Berkeley City Council Special Meeting on Budget Adoption - June 23, 2026
Berkeley City Council Special Meeting on Budget Adoption - June 23, 2026
The Berkeley City Council held a special meeting on June 23, 2026, at 6:17 PM to adopt the proposed FY2027-2028 biennial budget and FY2027 annual appropriation ordinance. The city faces a $30 million structural deficit for the next two years, with uncertain revenue prospects due to potential statewide ballot measures that could eliminate $35 million annually. The proposed FY2027 all-fund budget was $918.1 million in expenditures against $787.3 million revenue, and FY2028 was $873.1 million expenditures against $789.6 million revenue. Staff presented minor changes since the June 16 meeting, primarily capturing pass-through funds and updated arts and first source budgets. Major debate centered on funding firefighter/paramedic positions, the small sites affordable housing program, and the use of Measure U1 funds.
Public Comments & Testimony
- SEIU 1021 (Thomas Gregory, Nikia Harris, others): Urged funding six laid‑off positions, arguing the city should use one‑time money to avoid layoffs while other positions (fire/police) receive temporary funding. Highlighted that eliminating community health workers harms maternal and infant health equity.
- Firefighters and union representatives (Stephen Gilman, John Butler, many others): Stressed that voters passed two sales tax measures (FF and GG) generating over $100 million for public safety, and cutting nine fire positions (5 firefighters, 3 paramedics, 1 inspector) breaks a promise to the public. They argued the cuts would increase overtime and reduce response capacity, particularly for Station 4 which responded to 17 cardiac arrests.
- Small sites/affordable housing advocates (Leah Simon‑Weisberg, Bridget, Reverend Sophia DeWitt, many others): Stated that Measure U1 (passed 2016, 75% approval) was intended for affordable housing preservation. They argued small sites cost $459,000 per unit vs. $930,000 for new construction, and cutting the program erodes voter trust. They rejected the framing of firefighters vs. housing as a false choice.
- Arts community (Claire Greensfelder, Lisa Bullwinkle): Opposed cuts to civic arts grants ($83,000) and the elimination of the cultural affairs leadership position, noting arts generate revenue and small grants provide community benefit.
- Telegraph for People (Bryce Miller, Mia Garden, Grayson Savoy): Supported the mayor’s $1.3 million allocation for car‑free telegraph design, calling it a public safety and economic development victory.
- Live Free California (Kelvin Ward, others): Thanked the council for $200,000 in continued funding for gun violence intervention, noting zero fatal shootings in Berkeley in 2025 after multiple shootings in 2024.
- Residents and land trust members: Many opposed redirecting small sites funds, while a few supported using the money for new construction to leverage more state/federal dollars.
Discussion Items
- Staff Presentation: Deputy City Manager presented adjustments since June 16, including increased pass‑through business district funds and updated parks tax/Measure FF allocations. No changes to the general fund.
- Councilmember Kesserwani’s Supplemental (with Blackaby and Taplin): Proposed funding nine fire department positions (5 firefighters, 3 paramedics, 1 fire inspector) from general fund sources, and reallocating $3.8 million from the housing trust fund small sites program to new affordable housing projects, citing better leverage ($4:1) and faster unit creation. Later amended: keep $2.5 million for small sites and leave $1.3 million in the trust fund for new production.
- Mayor Ishi’s Proposed Budget and Amendments: Initially proposed one fire inspector position and preserving small sites funding. After public comment, she offered a friendly amendment adding all nine fire positions (using ambulance fee revenue, not U1 or city clerk funds), keeping the full $3.8 million for small sites, and moving four CIP items to unfunded pending Measure FF eligibility review. She stressed fiscal caution given November’s ballot uncertainty.
- Council Debate: Vice Mayor Tregab and others argued for the “three Ps” (production, preservation, protection) and noted small sites keep communities intact. Councilmember Blackaby framed the choice as getting the most affordable housing per dollar. Councilmember Humbert praised the compromise but ultimately supported the main motion. Councilmember Kesserwani defended the substitute as fiscally prudent and noted $286,000 per unit cost for small sites vs. $209,000 for new construction.
Key Outcomes
- Substitute Motion (Kesserwani): Failed (2 yes, 6 no, 1 abstention). The motion would have retained $2.5 million for small sites, kept $1.3 million in the housing trust fund, and funded nine fire positions via ambulance revenue without taking from the city clerk’s office.
- Main Motion (Mayor Ishi, as amended): Passed unanimously (9‑0). The adopted budget includes:
- Full funding for nine firefighter/paramedic/inspector positions for FY27, with a mid‑year review in early 2027 to assess FY28 positions.
- $3.8 million for the small sites program (including $2.5 million carried over and $1.3 million new from housing trust fund).
- $1.3 million for car‑free Telegraph Avenue design.
- $200,000 for Live Free gun violence intervention.
- Four CIP items moved to unfunded pending eligibility review by the Measure FF oversight committee.
- $50,000 (FY27) and $25,000 (FY28) for Euclid Street garbage corral design from District 6 office funds.
- FY27 Annual Appropriation Ordinance: Approved unanimously (9‑0), with revised gross appropriation of $921,596,116 and net appropriation of $795,829,332.
Meeting Transcript
Okay. All right. Thank you everyone so much for your patience. I'm calling to order the special meeting of the Berkeley City Council. Folks, if you could quiet down, please. Thank you. It's uh June 23rd, 2026, 617 p.m. Can you start us off with the role, please? Thank you, Mayor. Um, and before we start with role, I just want to let everyone know we've been advised by Councilmember Bartlett that he'll be participating remotely under the just cause exemption in the Brown Act. So we're just gonna run through that script real quick with Council Member Bartlett. Councilmember Bartlett is intending to participate in the meeting remotely pursuant to the Brown Act under the just cause justification. A quorum of the council is participating in person at a single physical location that is identified on the agenda, open to the public within the boundaries of the agency and meets accessibility requirements. This satisfies the requirements of the Brown Act. Councilmember Bartlett has notified us of their need to participate remotely. Councilmember Bartlett, please provide a general description of the circumstances relating to your need to appear remotely at this meeting. You are reminded that you need not disclose any medical diagnosis, disability, or other confidential medical information. Thank you. Uh let's just call it a child care emergency. Thank you, Councilmember Bartlett. Um, please at this time disclose um whether there are any other individuals 18 years of age or older um present in the room at your remote location, and if so, the general nature of your relationship with such individuals. Unfortunately, I'm the only adult here. Thank you. Um and Councilmember Bartlett, you're reminded that you must participate through both audio and visual technology. Okay, thank you, everyone. Um, and let's move on with the role. Councilmember Kessarwani here. Taplin. Present. Bartlett. Here. Thank you. Tregab. Present. O'Keefe here. Blackaby. Here. Muna Para here. Humbert? Present. And Mayor Ishi here. Okay. All right. So since it's tonight is a special meeting, we have only a couple of items on here. So we have a supplemental that will be presented by staff. And then Councilmember Kesserwani, if you could also present your supplemental. And just so folks know what we'll do is I will also have some comments and then we'll move over to questions. So if anyone has any questions for any of the supplementals or anything about the CAP or the budget, and then um we will take public comments and then we'll hear comments from the council members before voting. So okay. Would you like to take it away?
openpublica.com