements that are located six feet or more above grade to be inspected on a cyclical basis, and that they require certification by licensed professionals, and neither state nor Berkeley municipal code provide exemptions for owner occupancy, vacancy, or income level.

So this slide shows examples of exterior elevated elements.

It includes weather exposed wood and metal decks, walkways, balconies, stairway systems, guardrails, and handrails.

Berkeley's inspection requirements are managed under the city's exterior elevated elements program or E3 program for short, and these inspections must be performed by licensed or certified professionals.

Thanks.

I added okay.

So the appellant property at 1615 Fairview Street is a four-unit building with existing exterior elevated elements.

In 2016, Mr.

Merowitz first submitted an E3 exemption declaration form that declared under penalty of perjury that his property did not have exterior elevated elements.

Later that same year, he submitted a certification form verifying that his property did in fact have exterior elevated elements.

In 2021, the next E3 program cycle, Mr.

Merowitz again submitted an exemption declaration form, stating that his property did not have exterior elevated elements, and that his building had fewer than three dwelling units.

In September of 2025, staff issued a notice of violation and a warning of administrative citation.

Mr.

Merowitz then claimed exemption from inspection requirements and requested a formal determination.

In October of 2025, the building official issued a determination stating that the property was not exempt from E3 inspection requirements.

Mr.

Merowitz then appealed the determination to the housing advisory commission.

And on January 15th, 2026, the hack denied Mr.

Merowitz's appeal and affirmed the building officials' determination.

So for the sake of brevity, I have summarized duplicative points from the appeal, and they've been combined in five different issues.

So the first issue that was raised by the appellant is the assertion that the rental housing safety program provides annual inspections for exterior elevated elements, and that there are provisions for self-certification and exemptions for vacant and owner occupied units.

Staff's response is that the rental housing safety program and the E3 inspection program are two distinct programs that are mandated under separate legislation.

Any exemptions that are applicable to RHSP are not relevant to the E3 inspection program.

And per state law, E3 inspections cannot be performed by city employees.

The rental housing safety program ordinance requires inspection of rental units, meaning units that are either rented or are available to rent.

Therefore, if a unit is owner-occupied, it may qualify for an exemption under the RHSP program.

In contrast, state and local laws mandating E3 inspection requirements require that all buildings containing three or more dwelling units with existing exterior elevated elements are to be inspected on a cyclical basis, regardless of whether the building or any of the units are owner occupied or vacant.

The next issue that the appellant raised is that existing provisions and pro- oh, sorry.

Yikes.

My apologies.

The next, I apologize, I'm nervous.

The appellant asserts that the building department and planning department were the creators of the balcony collapse, and that the balcony collapse was due to too much weight and too many people.

So staff's response is that the balcony at 2020 Kittridge failed due to severe dry rot and water damage.

This was determined through multiple investigations by subject matter experts, including city staff, third party licensed professionals, and independent investigations by the California State Licensing Board.

This determination was also confirmed by the district attorney's findings.

The design of the balcony that failed was also found to have been compliant with the building code at the time it was constructed.

And regardless of the details that led to the tragedy or that precipitated adoption of the legislation that mandates the E3 inspection requirements, the building and safety division is responsible for enforcing local and state codes, and staff have properly applied E3 inspection requirements in the case of 1615 Fairview Street.

Staff's response is that the laws governing E3 inspection requirements do not provide an exception for low-income property owners.

And to clarify, thank you.

So this would be the fourth issue.

My apologies.

So the hardship exemption for low-income property owners, the laws that govern the E3 inspection requirements do not provide an exception for low-income property owners.

And the $1,000 fee that was actually addressed here was for the HACKS appeal fee, and there's not an additional fee that was assessed for this council appeal.

And the final issue raised here is the appellant questions the impartiality of staff and prior hearing bodies.

Staff's response is that E3 inspection requirements universally apply to all buildings with three or more dwelling units that contain exterior elevated elements.

Staff have correctly identified and applied E3 inspection requirements for 1615 Fairview Street.

Staff recommends that council deny the appeal and affirm the building officials' determination that 1615 Fairview Street is not in compliance with the city's E3 inspection program and to uphold the associated fees consistent with council adopted policy and state law.

Thank you.

That concludes the staff presentation.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

We will let me go look at the script.

We will now uh hear from Mr.

Maveritz, the appellant.

Oh, first are there any questions for are there any questions for staff?

Okay, I'm gonna yield back to the mayor.

Sorry, so I actually need to recuse myself.

Um I just realized that this house, I think it's too close to my house.

So and I didn't realize because it's on it's on a different street, but just geographically.

So I'm gonna give the process over to you, Vice Mayor, and then you will have to lead it.

So I'm gonna send it to you right now.

I think.

Okay, I have it pulled up.

You have it, yes.

Okay, great.

All right, thank you.

Um we will now hear from the appellant.

Appellant, you have up to seven minutes to speak.

Justice can't be served in seven minutes.

I'm just putting that out front.

You all are intelligent people, uh, one attorney as far as I know.

Um, so you're not gonna have a great grasp of what I'm about to introduce, and I wanted to introduce it first because I may run out of time rather than what I really want to focus on.

I'm gonna read this, and I don't know, I submitted this to you guys today.

Uh so you might not have had an opportunity.

So I'm just it's my oral arguments.

Uh so I'm just gonna read verbatim.

And if you uh, the one you have in your mailbox uh you can keep as a record to refer back to.

If you wouldn't mind pulling the mic a little closer to you, you can.

Oh, thank you.

This triple E is based on several fronts.

I have and continue to call into question uh actual virtual certainty that every aspect of this appeal by a housing advisory commission, building officials, city attorney's office, and subsequently the city mayor, are without required fairness and impartiality as required by the 14th Amendment of the U.S.

Constitution.

The creation of the Triple E mandate violates the U.S.

Constitution.

This is true and accurate for not only the local ordinance for Triple E, but also the California State Bill 721.

I introduced this first rather than later to prevent my time lotment of seven minutes from running out.

These balcony laws violate the fourth amendment against unconsented unwarranted searches of a property, especially the property's curtilage.

The Fifth Amendment and the properties owner's right to exclude government is violation and protected civil right as well.

And the 14th Amendment for a complete disregard of due process, including fair and impartial due process by a fair and impartial tri or effect, as is also a violation.

As such, the triple E mandate is illegal and unenforceable on its face.

Gee, I wonder why it is that there isn't a legal requirement mandating that.

Then there is the issue of city staffs changing the rules of the appeal that's set forth in the HAC appeals in chapter 19.90.

The city changed the rules twice in their relentless effort to gang up strategies.

In fact, I recently discovered that in reference to the HAC hearing and its video of that hearing, city staff is allowed to transcribe the video, eliminating anything that city staff wants eliminated as determined by the city, of course.

For instance, at the very beginning of my hearing with the HAC, I asked point blank, can you all be fair and impartial as a trier of fact?

Not one, not even one of the HAC responded to that immediate question.

Isn't that curious?

As you might expect, these specific exchanges were eliminated by city staff, justice, which, with what such unlimited discretion by city staff as legislately provided by city's uh council, city staff can manipulate the facts and the omission of facts any way they see fit to win, no matter what the truth might be.

There is this is not fair or an impartial, it is injustice.

When if ever will city council sta uh hold city staff strictly accountable as the city holds the citizens, voters, taxpayers strictly accountable based on the historical track record, never.

They then consult with the city attorney and the building official designates to formulate the HAC decision.

That's in my prior documents.

So uh there's a threefold uh one dating back to February, one dated back a few weeks ago, and this one.

And I included exhibits, uh, etc.

So the question is do you guys want to even question the constitutionality of Triple E?

It it violates both the fourth, the fifth, and the 14th Amendment, and it's unenforceable.

It must be declared unenforceable.

So that's the primary focus now because it's the strongest argument.

As far as the RHSP, uh, it's a it was effective for decades.

Now suddenly it's archaic.

This was an extension, and I expect the argument when I go to federal court, because I expect I I'll be denied.

So I'm going to federal court, I'm putting out the word, and uh as opposed to state court, because the impact of the state law 721 won't be impactful in the federal court at all.

Um, but that being said, um, I I wanted to focus more so on uh the extension of the rules that they've applied to the uh uh triple E, that was not just to protect balconies, it was to protect everything.

And they're gonna they're gonna argue their I anticipate their argument is gonna be safety is always the magic word, when in fact they're they're fishing for safety violations, and you can't do that without good probable cause.

These are all lawyers' words.

Uh I've become a somewhat proficient uh non-licensed attorney, and I will embarrass the city attorney when it comes to this uh case because they can't fight constitutionality unless you have a basis.

And they're gonna say, well, the safety, and but they the uh the the case precedents reflect the idea of it must be narrowly construed to minimize the impact on property owners.

And they're not gonna be able to do that because what they did is exceeded the balcony, they exceeded the DEX, they went, and whether it's a triplex or whether it's a rental property, it's a triplex is a rental property.

So they're just using semantics to confuse people.

I want to focus on the abuse of process and the fair unfairness and injustice by city staff.

Uh there's so many ways they've just plain ganged up on me in a variety of ways.

They didn't announce to me that uh Mr.

Newman Newmanville uh didn't uh indicate why he brought Jordan Klein, the planning director in, why he brought in the city manager's office, and so all of a sudden it extended from beyond the building official and Miss Burr.

Then it's now all these three heads of departments so they can gang up on me some more and accelerate and expand.

It's just a game to win.

It's not about fairness, and it's not about impartiality, it's about breaking me down.

It's um, and I have I I ask you to read this because I'm I'm out of time already.

This that's seven minutes is not justice.

Thank you.

This has no expensive time.

Thank you so much.

Uh we are now going to ask if there are any public comments from members of the public.

Um, uh, if there are none in the room um and uh Mr.

Pellin, I'm actually going to ask you for you to step away from the uh okay.

Uh are there any comments on my I don't see any hands raised, uh, members of the public.

If you're wishing to comment on this item, please raise your virtual hand.

Seeing no virtual hands, we are going to bring this back to the council for questions.

Are there any questions?

Seeing no questions.

Oh, we need to close the public hearing.

Thank you.

I'm going to entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Okay.

There's been a motion and a second.

Clark, please call the role.

Okay.

To close the public hearing, Councilmember Kessarwani.

Yes.

Taplin.

Aye.

Bartlett.

Yes.

Tregab.

Aye.

O'Keefe.

Yes.

Blackaby.

Yes.

Unapara.

Yes.

Humbert.

Yes.

And Mayor Ishi is recused.

Public hearing is closed.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh, we're on to council comments and possible action.

And for this appeal, um, the council may do any one of the following.

Continue the public hearing, remand the matter to the housing advisory commission, uh, or reverse or reform wholly or partly modify any decision determination or requirement of the commission.

Um council member parklett.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Tragob.

Um, and thank you for your presentation, and thank you for your presentation as well.

Um you are my constituent, so of course I'm sympathetic in all ears to you.

Um we have spoken on the phone many times about this.

I've walked over and seen the place myself as well.

Um, you know, looking through this right and discussing this earlier and and having early familiarity with the issue as well.

Um I have to I want to share some context with you here.

Um, so the the law that this E3 is born from and all that, it comes from here when this balcony collapse happened, right?

And it happened in a building where my father and I had a business, a coffee shop, and um, and uh every time it rained, the rain would flood down the back of the building inside the the parking area.

It's the inside of the building, like torrential columns of water would come down every time it rained.

Um and I knew the program too that had kids from Ireland come over here at that building.

They're my customers.

Um so when the balcony collapsed due to this rot of the wood from the water inside the building, uh we were caught in a wares, and it was tragic and it was terrible, and uh never again, right?

So I say this because in your in your in your legal analysis of the 14th and 5th, 5th amendment, your constitutional analysis here, uh, and I'm I'm welcome, I welcome your approaching us from a constitutional point of view and going to the uh the appropriate uh courts.

Uh however, uh you should know that you know uh governments have broad, broad powers for health and safety uh protocols, right?

To protect their their citizens, protect their property, uh, and unless those decisions are you know arbitrary or capricious, as they say, random or bad, right?

Um then they they tend to hold standard or they or they see the statute, right?

In this instance, I would argue that um it wasn't arbitrary.

You had you looking at this, you have six six elements that are direct directly applicable to the E3 law, which is six feet above the ground, because if that falls, someone gets hurt, and that's our mission to prevent that from happening again.

Um we also it's not capricious, it's not bad.

What do we have to do?

We didn't single you out.

Everyone in the city that has a balcony above six feet is subject to this investigation and to these requirements, and we didn't penalize you above others.

We give you a chance.

We do we do what we can do.

As the staff said, we do not control this process.

This is a state-mandated operation.

That obviously is to good effect as we've not had another balcony drop since then, and hopefully never again.

So I gotta say, I appreciate your passion and uh and your your effort to embrace the law, but I would encourage you to take that same passion and embrace the safety of your tenants.

Because just as you're my constituent, so are they.

I have no candidates.

I refuse to be a landlord anymore.

I think you will show me the building.

I'll take it over.

There will be no crosstalk.

Please continue, council member.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh so with that being said, you know, I just again uh I understand these are these are tough.

These are tough things to deal with, uh, but they are necessary.

And I encourage you to re-enter the business of providing shelter for people because we need it.

Okay now.

No, but I'm addressing you.

Um but anyway, so listen, with that, um I'm going to move to adopt the set of recommendation because there just is not a basis to deny the findings, okay.

Is there a second?

Okay, it's been moved and seconded.

Any further comments?

Okay.

Um I will make a brief comment uh because this is an issue near and dear to my heart.

The tragic terrible accident that led to um six people uh losing their lives in the prime of their lives happened in my district.

Last year, I had a chance to observe that tragic event with a delegation from Ireland, including some of the parents, and when I looked in their eyes, I will I was able to tell them that I I will never imagine what um they have to go through and are still going through.

But one thing that I can promise is that um on our watch, we will do everything possible to ensure that there will be no such tragedies ever again.

I followed the E3 ordinance closely uh while I served on the housing advisory commission, and I was grateful for the city's uh prompt response to that tragedy, and in fact, the city's um prompt response and the E3 ordinance.

Um became a model for what later became state law.

I think the city's police powers and the states are very clear on this matter.

We do have the power to regulate uh E3, and I will be supporting this motion.

So if there were no other comments, uh Clark, would you please call the role?

Okay, to uh affirm the decision of the housing advisory commission, deny the appeal and uphold the associated fees on the motion, Councilmember Kessarwani.

Yes, Taplin, Bartlett, yes, Traga, aye, O'Keeffe, yes, Wackaby, yes, Lunapara.

Yes, Humbert, yes, and Mary, she's recused in the motion uh carries.

Thank you very much for going to briefly recess for the mayor to good turn.

Do you need do you need to take a recess?

No, no, okay, all right.

Well, we will continue then.

Okay, thank you very much, Vice Mayor, for handling that.

And apologies, folks, for not realizing earlier.

All right, so we are moving on.

Excuse me, to item number 27.

Discussion about the desired qualifications for the next director of police accountability.

So, for those of you that don't know, or actually, I feel like everyone here knows.

But just so just so uh folks know, we have hired WBCP Inc., which is a recruiter, and they are helping us to recruit for the director of police accountability position.

Um, so far they have had conversations with community members.

We actually have a survey that's out.

Um, this is our opportunity as council members to let this recruiter know about the qualifications that we would like to see in our um in our new director of police accountability.

So this is a really exciting opportunity, and um one thing I did just want to say before I'm gonna pass it over to Lauren who is on the line.

Um Lauren's been doing a great job.

Thank you very much, Lauren.

And Lauren, actually, if you could raise your hand as well so that our city clerk can find you.

Um what I'd like to focus this conversation on is like aspirational, what is it that we want as opposed to what is it that we don't want?

If I think that that will be a helpful framing for us as we're as we're having this conversation.

So I think hopefully, Lauren is over.

Okay.

And I will let Lauren um help us walk through this process.

Ah, there she is.

I see you, Lauren.

Thank you so much for being here.

Absolutely.

Thank you, Mayor Ishii.

Uh, and uh council members, uh, thank you very much for the opportunity to join you.

Uh I'm sorry that I'm not able to be there in person.

I do look forward to meeting you all in person uh when I'm there for interviews.

Uh but I uh thank you, Mayor Ishii, for the introduction.

Um, I know you've covered a lot of ground this evening, so I'm gonna try to keep this concise.

Um, but uh as Mayor Ishi mentioned, I have been working with her and council members Lunapara and Humbert to begin the recruitment for the Director of Police Accountability.

And uh we're at this critical juncture in the recruitment process where we're taking a lot of feedback.

Uh, and as the mayor mentioned, we did have a community meeting.

Uh we do have a survey running, which is still uh open for uh for responses.

So for anyone who is online or in the building listening, uh that will that survey will be open through at least tomorrow.

Uh and the information for the survey is posted on the new section of the city's website.

Uh so definitely still opportunities to participate uh and to provide community feedback.

Uh, but I am excited to hear from you all on the council this evening about what you would like to see in candidates for this role.

This is gonna inform the ideal candidate profile that I'll use to pre-screen candidates that the subcommittee will use to screen candidates that will ultimately help us form interview questions and inform the process in a variety of ways.

Um, in your council, in your agenda packet was a few broad questions that I offered up for you to consider, the most central of which is what are the competencies interpersonally and technically you're looking for in candidates.

Uh, but also what would you identify as challenges and opportunities for a candidate stepping into the role and what would you identify as the most critical priorities for a new director stepping into this role in the next I would say like 12 to 18 months.

Um, those would be things that it's important for me to understand.

So uh Mayor Ishii, I am sure that you have a preferred organized way that you'd like to do this, but I would love to just hear from the council, and I'll take avid notes and ask questions.

Um, and would just love to hear your feedback.

Thank you.

I appreciate that, Lauren.

First, first I just want to check in with my council member colleagues to see if you all have any questions about this process or like what we're asking you to do today.

Okay, very good.

Um, so Lauren, is it actually is it possible to maybe put the questions up?

And yes, I think that might be helpful, and then we can have the council members um address those questions.

It just will be easier, I think, if everyone can see them.

Yes.

Are these yours?

Okay.

Is my screen up?

Yes.

Do you mind making it a bit bigger?

Just doing a yeah, a few couple more.

That's great.

That's great.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, so council colleagues, if you can just press your buttons and I will have you each go through and answer these questions.

I think that will be great.

I imagine that as folks are speaking, um, you might have more ideas, so it's okay if we need to kind of come back around again.

All right, I'm gonna start us off with Councilmember Taplin.

Uh thank you very much.

Um so I think going down the questions here, if my time can start, that would be great.

Thank you.

Um, yeah, I think for me it's really important that the new D the new director work with the commission and the department and the charter officers to implement the um the regulations.

Um, biggest challenges and areas.

Uh I think I uh sorry sorry, I'm trying to synthesize both my notes and the questions.

Um I think I think having a familiar familiarity with California sworn officer personnel and record access laws as well as Berkeley uh local law enforcement policies is important.

Um having uh objectivity, I think a challenge sometimes might be when uh there is a complaint or um uh potentially a policy that is not being complied with.

Sometimes there might be a tendency to assume an outcome, whether desired or undesired, and then when that occurs that presents a barrier to when the results of an investigation or or course of action is is otherwise from what might one might assume might be the outcome.

Uh but we're we're focusing on what we do want and we don't want.

So someone who will be able to be objective and keep an open mind along throughout each step of the the process there.

Um then my last one uh response to the final question.

Um for me having a collaborative approach to working within the city organization and alongside the companion components of the city, those being the department of the PD and the charter officer offices.

Um like work in tandem instead of working against or uh just really leaning into the ability to leverage the close working relationships we have both inside the city and with the community.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Thank you.

Okay, moving on to Councilmember Humbert.

Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor.

And since I serve on the ad hoc selection committee and had the opportunity to share thoughts at the recent community meeting, I'm gonna be mainly listening to others.

I appreciate Councilmember Taplin's comments, and I'll be listening to my other colleagues with great interest.

I wanted to say thank you to Lauren and her organization for their work on the public outreach efforts and the recruitment materials, they're really good.

And thank you to the mayor for placing this item on the agenda so that we could do this publicly as a full body.

I know we're all very interested in finding a strong candidate who has the management skills, public safety, and criminal justice expertise, and overall right and collaborative attitude for our community.

And I'm grateful for this opportunity to hear more from all of you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Moving on to Councilmember O'Keefe.

That was sooner than I expected.

Um I'm not gonna answer all four questions, and I I think I'm I'm expecting to broadly agree with a lot of comments people will make, so I'm just gonna make two comments that I think other people might not make.

Um, one is um, I guess this is in response to the third question.

Um, we all saw um last month how much fear and uncertainty there is in our community around police surveillance.

And this is a really serious issue.

And the person who occupies this role can really do a lot to help.

They can look out for the fears and concerns that the public has and really keep an eye on making sure that people are safe from the threats that perceived or real of police technology.

So I would really like to see someone who actually has a competency around that and really understands how the technology works.

And I think that could be a really really powerful skill just based on the kinds of new issues that we're facing in this community that are very serious.

So that's one thing that I'd really like to see.

I'd like to, yeah, to know any candidate that we see, I'd like to know what their level of understanding of that world is.

And then the second thing, this is related but more broad.

I really want to see someone who's really good at communicating with the public.

This is really this job is really important for the public to feel um to feel like our law enforcement is that they're safe from our law enforcement, for lack of a better way to say that.

And I I think that um if this person can really communicate with the public and really build that trust, that's actually the most important part of the job.

So I'd really want to see really strong public communication skills and a real commitment to building that trust in the community.

Absolutely.

Thank you very much.

I'm gonna go online to Councilmember Blackabee.

Thanks, Madam Mayor, and thank you, Lauren and subcommittee for all the work on this really important um search.

I will do my best to go through each of the four questions.

Um, in terms of priorities, um, first one, and hopefully we're close, but it's certainly just to get the final regulations over the finish line.

Again, I know there's multiple people involved in that, like it's not just ODPA, but it's also department, BPA, city staff, but to do her or his part to kind of get the operating regulations done is really important because so much of what is possible with the PAB keeps getting held up by the fact that this stuff isn't done.

It's a time sync, it's a money sink, it's a resource sink for the city and for the for the PAP.

Get them done.

Like that has to be a priority.

Second is then um making enough time then to focus like the most one of the most important functions of the PAB is to do really effective uh investigations about complaints, um making sure you have the time and the resources to do that.

And again, I uh a sub-bullet on here is also then the ability to sort of triage or to the extent it's possible.

I know that the charter language is there's some kind of precision here, but to the extent you can identify things that can be administratively closed sooner in the process, so you can spend more of those investigative resources on investigations that need to be investigated.

Um that's really important because not every issue, not every complaint is the same, right?

At some point, if you you need to figure out and do some initial work and decide, hey, this is something I really need to spend time on.

Maybe this one is one we should administratively close, that will help.

Um, if you do the first two things, then you also have time to do things like the policy reviews, as council member O'Keefe and others alluded to.

Uh you know, some of the surveillance technology participating in the RFP process, all of this could they could be very effective thought partners, but to be able to have the time for that, you need to have the first two things under control.

Um but that's a that you know that is a priority.

This is this can be a center of expertise in this area to do the policy work.

And then fourth um is uh the ability to do some better and ongoing kind of community outreach.

And by that I really mean to broaden the engagement to a wider swath of the public.

I think right now we're still kind of talking to kind of very narrow, you know, parts of our population.

I think this is something potentially that more, these are conversations that more of the community should be involved in and we should figure out how to do that.

The director could be effective.

So those are four priorities in order.

I think, in that order.

Um challenges and opportunities um certainly, you know, we're all in a budget environment.

So how do you make the most out of existing resources funding budget?

That's challenge and an opportunity.

Building relationships with all of the stakeholders, as people have alluded to, this is a really tough job.

Part of what makes it tough is you've got lots of lots of plates to keep spinning, and then lots of people to navigate.

And so again, that's a challenge.

You've got to be good at being able to sort of build those relationships across the organization and beyond the organization with the public.

And I think an opportunity is really to make our police accountability board more of a center of expertise in this area.

Um be a center of excellence, be you know, someone that certainly relied upon the city, but maybe even more broadly in terms of people that do this work really well.

Um, all right.

Technical competencies, I would say um, obviously, previous police accountability work would be really I think essential.

I don't think you just sort of step into this job not having had some experience there.

Um you've got to be a good manager of people.

Um, and by that I think that's managing your staff, but it's also managing laterally, and it's also managing upward.

You've just got to be really good at sort of managing in all of those directions.

Um, and I think as council member, you said a really effective public communicator.

This is a position that um when it comes to issues around public safety, you're gonna hear from the mayor, you're gonna hear from the city manager, you can hear from the police chief, and you'll be hearing from the director of this accountability in the press, and those, you know, you need to be a respected voice and a responsible voice in those sorts of public dialogues.

And then lastly, I'd say for the interpersonal leadership competencies, um, like a lot of the charter offices, uh, like us and others, you've got to be both independent but also collaborative.

And again, I know that's a difficult balance.

You've got to be able to be independent, and again, this setup in in the charter to be an independent oversight body.

So no one is questioning that.

That needs to be that needs to be clear, but all of us have some amount of independence, and all of us also have to be able to work with everybody else to get anything done.

So you have to again figure out how to be both independent and collaborative and have those sort of interpersonal skills.

Um, yeah, go ahead and make my time.

Go ahead.

I'm almost almost done.

Last thing is, yeah, last thing I'd say is then recognize that um you do have um many stakeholders to manage.

I mentioned before the council, um, the department, BPA, the public, city staff, city manager, HR, all those things.

Um so there you go.

That's it.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your for your very thoughtful answers to the questions.

And um, yeah, I do want to encourage folks like uh to say what you need to say, because you know, this is our opportunity to talk about it, and I want to make sure that the subcommittee and also Lauren that we really have a good sense of what everyone wants to see, so uh don't feel rushed.

Okay, go ahead.

Councilmember Partley.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And thank you for uh doing the hard work here, uh Mrs.

Ms.

Garrison Green on finding this person, uh and then the committee as well.

Thank you.

Uh yeah, so Berkeley, of course, I mean you may or may not know this, but Berkeley uh is the home of police accountability.

We're the first ever.

Uh, and so we have responsibility to do it right and to be a place of leadership for the country.

Um, so I mean, so going through your list here, uh, merging with my original notes.

Um uh the priorities immediately.

So we're restoring public trust in the office, uh, very important.

Uh professionalize the sort of processes that were there, um, repair relationships that were that have been ruptured um over the last few years.

Um, and um, and of course, uh bring further transparency uh and more diligent reporting.

That's um, that I'll say I'll just leave it at that.

Uh the biggest challenge is, and it was opportunities.

So, um again, the challenge is that trust in the office has been strained, trust between the office and other departments of the city has been strained, trust between the office and us have been strained, and trust between the community at large, um, with all of us has been strained around this topic.

Uh, so again, um getting to that.

Um, another challenge that this town is, of course, very uh active, very sophisticated politically, and expectations are very high.

Um, another challenge is that uh that this role is very very complex, is that it sits at the intersection of law and labor, laws, um labor relations, politics, public safety, race, homelessness, mental health, and civil rights.

All that in one role.

Um, and um the another one opportunity, let's get opportunities now.

Um, you know, again, this is a chance for someone to be a leader.

This role in the right hands is a game changer for their lives.

Um they can really do something big from this position.

Um, opportunity to really deploy new methods of data, data gathering, new technologies.

I think my colleague mentioned that.

Uh, opportunity to really take us to the next level uh and embrace the future um of modern policing.

Um so uh yeah, uh the competencies you need, you definitely need uh you need experience and civilian oversight.

It's too hard to jump into this thing.

Uh you need investigative competence, so then investigations, you know how to run investigation.

Uh you need to understand all the police practices, um the laws around policing, the laws around um around labor, um, and really those are the two strong ones.

Um, and also and also constitutional laws as well, and the nuances around constitutional uh protections as well, and there are sometimes limitations.

Um, policy and systems, so municipal systems, you have to understand that.

Um, data skills, again, and uh public reporting elements and communication, communication powers, so you can communicate effectively uh the data you're gathering and the work you're doing and the changes that you are promoting and implementing.

Um you need to work, you know, learn to work with um uh politicians, yeah.

I mean, not including myself, but these are these eight people uh and others, you know.

Uh you need you need um I'll give it interpersonal, what's the next one?

Interpersonal competencies, where are we here?

Yes, yes, yes.

So here, um, you here this is this is the the most important one here because um, you know, you need to this person needs to operate um in ambiguous or unstable environments uh with limited and often conflicting guidance and hostility, they have to be able to really be centered in that maelstrom and stay the course for this role.

Uh very difficult.

Um and they need to be diplomatic with their independence, is with their with their their mission directive as well.

Um they need to they need to gain the be able to earn credibility across the divergent populations and divergent elements.

Um low ego leadership, you have to be able to work with the team, uh, even though you are the person, you still have a team, and the city itself is your team, the police are your team, uh, we're your team, the city manager team, city attorney's your team.

Uh you have to they have the person has to really understand how to work with the team and quarterback it.

Um crisis communication, these scandals come up, um, incredibly violent things happen, uh heartbreaking things happen.

They have to be able to communicate a crisis effectively uh to the community.

Uh and of course, this is the the most important one.

Uh, the only cultural competence and uh and a fluency in racial equity because that is the core of police oversight in America.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, council member.

Thank you.

Oh, Vice Mayor Trackab.

Okay, thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, I'm gonna start with challenges and opportunities, and um I think that the acronym VUCA is fitting.

That stands for volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.

And I think we at times, uh, and especially someone in that while at times, has to navigate um all of these attributes.

Um uh that is both a challenge and an opportunity.

There is a challenge and opportunity to navigate a highly dynamic landscape of emergent and existing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with surveillance technologies and policies, as well as ever-changing regulations at the state level, such as a recent change in reporting requirements that Berkeley then had to look at how our own requirements fit within that framework.

Another challenge and opportunity is that this would be a new director within a uh relatively uh new department, working with a mostly new uh PAB.

And then finally, um, it it is a tight budget year for all of us, and ODPA is not um uh not unique in that having to navigate that challenge.

So uh there will be a need for this role to someone in that role to understand and set priorities.

Um priorities, um, to me, some of the critical priorities are to finalize regulations governing the PAB and ODPA.

Um, working with the PUB to evaluate the um uh now what will be uh contracting process for um items related to the safety technology ordinance, as well as other tools and reporting requirements and cadences that are or may be under review in the future by the council.

Um of course I already mentioned um that um well this this is a challenge, an opportunity, and a priority.

They would need to work closely with the PAB, much of whom uh will be new.

And uh a priority for me is for their ability to work collaboratively with various stakeholders, including but not limited to PAB, BPD, city manager, charter officers, mayor, and the council, as well as their uh respective reports.

Uh so that brings me to um desired qualifications.

So um I come from uh an independent oversight uh well, that is something I did um in the regulatory space in the federal government, um, and uh likewise um I I see this role as um in part a role that dispenses independent oversight, and that means it's very important for whoever is in that role to be impartial to get to the truth.

Um I think we know what that is not, so that is not playing gotcha or reflexively assuming the worst without um getting data, um, but it's also not someone who goes along merely to get along.

Um it is vital that um someone in an independent oversight role maintains respect for everyone's roles, even when there is a professional difference of opinion.

Um, it is also someone who should have strong knowledge and understanding of all relevant regulations, someone who seeks to listen to all perspectives uh and yes, uh, maintains a cultural competency, as has been said, um, develops a deep understanding of the issues and acts based on that understanding.

Um, an understanding of how different stakeholders operate and interact would be a plus.

Um, in addition to that, as mentioned with um the budget and other constraints on resources, um, they have to be a good program and project manager, and uh uh should be able to set priorities.

Um, what is done here?

Um, ideally, uh they would have experience working in a jurisdiction with significant challenges that underwent meaningful improvement under the leadership.

And uh finally, and this is probably the most important, is uh as has been stated by others.

They need to have sound communication skills, and they need to be strong in communicating with the public, both the entire public as well as broad swaths of the community that may disagree on certain things uh as well as internally within their own department and cross-cutting to the city.

Uh that is all.

Thank you so much.

Thank you very much, Vice Mayor.

We are moving on to Councilmember Kessarwani.

Thank you so much, Madam Mayor, and thank you for um initiating this this conversation with the full council and um thank you to the mayor and council member Humbert and Councilmember Lunapata for being part of that or being the group that is um making more of these decisions for us because this is such an important role that has been authorized by the voters of Berkeley to create this office of a department of police accountability, and um so I'll I'll just quickly run through these questions because I I think everything I wanted to say has already been covered, but I I just do want to share share it from my perspective.

So, in terms of the first 12 to 18 months, I um think it will be important to rebuild trust and visibility that um this office has a new permanent director, and I think uh one good way to do that is to conduct listening sessions with the community and to make sure that the director does outreach to a the diverse range of community members who interact with our police department.

Um, I also think that it would be useful to strengthen public reporting so that the public can track patterns and outcomes and the work that's going on in this office and and better understand the role that it plays.

Um, okay.

So then let me look at the biggest challenges and areas of opportunity, and so I think um there are many members of our community who are very engaged, and so I think that can be an opportunity.

Um, and I talked about doing listening sessions.

I think it'll also be important, and um, I thought a lot about this when I first got elected in my first term.

Is thinking about how to outreach to people who um are very busy and aren't are not likely to go to you.

You know, they're not gonna come to you to your, you know, the Berkeley Police Department has coffee with a cop, only certain people are going to do that.

So, how can you come to people where they are and engage with them?

Um, I I think that will be very important to uh, you know, for the director to have a broad understanding of the community's um sense of police accountability and its importance, because I think in this space, there do tend to be activist voices that are very loud and strong, and I would want this person to know that they have a responsibility to represent the entire city's interests and and to actively uh pursue voices that you know they may not necessarily get a chance to hear from unless they do that proactive outreach.

Um, and so okay, let me keep going.

In terms of technical competencies, background and experience, I you know, I think this is as others have said, a very um technical uh role, you know, with important technical competencies, like having expertise in how impartial investigations are conducted, somebody who understands the California legal framework.

I think that's already been said as well.

And um, and you know, I I think this is gonna be a pretty broad search.

So it may be somebody who's not from California, but somebody who has demonstrated the ability to come up to speed on the technical and legal understanding that is needed to be effective in the role.

And then finally, I think the last question is probably most important, the interpersonal leadership competencies.

And I so I do think, as others have said, communication will be very important.

I think what Councilmember Blackaby said about being independent, but collaborative, independent and collaborative, that's very much what we have to do on the dais.

You know, we I think we all have very strong views, uh, but we we need to get to five votes.

And that person is is not part of those vote counts, but you know, I I would love to see a director of police accountability who can um work collaboratively with the council because we are often wanting the input of that director on the various public safety policy issues that we're grappling with, and um, and so that's gonna be important to be collaborative and and also to bring um an objective, oh, fact-based, I know the time really goes by fast.

Um, the an objective fact-based perspective to things, um, and let me just see if I haven't left anything out here, and and I also think you know, in terms of liking likening it to a political role, somebody who has had to navigate a political environment and and has done so successfully, somebody who understands the importance of relationships as the director and not just with the council, but other city staff, you know, somebody who can work collaboratively with the police chief.

You know, that's really what's required to be able to be independent, but also um also just be able to to understand that this is an organization with a lot of uh different uh people serving in it and and they need to learn how to navigate that, and then there's gonna be tension in that naturally, but but to be able to do that in a respectful and productive way is very important.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you all so much for your thoughtful comments.

Um Councilmember Taplin, did you have something you wanted to add?

Yes, thank you very much.

I just wanted to add uh very briefly, in addition to all the political acumen that this role requires, I think it's important to recognize that this is also a position for a city employee.

So having someone with experience, um leading uh a department, managing a department budget, um, especially in a public agency, non-academic institution, non-nonprofit, but a public agency is really important.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Um I know that my council member colleagues on the subcommittee and I have already given plenty of our opinions.

Um, and I so I did just want to say um thank you to everyone who who spoke and who shared their opinions and their thoughts.

Um I think that your feedback is really, really important.

And I also want to let you know that this really mirrors what we heard a lot in the community meeting as well.

So just so folks know, like that gives me uh a really um strong sense that we are very aligned on like the kind of person we're looking for and the kind of skills that we want them to have and abilities, and also what we see as areas of challenge and opportunity, and um just so uh my fellow council members know too, um, we had folks there who have been very supportive of the ODPA position, folks who have been more critical.

We had folks, we had the BPA president, he was there.

Uh we also had former um members of the PRC, um, let me think, and then folks online, you know, from League of Women Voters, and and um, yeah.

So I just wanted to let folks know.

I I really felt that there was a good representation of folks from different perspectives, um, and that uh our consultant has done a really excellent job leading those conversations and also making sure that we're moving through this process.

So speaking of, Lauren, I'm gonna pass it back to you, and if there's anything else you want to say, and if you could also just walk us through kind of what the next steps are so that folks know what to look forward to going forward.

Absolutely.

Thank you, Mary Ishi.

Um I have appreciated hearing from all of you.

This is very helpful, and I do want to echo what the mayor said that uh it's very encouraging to see that there's so much alignment between what you all and the council are looking for and what your community members have said they're looking for.

That's encouraging for me, both going out there and looking for candidates, and that's also encouraging to candidates who are interested in the role who can get a clear sense of uh what they might be looking at stepping into a role like this.

Uh, so that is that is very encouraging.

So I'm gonna stop sharing my screen so that I can see the other things that I have pulled up for you.

Uh, I do want to walk you through kind of where we are headed next.

So, as I mentioned, we have been spending time doing a lot of community engagement early on in the process.

Uh, and at this stage, we have scheduled interviews for an initial round of virtual interviews.

That'll be the candidates' first opportunity, top candidates to interview on July 17th.

That will be the subcommittee will meet prior to that and put forward a group of candidates to those interviews.

Uh, the makeup of uh the participation in those interviews is still being finalized, but will involve community members as well as the PAB.

Uh and finalist candidates uh selected by the subcommittee to move forward from those interviews will be put forward to a closed session interview with all of you at the end of July.

We are currently finalizing that date, and I believe that we are close.

Uh so stay tuned for uh for that date.

But that's kind of where we are, and from there uh I will be working through the mayor's office to um to finalize uh processes with your select candidate.

Hopefully, the outcome of the interview with the full council is that uh you'll arrive at uh a candidate you'd like to make an offer to, and uh I will assist in that process uh and work through the mayor's office and your city attorney, et cetera.

So that's where we are currently.

Uh the recruitment has recently been opened.

So we are taking applications.

It will remain open until at least June 24th.

Uh, it's a national search, as you might have guessed, and we do a pretty robust outreach campaign.

Currently, we have 44 applicants for the role.

Uh, and I would say there are some very interesting folks in there.

I definitely think that there's uh there are some strong contenders in the mix.

Uh, and so I am encouraged and uh optimistic about uh the candidate pool so far, and that is where we are at the moment.

I would love to know if any of you have questions about the process.

Any other questions from my council colleagues?

I am not seeing any questions.

Okay, and then I did want folks to know that um Lauren is also basically doing this same process with the PAB, so they will also be able to give their feedback on, you know, what they want to see in this uh director of police accountability.

Um and then there are a few other things that just to give you all updates on this topic generally.

Um, I know we've been talking a lot about building trust, and that's absolutely something that's that's very important in the past.

We had also talked about making sure that we have um a full PAB.

I think that we only have two vacancies right now, and I think those of us who have vacancies actually there are folks are already in the process, but they need to go through background checks and paperwork, etc.

And so those should hopefully be coming on um soon.

And uh so I just wanted to let folks know about that because that is really important, Lauren, for the person to know that they will have a full PAB to work with, because before we had many vacancies.

And then I have been meeting basically weekly, every week or one and a half weeks or so, with our interim director of police accountability.

So just so folks are aware of that and been working with her very closely on the budget process and checking in to see if she needs anything administratively.

And then the PAB regulations was also brought up, so I did just want to mention before I forget that that is also moving through.

I think that there's just one issue that's remaining, and I know it's very challenging because there are so many folks in those meetings to to get internal alignment.

Um but we are moving forward with that as well.

So just to give you all um some updates, and that's also important, Lauren, because those PAB regulations, I think having those settled before the new person comes in or very soon after, will make their job easier and have they'll have more clarity in the work that they'll be doing and how to do it.

So just wanted to share that with everyone.

Okay, I think that that is it for this item.

So thank you so much, Lauren.

Thank you for being here so late in the evening, and we will be in touch with you soon.

All right, thank you so much, Mayor, and thank you to the council.

It's been great meeting you all.

And like I said, I look forward to meeting you all in person when I'm down there for interviews.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay, so um we did move item 28 to the uh Dune to the meeting on the 16th.

Um, but usually what I do is if there's comments on the CIP, an item that we removed.

I just want to see if anyone has any public comment on that.

Anyone online?

I'm not commenting the public.

Oh, sorry.

There's one commenter online, um, Kathy Fogle.

I just realized we also didn't take public comment on the item previous.

Yeah, this so this is for public common director police accountability.

We should take that first.

Okay, Kathy Fogle.

Oh.

I I wanted to speak to the CIP, so we'll come back to you, Kathy.

I'm sorry about that.

No worries.

I don't see any hands raised for the director.

Okay.

Please, okay.

Please accountability.

Thank you.

So go we'll go back to Kathy then for comment on CIP.

Um I oh you can hear me.

Okay.

Great.

Hi, uh, my name is Kathy Fogle, and I live on McGee Avenue.

McGee Avenue between Cedar and Rose Street is a failed street.

Four years ago, this street has had a uh paving condition index of 11.

Now it's probably a seven.

The street is dangerous, it's rutted, there's dirt and gravel everywhere.

Bike riders can't use it.

My neighbor's car's dash cam switches to emergency mode when she drives here.

The road is so bumpy and uneven.

Her car thinks she's in an accident.

Street sweeping doesn't clean the street, it just raises up gravel and dust.

54 neighbors and I submitted a later a letter and photos of McGee Avenue for the intended agenda item.

It's in your supplemental agenda.

We'll resubmit it for the next meeting.

McGee Avenue is currently in staff's recommended 2027 to 32 five-year paving plan using measure FF funds, and funding for these streets is included in the capital improvement plan.

Please do not remove McGee Avenue from the final five-year paving plan, measure FF and CIP plans.

McGee Avenue desperately needs paving.

McGee Avenue is included by staff in the five-year plan because of need.

Some streets need to be prioritized simply because of need.

McGee Avenue is one of those streets.

Please help us and ensure that it can be paved.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Kathy.

Anyone else want to comment on item 28, which is the CIP, the capital improvement program.

We won't be hearing that item this evening, but if folks are on still, I want to give them an opportunity to comment.

Okay.

I think that's it then.

Um, is there any other public comment for items not listed on the agenda?

Uh yes.

Um, as Carol Morosovic, as the um high commission's a beginning to go hybrid, uh, my understanding is they will not be posted.

But staff can the staff secretary can receive requests um for the recording.

I really if there's any way that the website can manage it, it's more transparent to post it.

People may want to listen to meetings, uh, because they're otherwise engaged at that time.

Uh, and uh and once you have a controversial issue, do you really want to take up that much staff time with the number of requests that can go to a staff secretary asking for the recording?

It just seems as if it would be much more efficient to just post those recordings so that people can uh go back and listen to meetings on issues that they're interested in.

Thank you.

Carol, Carol, thank you.

I mean, we talked about this at the landers committee meeting.

Remember, um, that's actually not correct information.

Well, the uh the city clerk's office said, okay.

Uh, sorry, Carol, we're not gonna have it back and forth, but is there anything you wanted to add to that?

Just the meetings will be posted.

Yeah, okay.

So, um, and um okay.

Is there any other public comment for items not listed on the agenda?

There's two hands raised.

First is Kelvin Ward.

For non-agenda public comment.

Uh, yes.

Thank you.

Uh, my name is Kelvin Ward.

I'm a community organizer with Leave Livery, California, and uh I wanted to uh just show my support for uh continued funding for the Berkeleys uh community violence intervention program.

Um so when we talk about public safety, um, I realize I think a lot of us realize that we have to invest in what's actually working.

Uh this program has helped to save lives uh interrupt cycles of violence and create pathways to healing and stability for individuals and families most impacted by gun violence.

Um the results speak for themselves.

We've seen significant reductions uh in violence and homicides uh in the uh Berkeley area, and so I respectfully urge the Berkeley City Council to continue funding this uh proven strategy and demonstrate uh that community-based solutions remain a priority.

Public safety is strongest when communities and government work together to save lives.

Thank you.

Thank you, Calvin.

Caller with a phone number ending in 211.

As far as the parking problem, amend strongly using bus number sixty and six to five for anybody living in Kensington.

Like I do, or Berkeley Hills.

It takes 10 minutes to go any place, safe and quick.

No, I think referred to group language, including Hebrew, it does not include um uh Yiddish.

Yiddish is European language, by the way.

Uh don't have any and Israelis.

Israelis can zero to two percent, also because they come from Central Europe, Ukraine, and so on.

Palestinians can 78%.

We have to be well, the same people.

We wouldn't have a choice when they come to this horrible earth.

So, not from thank you, and good have a good night.

You had very good um meeting tonight.

Good night.

Thank you.

Can you hear me?

Yes, okay.

So, as far as the Zoom recordings of the meetings, those are not available unless they are requested, and I have been requesting them so that I have so that I can watch the Zoom recording.

Uh there still are some problems with uh commissions that do not record their meeting, and that would be the hack.

I requested uh the recording from the hack meeting, and they evidently didn't do it.

Um I was able to get the recording from the planning commission and I was able to get the recording from the landmarks preservation commission.

So this is inconsistent.

It's also inconsistent in terms of being able to uh save the Zoom transcript during the meeting, and I would like to see this made consistent across all boards and commissions that the zoom recording is saved and that it is available for the time that you defined in your ordinance, and that the transcript is always available to be recorded during the meeting if someone so chooses to do so.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else have public comment for items not listed on the agenda?

No.

Okay.

Is there a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Second.

Uh can we take the roll on that, please?

Okay, to adjourn the meeting, Councilmember Kessarwani.

She's closed.

She's gone.

Um Taplin.

Verily.

Aye.

Bartlett.

Yes.

Traga, aye.

O'Keefe.

Yes.

Blackaby.

Yes.

Luna Para.

Yes.

Humbert.

Yes.

And Mary Sheen.

Yes.

Okay.

Meetings adjourned.

Meeting is adjourned.

Thank you all so much.

Recording stopped.