OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Berkeley, California/City Council
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Joint Powers Financing Authority and City Council Meeting - October 27, 2026

City Council — Tuesday, October 27, 2026
BodyBerkeley, California
SessionCity Council
DateTuesday, October 27, 2026
StatusNEW · FILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Original source
Transcript — Verbatim

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.

Speaker 1

0:00

Including at the last minute earlier this month, he's pulled back from major threats like this repeatedly.

0:08

Um and so now the White House is saying no strikes before midterms, Iran's intelligence says it could become before Israel votes on Tuesday.

0:17

Which is which clock is is correct in this case.

0:22

And if the Republicans lose Congress, can it Democrats stop a possible escalation?

0:29

And will they?

0:30

You know, you've been talking repeatedly and criticizing how the Democrats attacked the MOU the same same way that the Republicans went after the Iran deal in 2015.

0:43

So are they really invested in stopping this war?

Speaker 2

0:49

Unfortunately, not to the extent that they should be.

0:52

Now, of course, it's perhaps a different political calculation before the midterms versus after the midterms.

0:58

But what you saw with the MOU, it was that there were a lot of Democrats who should have known better, who actually played a fantastic role in the JCPOA, who now returned the favor to the Republicans by doing these bad faith attacks against the MOU.

1:12

It all contributed to the MOU collapsing.

1:15

It's not the only reason, but it contributed certainly to the conception that Trump now has, which is that a deal with Iran is not a win because he will pay such a high political price for it, which is a conception every previous American president has had.

1:29

It's actually uh, you know, it's rather interesting that Trump didn't have it.

1:32

It's part of the reason why he was so willing to strike a deal with Iran, so willing to strike a deal with North Korea, because he didn't have that, you know, that he was kind of immune to the idea of a political cost for uh striking such an agreement.

1:45

But that's changed, and the Democrats did contribute to it.

1:48

I think after the midterms, it will be critical for the Democrats to do everything they can from using the power of the purse to other means that they have to put an end to this war.

1:59

Because once they're in control of the House, and particularly if they're also control of the Senate, they're no longer bystanders.

2:05

They're complicit if this is allowed to continue because they will have the power to stop it.

Speaker 3

2:11

I mean, there's so much damage incurred from this war.

2:15

Um, obviously not as much as the Iranian side, but and I think it still stands to be seen just how deep that damage can go.

2:21

And Iranian officials are now talking about expanding targets to data centers and undersea internet cables.

2:27

Iran analysts floated hitting Saudi refineries like a Ramco to spike oil prices.

2:32

Um a top advisor to Galibaf called the idea of that 72-hour war that the Trump administration is talking about to the media a fantasy.

2:41

So I guess what is the next round look like from Iran's side?

2:45

Uh, how much more can they escalate?

2:48

And why do you think Iran has decided to kind of wait out Trump rather than cut any more deals?

Speaker 2

2:55

Well, let me say a couple of points.

2:57

First, I spoke to uh a senior advisor to a European um uh president, uh, who's no longer in office, just recently left office.

3:09

Not particularly unsympathetic to Trump, to be frank with you, within the European context.

3:13

I asked him that all of these protests that we're seeing around Europe right now, not just in France, but in many other countries, how much of that do you think is driven by the economic consequences of this war?

3:24

And to my surprise, given the fact that I think he's a person who also not on, you know, he's on the conservative side when it comes to immigration.

3:32

He said overwhelming.

3:33

He said that a lot of it has to do with the consequences, the economic consequences of this war.

3:38

The focus he said is oftentimes on immigration, but it's not the driving force of this.

3:43

So even from someone from the right that is actually more on the anti-immigrant side, actually said that uh uh what we're seeing in Europe right now is largely driven by the economic consequences coming out of this war.

3:55

So the the global repercussions so far, and the first two rounds are going to be benign compared to the third round, uh, has already been uh extensive and and will become overwhelming uh uh later on.

4:09

Sorry, the other part of their question, if you could just quickly repeat.

Speaker 3

4:13

Yeah, I was, I guess I was wondering why it is now maybe this is self-explanatory from the Iranian side in a way, but why it is that Iran has kind of decided to.

Speaker 2

4:21

I think that's a very good question.

4:22

Yeah, yeah, it's a very good question.

4:24

And I think the answer lies in the fact that in this war of attrition that has existed up until now.

4:30

I mean, I I worry that the war will begin this weekend by the Israelis.

4:35

Um that up until now, the Iranians have actually been very comfortable, not in the sense that they're not hurting, but because they believe that in this war of attrition, time is on their side.

4:45

The Trump administration is of course putting forward a completely different story.

4:49

They're saying that they're winning, they won the battle of war moves, more volume is coming out of the Strait of Hormuz, and as a result, they're winning the war of attrition.

Unassigned speaker

5:00

Yet it is the United States and Israel that is about to start this war, which tells you something as to whether who actually is winning that war of attrition.

Speaker 2

5:05

Or at least who had the momentum on their side.

5:07

The administration I think has been remarkably successful, not because of their brilliance, but because of the lack of brilliance in the media core and in the analytical core, in which

Unassigned speaker

7:24

the date of like virtual participation, I just think it's got some.

Speaker 4

7:54

Yep, looks good.

Unassigned speaker

8:22

I don't know.

Unassigned speaker

8:47

Yeah,

Speaker 5

8:47

I guess this is

Speaker 6

8:48

that's

Unassigned speaker

9:00

cute.

Unassigned speaker

9:12

That's like only like the nearest

Speaker 6

9:15

scale.

9:21

Yeah, yeah.

Unassigned speaker

9:39

I used to be a good thing.

Unassigned speaker

10:00

Oh no, I'm sorry, I'm going to screw it.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Procedural████████████████████████████28%
Housing████████████████████20%
Public Comment██████████10%
Procurement██████6%
International Relations█████5%
Energy and Sustainability█████5%
Youth Programs████4%
Community Engagement████4%
Homelessness███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Joint Powers Financing Authority and City Council Meeting - October 27, 2026

The Joint Powers Financing Authority (JPFA) convened at 5:45 PM, followed immediately by the Berkeley City Council at 6:01 PM, on Tuesday, October 27, 2026, in the School District Board Room and via Zoom. The JPFA meeting was brief, focusing on approval of prior minutes. The City Council session included ceremonial presentations, a city manager report, a city auditor update, public comment, a substantial consent calendar, and a major discussion item on the Ashby BART East Lot affordable housing development.

Consent Calendar

  • Joint Powers Financing Authority: Approved the minutes from the December 2, 2025 meeting without comment or opposition. Motion by Councilmember O'Keefe, seconded, passed unanimously.
  • City Council Consent Calendar: The council approved a large consent calendar with several modifications:
    • An urgency item (opposing proposed Census changes) was added by Councilmember Kessarwani and co-sponsored by Councilmember Trego, added unanimously.
    • Item 22B (City Manager companion report on special events ordinances) was removed at the city manager's request and Item 22A was referred to the Agenda and Rules Committee for future scheduling.
    • Items 20B (ProWAG guidelines), 23B, and 24B (zero waste ordinances) were adopted as the companion reports.
    • Items 26 (Berkeley Flea Market fall festival) and 27 (Harriet Tubman Terrace low-income housing bay cruise) received discretionary fund pledges from multiple council members totaling over $1,100.
    • Item 25 (amending municipal code to require competitive procurement for service contracts over $100,000) was approved; Councilmember Kessarwani clarified the award criteria are based on competence and qualifications, not solely lowest price.
    • Item 21 (renaming the northern end of the Berkeley Waterfront to "César Chávez Park" – cited as "Cisepue Park" in transcript) was approved; speakers noted that the United Farm Workers union had given provisional approval for use of the trademarked phrase "Sí Se Puede."

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Non-Agenda Public Comment (JPFA & City Council):
    • Steve Tracy (Berkeley resident) expressed concern about rumors of Fire Chief Sprague's resignation and urged a public statement before the election.
    • A speaker from BCBI supported extending their contract.
    • A representative from Live Free thanked the council for a $200,000 allocation and invited all to a fundraising event on November 7.
    • Jennifer Cogley (Bayer Healthcare) reported deteriorated conditions on Grayson Street affecting vendor deliveries for medicine production, urging the council to address street safety.
    • Kentrell Killens urged consideration of individual circumstances in homeless policies rather than broad bans.
    • Della Luna criticized new crosswalk signs and red curb painting at Ashby and MLK, arguing they distract drivers and create confusion.
    • David (District One resident) urged passage of Councilmember Kessarwani's resolution to establish encampment buffer zones around licensed preschools and daycares, noting a special meeting on November 17.
    • Maria Sol encouraged more commission participation and raised concerns about Bonita House closure and safety for seniors and disabled.
    • A caller (number ending 211) criticized the city's failure to pass a Gaza ceasefire resolution and alleged a new housing employee from Pacifica blocked a business deal.
    • Jessica Prado opposed the buffer zone policy as a reactionary homeless policy that could lead to litigation under disability accommodation requirements.
  • Consent Calendar Public Comments:
    • Multiple speakers (Natasha Beary, Beatrice Leva Cutler, Philip Monrad, Sandra Curtis, Jack Mises, Stephen Sherman, Carol Morasovic, Rena Fisher, Monique Allen, Martin Bork, a public commenter, Rebecca Alcaladeira Flor) spoke in support of items 21-24, 26, 27, and 25 (with suggestions for flexibility on contract length). Several also urged prompt implementation of ProWAG boilerplate contract language for accessible public right-of-way.
    • A public commenter criticized the Westlaw contract waiver of sanctuary city ordinance, noting Westlaw contracts with ICE.
    • Marty Nicolaus raised concerns that the name "César Chávez Park" is federally trademarked by UFW and no written consent had been received; the mayor responded that city staff would obtain consent before finalizing.
  • Discussion Item Public Comment:
    • James Codlin (SAHA) expressed gratitude for the recommendation.
    • A tenant complained about SAHA's code enforcement violations, fire department violations, and lawsuits, urging the council to address these issues.
    • Maria Sol urged SAHA to be more open to dialogue on safety and security.

Discussion Items

  • Ashby BART East Lot Developer Selection (Item 30):
    • Staff presented the culmination of a nearly nine-year process to develop the 1.9-acre city-owned parcel. The site was split from the Ashby BART station development; the city now owns the East Lot via an exchange agreement with BART. Key community priorities included a minimum of 300 bedrooms, 35% affordability (stretch goal 50%), 25% set-aside for people with disabilities, and a reparative framework for the historically displaced South Berkeley Black community.
    • The city received six proposals in July 2026. An evaluation panel shortlisted two teams: SAHA (Satellite Affordable Housing Associates, Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley, Deborah Matthews Development Consulting) and Related California with The Kelsey. SAHA was recommended as the primary developer; Related as the alternate.
    • SAHA's proposal includes: 341 bedrooms (100% affordable), 12 affordable townhomes for homeownership, universal design with Architecture for the Blind, generous open space, and a reparative framework including local hiring and historical education. The project leverages $8 million in Measure O funds already reserved.
    • Council members (Bartlett, Trego, Humbert, Blackaby, Kessarwani, Lunapara, O'Keefe, Mayor Ishi) unanimously praised the process, the team, and the focus on righting historic wrongs. Councilmember Bartlett emphasized that the project is about economic repair, not replacement. Councilmember Trego noted it was a proud moment from the 2018 Measure O bond.

Key Outcomes

  • Joint Powers Financing Authority: Adjourned at approximately 5:58 PM.
  • City Council:
    • Approved the consent calendar as modified (including urgency item on census, adoption of companion reports, referral of special events item, and approval of all other items).
    • Unanimously approved (8-0) the adoption of two resolutions authorizing the city manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement with the SAHA team (with Related as backup) and to release a $1 million pre-development loan for the Ashby East Lot. The negotiation period is anticipated to last up to 12 months, with construction closing targeted for December 2031.
    • Approved discretionary fund allocations from multiple council members for items 26 and 27.
  • Next Steps: City staff will negotiate with SAHA; the development team will engage the community during the ENRA period. The final ground lease terms must return to council for approval. The project will also require a land surplus declaration and completion of the funding stack.

Meeting Transcript

Including at the last minute earlier this month, he's pulled back from major threats like this repeatedly. Um and so now the White House is saying no strikes before midterms, Iran's intelligence says it could become before Israel votes on Tuesday. Which is which clock is is correct in this case. And if the Republicans lose Congress, can it Democrats stop a possible escalation? And will they? You know, you've been talking repeatedly and criticizing how the Democrats attacked the MOU the same same way that the Republicans went after the Iran deal in 2015. So are they really invested in stopping this war? Unfortunately, not to the extent that they should be. Now, of course, it's perhaps a different political calculation before the midterms versus after the midterms. But what you saw with the MOU, it was that there were a lot of Democrats who should have known better, who actually played a fantastic role in the JCPOA, who now returned the favor to the Republicans by doing these bad faith attacks against the MOU. It all contributed to the MOU collapsing. It's not the only reason, but it contributed certainly to the conception that Trump now has, which is that a deal with Iran is not a win because he will pay such a high political price for it, which is a conception every previous American president has had. It's actually uh, you know, it's rather interesting that Trump didn't have it. It's part of the reason why he was so willing to strike a deal with Iran, so willing to strike a deal with North Korea, because he didn't have that, you know, that he was kind of immune to the idea of a political cost for uh striking such an agreement. But that's changed, and the Democrats did contribute to it. I think after the midterms, it will be critical for the Democrats to do everything they can from using the power of the purse to other means that they have to put an end to this war. Because once they're in control of the House, and particularly if they're also control of the Senate, they're no longer bystanders. They're complicit if this is allowed to continue because they will have the power to stop it. I mean, there's so much damage incurred from this war. Um, obviously not as much as the Iranian side, but and I think it still stands to be seen just how deep that damage can go. And Iranian officials are now talking about expanding targets to data centers and undersea internet cables. Iran analysts floated hitting Saudi refineries like a Ramco to spike oil prices. Um a top advisor to Galibaf called the idea of that 72-hour war that the Trump administration is talking about to the media a fantasy. So I guess what is the next round look like from Iran's side? Uh, how much more can they escalate? And why do you think Iran has decided to kind of wait out Trump rather than cut any more deals? Well, let me say a couple of points. First, I spoke to uh a senior advisor to a European um uh president, uh, who's no longer in office, just recently left office. Not particularly unsympathetic to Trump, to be frank with you, within the European context. I asked him that all of these protests that we're seeing around Europe right now, not just in France, but in many other countries, how much of that do you think is driven by the economic consequences of this war? And to my surprise, given the fact that I think he's a person who also not on, you know, he's on the conservative side when it comes to immigration. He said overwhelming. He said that a lot of it has to do with the consequences, the economic consequences of this war. The focus he said is oftentimes on immigration, but it's not the driving force of this. So even from someone from the right that is actually more on the anti-immigrant side, actually said that uh uh what we're seeing in Europe right now is largely driven by the economic consequences coming out of this war. So the the global repercussions so far, and the first two rounds are going to be benign compared to the third round, uh, has already been uh extensive and and will become overwhelming uh uh later on. Sorry, the other part of their question, if you could just quickly repeat. Yeah, I was, I guess I was wondering why it is now maybe this is self-explanatory from the Iranian side in a way, but why it is that Iran has kind of decided to. I think that's a very good question. Yeah, yeah, it's a very good question. And I think the answer lies in the fact that in this war of attrition that has existed up until now. I mean, I I worry that the war will begin this weekend by the Israelis. Um that up until now, the Iranians have actually been very comfortable, not in the sense that they're not hurting, but because they believe that in this war of attrition, time is on their side. The Trump administration is of course putting forward a completely different story. They're saying that they're winning, they won the battle of war moves, more volume is coming out of the Strait of Hormuz, and as a result, they're winning the war of attrition. Yet it is the United States and Israel that is about to start this war, which tells you something as to whether who actually is winning that war of attrition. Or at least who had the momentum on their side. The administration I think has been remarkably successful, not because of their brilliance, but because of the lack of brilliance in the media core and in the analytical core, in which the date of like virtual participation, I just think it's got some. Yep, looks good.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com