Transcription Metadata

Whisper API Version 1
Generated 2026-01-28 19:31:25 UTC
Archive URI berkeley_a9dd3609-60e9-4268-8e4b-70f79509c4d4.ogg

Segment 1

Good evening everyone.
I'm going to call to order the Berkeley City Council meeting.
Today is Tuesday, January 27, 2026.
Clerk, can you please take the roll? Okay.
Council member Kesarwani? Here.
Taplin? Present.
Bartlett? Here.
Tregub? Present.
O'Keefe? Blackabee? Here.
Vice Mayor Lunaparra? Here.
Council member Humbert? Here.
And Mayor Ishii? Here.
Okay.
All present.
Great.
Thank you so much.
We have an urgent item tonight on the agenda.
The resolution is called Demanding an End to ICE and CBP Searches on Minneapolis and Across the Country Immediate DHS Leadership Changes and Necessary Guardrails for Any Future Funding Bill for DHS.
It falls under immediate action required and there is a need to take immediate action and the need for action came to the attention of the local agency subsequent to the agenda for this meeting being posted.
Council member Blackabee, would you like to introduce the item? Yeah, thanks.
And I can talk about it if we accept it more during the consent calendar, but a couple of facts here.
Obviously, we've all been reacting to the horrific events that we've seen transpire in Minneapolis and a couple of the murders of Renee Good and Alex Preddy happened after our last agenda deadline and Congress has scheduled a vote on increased ICE funding this week, so we felt in consultation with the mayor and my co-sponsors that this is an important time for us to speak out and be heard and so we wanted to submit this as a immediate action item for tonight's agenda.
So I would move that we do add it to the consent calendar for the two-thirds vote and also add Council Member Taplin as a co-sponsor.
Second.
Thank you.
Can we call the roll? Okay.
Council Member Keserwani? Yes.
Taplin? Yes.
Bartlett? Yes.
Traigub? Aye.
O'Keefe? Yes.
Blackabee? Yes.
Vice Mayor Lunapara? Yes.
Council Member Humbert? Yes.
And Mayor Ishii? Yes.
Okay, the item has been added to the consent calendar for tonight's agenda.
Great.
Thank you so much.
I'd also like to turn it over to Mayor Ishii for some comments that she would like to make.
Thank you.
In that same vein, I wanted to add some comments.
So in the last several weeks, of course, we've been closely monitoring the events unfolding in Minnesota, where the President has sent a surge of ICE agents to cause chaos as punishment for state and local policies that support the immigrant community.
As the first time we've seen a surge of ICE agents As the first sanctuary city in the country, the City of Berkeley stands in solidarity with Minnesota and the Twin Cities and will do everything it can to support them in protecting their communities against this unprecedented federal intrusion.
In that vein, I'm pleased to announce that Berkeley will be signing on to an amicus brief from local governments across the country in support of Minnesota and the Twin Cities.
The brief argues that the Minnesota federal court should halt the President's ICE invasion, dubbed Operation Metro Surge, immediately because it violates the 10th Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution and has caused immense harm to the local community in Minnesota.
The brief also highlights the harms that similar ICE invasions have caused and will continue to cause to public safety and local law enforcement throughout the country if the court does not act.
Through this action, as well as the sanctuary ordinance of the city enshrined into law last year, Berkeley continues its longstanding commitment to supporting all of its residents and fostering a relationship of trust between the city and its immigrant community.
And I might add that the Berkeley City Council has given our city attorney authority to join amicus briefs that are related to this topic, and that's how we were able to move forward with that, just in case folks are wondering.
Thank you so much, Mayor.
We're going to start with ceremonial matters.
Council Member, we have three adjournments in memory, and we'll also be talking about the Holocaust Remembrance Day, which is today.
So first, we'll go to Council Member Blackbee, who has an adjournment in memory for Martin Marty Lorber.
Council Member? Thank you, Acting Mayor.
I know Marty's wife, Joanne, and former Council Member Rosenyak are also here to share some comments.
So, you know, we're asking the Council tonight to adjourn in memory of Marty Lorber.
Marty passed away on November 3, 2025.
For nearly 50 years, he made his home in Berkeley and became an extraordinary presence in the life of our city.
Marty was interesting, fun, and deeply caring.
He was genuinely curious about people and their lives, and he had a rare gift for connection.
An uber schmoozer in the best sense of the word, Marty could talk to anyone about anything at any time.
If you ran into him on a walk, you knew you'd be late for your next appointment, but the conversation, the laughter, and the human connection would always be worth it.
Though Marty was brilliant, he was accepted at MIT at the age of 16 into medical school in Rome.
He wore his intellect lightly.
He communicated with warmth and ease, putting people at comfort from the first moment he met them.
He was, above all, a wonderful neighbor.
Marty served the community in countless ways, a primary care internist for 34 years, medical director for numerous convalescent facilities.
He chaired the Berkeley Commission on Aging, served as a history docent at the Oakland Museum of California, and was past president of the Hillside Neighborhood Association.
He volunteered with Meals on Wheels and was a steadfast advocate for Berkeley's Lawn Bowling Club, helping to protect it from development and strengthen its sense of community alongside his wife, Joanne, who's with us here.
Marty also played a crucial role in the long and complex consultations among neighbors, the city, and the school board regarding the future of Hillside School.
It was Marty who conducted the neighborhood survey, largely through his own tireless door-to-door efforts, establishing what funding the community could bring to the transition.
He was endlessly generous with his time, often offering health advice or an informal second opinion to neighbors who sought his counsel.
On a personal note, I can say during some of the long days and nights of my campaign in 2024, and more recently as a council member, whenever I ran into Marty in the neighborhood, he was always quick with a smile, with words of friendly encouragement, and a pick-me-up that always really got me going, and I will always miss that.
The last email I ever received from him, addressed to Susan Wendegraff and me just a few weeks before he died, was quintessentially Marty, and so I wanted to share a little of that with you.
Hi to both of you.
Sorry I missed last night's fire safety meeting, however close it was to home.
I have been waylaid by an onset of widespread pancreatic cancer and blood clots.
Darn! Exclamation point, exclamation point.
I wanted again to say to each of you how pleased I've been of your major efforts over time to promote the core basis of the Fire Safety Council that I nurtured in the Hillside Association for so long.
I'm so proud of your energies, even if I won't be around to see the end effects.
Please personally pass on to Chief Sprague my similar salute and respect for his ongoing principal impact on these developments.
Keep up the good fight.
Hugs from me, Marty.
Marty Lorber was a spectacular neighbor and a true asset to Berkeley.
His passing is a profound loss to our city and his kindness, service, and presence will be deeply missed.
An honor, Marty.
Council Member Wozniak or Joanne, did you have something to say? Thank you, Council Member.
Well, I just want to thank you all for recognizing Marty.
He was a spectacular man and it was my privilege to be with him for so many years and I appreciate the recognition that you're giving him.
He'd be smiling if he were here today.
Thank you.
And Gordon is our dear friend.
Yes, I want to thank the Mayor and Council for honoring Marty Lorber.
I just want to amplify a couple things that were said.
I met Marty probably 40 years ago when my son was in the soccer league.
He was a soccer aficionado.
He knew everything about soccer, okay.
He was also into jobs, but he was very interested and he was a referee and refereed many, many games and that's when I first met him.
I was someone in all of, soccer was alien to me.
I grew up with baseball and football.
But then, you know, about 20 or so years later when he married Joanne, which was a very good friend of my wife's, we were part of, we started meeting and having dinner and lunch.
He found out he was an amazing cook.
Found, as you said, he got into, you know, MIT out of high school and I, after I graduated from college, I applied to MIT and they turned me down.
I had to come to Cal, which was a great school, but Marty was really a renaissance man.
He took, he audited classes at Cal all the time.
He went to OLLI classes and he, if you didn't know it, he would look it up and come back and you could discuss it.
But he didn't, as Brent said, he didn't wear his, I mean, he was really a renaissance.
He knew lots and lots of stuff, but he didn't overwhelm you with these.
He liked to engage what you brought to the table, but he just knew an amazing amount of things.
And the last thing I sort of want to say, other than taking credit for appointing him to the aging commission, which I think he did, I mean, he got, like, he got appointed, you know, chair of the commission at the first meeting.
I mean, that's almost unheard of.
You usually have to, you have to be there for a year or more and you start as a vice chair and you work your way up and he was, he was made chair immediately.
So the last thing I want to tell you is at some point after I retired, we were talking about film and literature and about murder mysteries and somehow it came out of that.
Why don't we teach a knowledge class on poison? Okay.
We call it the elements of murder, how poison was basically used in history and films and politics and movies and murder mysteries.
And he had all the medical knowledge of why things killed you.
And I could fill something in on the chemistry and it was a lot of fun.
He could, he could do anything.
He was an amazing person.
And as you also heard, he was a really good citizen.
He took his, you know, he tried to contribute to make things better.
And so we'll miss him greatly.
And I thank you again for honoring him.
Thank you so much, former council member Wozniak.
And thank you, council member Blackaby.
Council member Trageb has asked that we also adjourn in memory of Barbara Lubin.
Council member Trageb, would you like to share what you prepared? Thank you, madam acting mayor.
I would like us to adjourn this meeting in memory of Barbara Lubin, who passed away on December 13th, 2025, surrounded by her husband, Howard Levine, her four adult children and seven grandchildren.
Born in Philadelphia, Barbara was a lifelong activist for social justice.
She served as a draft counselor during the Vietnam War, and despite being a high school dropout, actively engaged with the anti-war and civil rights movements.
After giving birth to her son, Charlie, in 1969, who was born with Down syndrome, Barbara chose to raise him at home, defying medical advice to institutionalize him.
This decision shaped her lifelong advocacy for children with developmental disabilities.
After moving to Berkeley in 1973, she fought for inclusive education, successfully challenging the school district and helping create the model school, a fully integrated school for children of all abilities.
She also defended Charlie's social inclusion, founding the Elmwood Preservation Alliance to save a beloved local soda fountain, and advocating for commercial rent control to protect small businesses.
Barbara's activism extended globally.
In the 1980s, she supported Central American refugees and opposed U.S.
intervention in Latin America, spending time in Santa Rita Women's Prison for civil disobedience.
She co-founded the Middle East Children's Alliance, or MECA.
For over three decades, MECA supported clean water programs, playgrounds, youth media, and child psychology centers, always responding to the needs of local communities.
Barbara lived by the principle that what was good for her children, especially Charlie, was good for all children.
Fearless, witty, and unwavering in her convictions, she built solidarity across boundaries of nationality, ethnicity, and religion, leaving a profound legacy in MECA, in Berkeley, and in the lives of everyone she touched.
And I believe we have Howard here.
Yes, if you would like to come up and say a few words.
Thank you, Council Member.
Go ahead.
Hi, my name is Howard Levine, and I was Barbara's husband and partner for almost 40 years.
On behalf of her children, Christy, Liz, Charlie, and Alex, and her grandchildren, Sochi, Rio, Rosa, Tess, Isabel, Eob, and Solomon, I want to thank the Mayor and the City Council Members for honoring Barbara tonight.
There are so many words to describe Barbara.
Leader, organizer, visionary, activist, champion, hero, inspiration.
She was angry, outraged, outrageous, passionate, compassionate, loving, sarcastic, and hilarious.
But all these words are still inadequate to retain who she was.
Barbara was a high school dropout who lectured at Harvard Medical School and was elected to the Berkeley Board of Education.
As a school board member, Barbara fought to make sure that every student in Berkeley had the same right to an excellent, diverse, and accessible education, no matter where they lived or what challenges they faced.
Barbara was a stay-at-home mom who, when fighting for her dad's syndrome, Charlie, right to a mainstream education, found she had to protect the Aussies, a sort of fountain Charlie went to each day to give Barbara some needed respite.
That meant taking on some of Berkeley's biggest commercial real estate developers.
She beat them and helped bring commercial regulatory to Berkeley and helping preserve the character of neighborhoods like the Elmwood, until the standout lauded a few years later.
Barbara was a Jewish grandmother who became one of the loudest, fiercest, and most evocative voices for justice in Palestine, in this country, and internationally.
As her school board term was ending in 1986, the first Palestinian intifada was just beginning, and Barbara joined one of the first delegation of elected officials and activists to visit occupied Palestine and see firsthand the brutality of the occupation.
Her entire worldview as a U.S.
taxpayer and supporter of Israel was undone, and she was determined to do something about it.
In 1988, she co-founded the Middle East Children's Alliance.
This was at a time when Palestine was not talked about in polite circles and couldn't even be discussed in progressive areas.
Barbara helped change all that, and now no progressive agenda is complete if Palestine isn't included.
She inspired hundreds and probably thousands of people to become activists for Palestine.
I'm proud to say I was the first.
Since its founding, the Middle East Children's Alliance has delivered millions of dollars worth of aid to the West Bank and Gaza Strip, provided academic scholarships to hundreds of students, and supported projects all over the area.
Barbara felt a special connection to the people of Gaza and traveled there several times a year for nearly 30 years.
She got to know the people and established many programs that provided an infrastructure for organizations all over the world to provide life-saving aid during the bombing of Gaza in 2018 and again during the current and ongoing slaughter.
In these dark times, we need many more Barbara Lubens, but really there was only ever one.
Thanks again for this honor.
Thank you so much, and thank you again, Council Member.
Council Member Keserwani has also suggested an adjournment in memory as well for Renee Nicole Goode and Alex Pretty.
Would you like to present, Council Member? Yes, thank you very much, Madam Vice Mayor.
So I would like to move that the City Council also adjourn tonight's meeting in memory of Renee Nicole Goode and Alex Jeffrey Pretty, two residents of Minneapolis, Minnesota, who, as we all know, their lives were tragically cut short by federal immigration agents earlier this month.
Renee Nicole Goode was age 37.
She was a devoted mother of three, a prize-winning poet, and a self-described writer, mother, and wife.
Remembered by her family as a kind-hearted soul and an amazing human being, Renee was killed by an ICE agent on January 7th, just blocks from her home.
She had recently moved to Minneapolis to start a new chapter where she was known for her compassion, her love of singing, and her dedication to her children.
Alex Jeffrey Pretty, also age 37, was a registered nurse in the intensive care unit at the Minneapolis VA health care system.
Alex spent his career caring for our nation's veterans and was described by colleagues as a gentle soul who always looked for ways to help others.
On January 24th, while acting as a peaceful observer and attempting to assist a bystander, he was fatally shot by federal agents.
Alex died as he lived, taking care of people and standing up for the dignity of his neighbors.
The deaths of Renee and Alex have sparked nationwide mourning and calls for accountability.
As we adjourn tonight, we honor their commitment to community, their roles as caregivers and creators, and their ultimate sacrifice in the name of witnessing and protecting others.
We extend our deepest condolences to their families, their friends, and the community of Minneapolis.
May their memories be a blessing and an inspiration to all who strive for justice and peace here in Berkeley and throughout the country.
And I just ask that we just have a moment of silence as we adjourn in memory of Renee Good and Alex Pretty.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Councilmember.
Today, January 27th, is also International Holocaust Remembrance Day and it marks the 81st anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945.
Councilmember Humbert would like to read an acknowledgement and reflection of the day from Albany Mayor McQuade.
So I'll hand it over to him.
Yes, thank you Madam Acting Mayor.
And this is a statement written by the Mayor of Albany, Peggy McQuade, but I don't think it can be improved upon, so I would like to read it in this context.
Each year on January 27th, communities around the world observe International Holocaust Remembrance Day, commemorating the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the largest Nazi concentration and extermination camp.
January 27th, 2026, marks the 81st anniversary of that liberation.
It is a time for our community to pause and reflect on one of the darkest chapters in human history.
On this day, designated by the United Nations General Assembly, we remember the six million Jews systematically murdered by the Nazi regime, along with millions of other innocent victims, including people with disabilities, political dissidents, Roma people, LGBTQ individuals, and others who were targeted for persecution and extermination.
As a community, we recognize that remembrance is not only about honoring the past, but about shaping the future through education, reflection, and moral action.
Learning about the Holocaust by sharing survivor stories, teaching historical truth, and confronting misinformation helps ensure that future generations understand the consequences of hatred and the importance of standing up for one another.
Grounded in these lessons, we reaffirm our shared values of human dignity, inclusion, compassion, and mutual respect, and we stand united against anti-Semitism and all forms of hatred and discrimination here in our community and beyond.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Council Member.
We are now moving on to City Manager comments.
City Manager, do you have any comments tonight? Yes, thank you, Acting Mayor.
I have two things on the agenda I want to make comments about.
The first is item number six, which is an option agreement with TSA Holding Group LLC for 199 Seawall Drive.
There's been some questions about this, and I just want to clarify on the record that the city does intend to follow its Labor Peace Policy Ordinance, and I'll read part of the relevant part of that right here, which is Section 2.102.030A, which provides that the city shall not execute a hospitality operations lease or substantial amendment providing for the use, development, or operation of a hospitality operation within the marina zone in which the city has a proprietary interest unless and until the project applicant, developer, or owner, and any operator or manager of the hospitality operation has provided evidence that it has entered into a labor peace agreement covering the hospitality.
I just, if you're going to have conversations, please step outside so we can hear our City Manager.
Sorry about that.
Thank you.
That's okay.
Just covering the hospitality operations, pursue it.
So essentially the city, through this ordinance, is required to have a labor peace agreement prior to executing a lease and intends to follow that.
I've had conversations with principals both from Unite Here and from TSA Holdings, and everyone is aware of and understanding and agreeable to that fact that the city has to follow that ordinance.
Secondly, I'm requesting that item 20 be removed from tonight's agenda.
That item is an appeal of the Zoning Adjustment Board's decision to approve a use permit for 2109 Virginia.
We didn't notice that properly, so that item cannot be heard today, and we've requested that agenda and rules that it go to the February 10th meeting, but I just wanted to say that on the record as well.
And that's all.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Mr.
City Manager.
If you would like to comment on item 20 tonight, you may do so during the public comment on the consent calendar, but we will not be holding a public hearing for that item this evening.
If you'd like to participate in the public hearing for that item, you may do so on February 10th.
Now we will go on to public comment on non-agenda matters.
Do we have in-person comments? So we just have four cards for in-person commenters.
Andrea Pritchett, Russell Bates, Michael Johnson, and former Council Member Cheryl Davila.
So you guys come up in any order.
If your name was called, please come line up.
Public comment on non-agenda matters, I believe, is one minute per person.
Yeah, so I'll just ask if there is anybody who is participating in the meeting remotely through Zoom that would like to speak on non-agenda public comment.
If you would, please raise your hand now.
Anybody participating on Zoom that would like to give comments on items not on the agenda, please use the raised hand function now.
There's no raised hands, so we have four cards, so we can do two minutes.
We can do two minutes each.
Thanks.
Go ahead.
It's ironic to me that the settlements of people who were murdered just because they were who they are are now perpetuating the genocide against the people of Gaza and Palestine going on over two years now.
I'd like to propose that the Berkeley City Council at some point acknowledge that by having a Gaza Genocide Remembrance Day so that will not be forgotten and the rightful people who belong in Palestine 48 will eventually, hopefully, be signed as free and be able to deal with their situations by themselves their way.
Long live Palestine.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
Next speaker.
Scary.
It's very pee-poppy over there.
So my name is Andrea Pritchett and I'm here tonight because I'm only concerned.
I filed a police accountability complaint on June 4th.
I tried to bear witness as the council member mentioned how crucial it is to bear witness when we see state power unjustly being used against the innocent.
I have waited seven months for the PAB to be able to produce relevant documents.
I am waiting for the chief to release the relevant documents in that case and I find it to be honest it's kind of rich that that you guys can can your hearts are broken as they should be about what happened to Alex and what happened to Renee but let's remember that they were trying to bear witness to injustice.
Our police in our town threaten to arrest.
To arrest.
They push.
They put hands on.
They put up barriers to our observation and after all these months I've gotten no satisfaction.
Nobody has come to me and said here's what we're going to do about it.
Nobody.
Have any of you looked at the video? Have any of you concerned yourself with our police department because what I see is that we are instead of opening and transparent and working with the community every measure that this council has supported is in the opposite direction.
It takes us we can't listen to scanner codes anymore.
We were being subjected to mass surveillance.
We are we are trying to reintroduce tear gas.
You're seeking to opt out of council review of agreements with those agencies that are perpetrating these crimes.
I have more to say later comment.
Thank you.
Next next commenter.
Go ahead.
I'm Michael Johnson.
I just want to introduce myself.
I'm candidate for superior court judge.
This is not a campaign speech or anything like that so um but I just uh you know wanted to get out into the community and let you know who I am and what I stand for.
I had a moment to go around the community before the meeting tonight and I asked people this weird question.
I said do you know anything about judges? What do you think about the court? Other than the explicatives they gave me um they just said you know they want fairness.
They want access.
They want to be seen and respected and heard and so in my 40 years as an attorney in my five years as a pro tem judge I give that and so I'm going to be out in the community until the June 2nd election just letting people know about my campaign about me and the values and things that I hold dear and the values and things that people hold dear in the community.
So thank you for this opportunity and if you have any questions I'll be outside.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
We have one more um commenter former council member Davila.
Go ahead.
Free Palestine.
Um so you do a remembrance of the holocaust.
Lovely.
But you know there's a holocaust going on right now that none of you.

Segment 2

I want to start by thanking all of you who have tried to stop, and can you pay attention, can you look up, can you listen, act like you're doing your job? Because people are dying every day in Palestine, continued.
I'm glad to see that you have your keffiyeh again, because nothing's changed.
I haven't stopped wearing mine because nothing's changed.
People are still dying, people are still starving, it's not real, isn't letting anything in to help people.
They're going through really bad storms, rains, really cold temperatures, babies are dying, freezing to death, Mayor and Council.
Freezing to death.
Can you imagine? I can't.
I have a home I live in, an apartment anywhere in Berkeley.
But people are dying, and you guys don't care, can't even look up.
Not my representative in District 2.
It's just really sad that you all don't give a crap about dying babies, dying people, and we're a sanctuary city.
What are you going to do when ice comes here? Because, you know, I hope it doesn't happen, but we need to prepare for that.
And tear gas isn't the way, Councilmembers who brought that forward, you know who you are.
It's bear, it's meant for bears, animals, not people.
And publicly I want to thank the Councilmember who gave me the shovel at the African American Holistic Resource Center.
Thank you, Councilmember, for your comments.
Just to double check if there's anyone online who would like to give a Down Agenda public comment.
Yes, there's two hands raised.
First is Alana Auerbach.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
Hi, good evening, everyone.
This is Alana Auerbach, and I wanted you to know what our F.L.O.T.
cameras are doing.
It was the day before Thanksgiving.
I came back, I was walking to my car from the dojo on University, and I saw, oh, I think it was four or five police SUVs.
They pulled over one car, they were parked on Berkeley Way, and two young 20-something people were handcuffed.
Each of them, you know, a young man, young woman, taken to two different cars.
I'm recording, I'm, you know, wondering if they've been told their rights.
Then one of the cops goes and looks in their suitcases that were in the trunk of the car, and he told me that he had gotten permission from the driver of the car.
And so, and the driver of the car had given him permission to search the car, but no, our Berkeley police would not search the car.
They followed this young couple around Berkeley for an hour because it was marked on F.L.O.T.
by a San Jose police officer.
So they impounded the car on a Wednesday.
These two young people, 20-something-year-olds, live in their car.
They do door dash to support themselves.
Now they are, have no car, they have no home, they have no way to make money.
That officer did not come up to Berkeley until Monday.
Do you know how much money? It was over $1,200.
How many, why didn't they just search the car for a firearm? There was no firearm in that car.
The San Jose police officer caused undue harm to these young people thanks to F.L.O.T.
That was totally unnecessary.
How many more of these incidents are happening? When somebody like me is not watching, to be a safety net for young people whose homes get taken away by our police department.
Your time is done.
Thank you for your comment.
Next commenter.
The last speaker's phone number ending in 000.
Go ahead.
Hi, good evening.
So my assistant Roy, he has handed you some papers today.
And please read it carefully.
We are going to file a complaint with the state jurisdiction office, as we did against Erdogan a couple of years ago.
The way the city of Berkeley treated our business, treated the residents of Berkeley, is shameful.
As of what's happening in Washington, D.C., this is monstrous.
The German during the fascist, they had a say.
They came to my neighbor, nobody spoke.
And they came to my brother, nobody spoke.
And they came to me, nobody was left to speak for me.
What's happening? This is a fascist.
This man is a Russian, trodden horse, destroying everything.
Every country in the world has free education, except America.
Every country in the world has great health care, except America.
These are a bunch of animals.
And that's insulting animals.
Taking over this country, fascist, garbage, bloody.
What they did to this poor, this innocent man in Minnesota and the woman is unforgivable.
It is unforgivable.
Wake up, everybody.
They're going to come after you.
You are naked, each and every one of you.
No matter what color or creed or race, they're going to come after all of you.
Take you away.
Take your money away.
Have a good night.
Thank you for your comment.
I think that concludes non-agenda public comment.
Thank you so much.
We're going to move on to the consent calendar now.
First, before we take comments, I would like to move item 22, creating accessible routes for riders, equity, and the environment, car-free, budget referral to fund limiting cars on Telegraph Avenue to the consent calendar.
Are there any objections? Great.
Then item 22 moves to consent.
Thank you so much.
Council members, are there any comments on the consent calendar? Who wants to start? Council member Blackaby.
I'm number 31 according to this.
That's all right.
That's okay.
Just two comments.
First, on item one, I just wanted to thank the city manager, public works, and the city attorney's office for their really important and quick work.
This is an item that many of us might just sort of flip through very quickly on an agenda, but this was a really important issue in our district affecting several residents in an unstable hillside.
And so kind of upon learning about the situation, city staff really leapt into action and are moving quickly to address it.
So I just wanted to thank staff for all their work on this.
It's really important to residents there, and I appreciate, we really appreciate the efforts.
And then second, since we agendized the resolution, the ICE resolution tonight, I know it wasn't in the packet.
I did want to spend just a couple of minutes to run through it, especially for people who are online who might not have a physical copy.
So on the resolution, first of all, I just wanted to thank the mayor and Julie Sinai from her team.
Thank Council Member Lunapara.
Thank Lori McWhorter from my team for all their work to put this together.
It was really kind of a group collaborative effort to put something together that we thought we hoped, and I hope you'll agree, kind of responds to the moment that we find ourselves in.
Because, again, what we're seeing in Minneapolis, what we've seen in Chicago, what we've seen in LA, we very well know could happen here or to other communities near us.
And it was important to us to sort of plant a flag about it and ask for relief and demand changes.
And so this was our effort to provide a vehicle where we could speak with one voice about that.
So very briefly, to highlight what we say in this resolution, it's demanding an end to the ICE and CBP surges in Minneapolis and across the country.
It's demanding immediate DHS leadership changes and demanding necessary guardrails for any future funding bill for DHS.
So on the first page, again, we just recite the egregious actions, the horrific assaults that we have seen in recent weeks.
We highlight, in particular, the fact that 10 individuals have died since September, including Renee Good, Alex Preddy, Keith Porter Jr., and Silverio Villegas Gonzalez.
In addition, at least nine children have been detained, including one toddler, particularly cruel and inhumane, and the conditions of immigration detention facilities where people are being housed while they're being detained, being completely substandard and inadequate.
Overall, since President Trump has taken office, 37 people that we know of so far have died, including many deaths that we know have been preventable.
So the resolve clauses are what we are asking for in the resolution.
The first is that we want to pledge our support and stand with the people of Minnesota, including the mayor, the city councils, and all the people of Minnesota who are, again, doing what I think the people of Berkeley would be doing if we faced the same situation, which is peacefully protesting this lawless surge.
We're calling for an immediate end to Operation Metro Surge and demanding that no future surges be initiated in any other city across the country.
We're calling for the resignation of Secretary Nome and failing that for impeachment of the Secretary, calling for the firing of Gregory Bovino and Stephen Miller, and calling for that the officers who are responsible for these deaths be held accountable for their actions by the states, if not by the United States Department of Justice.
And then the big piece of this really is calling on Congress then to put in the guardrails for future action.
This is really the power of the purse where this needs to happen, ending the lawlessness, requiring masks, ending detention abuses.
And we're calling on Congress not to provide any additional funding for DHS without these guardrails and until the leadership changes have taken place.
We're calling on Congress to restructure DHS, to fundamentally rebuild from ground up, to abolish ICE in the process, and to start over, because what we have is clearly not working and is working to the detriment of people in this country.
And then lastly, we're asking that the governor here and the attorney general here help us prepare in this state for what we hope doesn't happen but we know could happen in conducting additional training for the troops, for CHP and National Guard that we know will be called in to protect peaceful protesters here in California.
So to prepare for that eventuality.
Hopefully we don't need it.
And also to prepare, as the mayor said earlier, legal action to halt any future threatened federal funding cuts to sanctuary city jurisdictions like ours.
And then we wanted to send a copy of this resolution to our entire congressional delegation as well as leadership in Minnesota and our state senator and our assembly member.
So again, I appreciate all the work that went into this and appreciate the support of my colleagues and will be proud if we move this forward tonight.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Council Member Blackaby.
Council Member Bartlett and then Council Member Humbert.
Thank you, Madam Acting Mayor.
And thank you, Council Member Blackaby, for your work there.
Really wonderful positioning for us to take.
Thank you.
On a more local, lighter note, I just want to recognize one of our dear, dear constituents here.
Item number 11 is Urban Ore.
Contract renewal.
Mary Lou is in the house, I see.
Urban Ore is a place that makes gold from lead, if you will.
And we worked together on the Zero Waste Commission way back in the other decade.
It's my first commission.
And great work.
You do great work for the community.
Your labor terms are good.
You serve the city well year after year.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council Member.
Council Member Humbert.
Yes, thank you, Madam Acting Mayor.
And first, I want to thank Council Member Blackaby and the co-sponsors for bringing this urgency item.
It's a really incredibly compelling document.
I also want to thank everybody who pitched in and worked on this on such an accelerated basis.
It's just a critically important thing.
And I read it.
And as I read it, I was very moved by it.
And I don't know if there's any room for one more co-sponsor.
Council Member Blackaby.
Tap ones.
Okay.
Thank you.
Anyway, it's an incredible, compelling document.
And I really appreciate it.
With respect to other items on the consent calendar, item number five, which is a contract for converting the Santa Fe track bed to a park, I just want to say I'm really excited about the prospect of a new park for Berkeley.
Can't wait to go down there and see it in process and see it when it's done.
And now that we have transferred – wait a second.
Oh, item number 17, I refer to the city manager to include in the community survey a poll tax in the city of Berkeley.
I thank Council Member Casarwani for bringing this.
I'm pleased to support it.
Surrounding cities have increased their sales taxes the extra half percent to 10.75.
And given our dire budget circumstances, we should follow suit.
I think, as I understand it, it may mean maybe $5 million in increased revenues for the general fund.
It's certainly – certainly polling our constituents about this makes sense.
And on – I can read the action calendar except number 22 has moved to consent.
And I have comments that I want to make about that, if now is the appropriate time.
Yes, now is the appropriate time.
I'm grateful to be added by Vice Mayor Lunapatra as a cosponsor on this item.
I've gotten a number of emails.
This is the item for creating accessible routes for riders, equity, and the environment, car-free budget referral to fund limiting cars on Telegraph Avenue.
I'm grateful, as I said, to be added as a cosponsor.
I've gotten a number of emails from constituents strongly in support of pedestrianizing Telegraph from Dwight to Bancroft, something that councils, apparently since time immemorial, have been considering.
Vice Mayor Lunapatra's excellent staff found evidence of discussion as early as 1968, I think.
Was it earlier, or is that the earliest? A long time ago.
It makes all the sense in the world.
We can see just how culturally and economically vibrant pedestrian corridors leading up to major universities are in other cities, including Charlottesville, Virginia, the University of Virginia, and Boulder, Colorado, the Pearl Street Mall, leading up to the University of Colorado campus.
I think this should be a perfect project for funding from our LRDP settlement with the university and funds for Measure FF.
Thank you again, Vice Mayor, for bringing this item, and I certainly support it.
Thanks.
Thank you so much, Council Member.
I'm going to go to Mayor Ishii and then Council Member O'Keefe.
Thank you very much.
I've got some comments here.
I want to start by thanking Council Member Blackaby and his staff for working on this item so quickly.
I am in D.C.
at the U.S.
Conference of Mayors and actually meeting with our representatives here.
We met with Congresswoman Simon's office today and let them know about some of the work that we're doing here, including this resolution and the amicus brief that we've signed on to.
I also really want to thank School Board Member Jen Korn, who sent us the draft that we were working off of.
So thank you, School Board Member.
I'm also excited about Item No.
5 moving forward for the Santa Fe Trackbed to Park Conversion Remediation Demolition Perimeter Fencing Project.
It's been a long time coming, and it's great to see the progress.
I'm pleased to support Item 11, which is the contract with Urban Ore.
Now that they settled their contract with the workers, I really appreciate that we're able to move that forward.
For Item 16, I want to thank Council Member Lunapara and Council Member Humbert, Vice Mayor Lunapara and Council Member Humbert for agreeing to serve on the newly organized A.T.
Transit Joint Interagency Liaison Committee consisting of Berkeley and Emeryville.
And just to briefly comment on car-free telegraph, very excited to also be added on this item as well.
And in support, of course, as a supporter, I think there are some folks there to speak, and I want to thank you all for being there to speak in support.
And yeah, I'm looking forward to reporting back from the U.S.
Conference of Mayors.
Thanks very much.
Thank you so much, Mayor.
Council Member O'Keefe.
Thank you, Vice Mayor.
I originally didn't have anything to say about the consent calendar, but now that Item 22 was moved to it, I do have something to say, which is I wanted to really be clear about my support for it because I made such a fuss about the last time we talked about the treatment of traffic on telegraph.
And while I still feel that way, I want to make clear that I think that telegraph is a very different street north and south of Dwight, and I think north of Dwight, I think this makes perfect sense.
I think it's an amazing improvement to that area.
Every time I find myself driving on that part of telegraph, I wonder why I'm there.
It feels very unsafe and very unnatural, and I think it would be really transformative for that area to be, you know, essentially pedestrian-only.
So I just wanted to be explicit about my support, and I'm glad it's on the consent calendar.
I'm happy to support it.
Thank you so much for your support, Council Member.
There are no other..
Oh, Council Member Tragen.
Sorry, the parliamentarian is on the slips.
Thank you, Acting Madam, or Madam Acting Mayor.
I first wanted to thank you and your team for the excellent work on Item 22, car-free, and I am excited to support it.
And it was..
I really appreciated the report in just how long it has actually been to get to this point.
So hopefully this is one of the last blocks to navigate before we get all the way there to that vision of a telegraph for all.
I wanted to just also say a few words of appreciation to Council Member Blackabee and the mayor and all the co-sponsors on the urgency item.
There are truly no words to describe the depth of depravity that has been normalized by the cruel policies unleashed by this federal administration.
If you want to have a very long cry, watch the video of the send-off of Alex Pretty where he is being saluted by ICU nurses.
But I also want to thank the members of this community for their solidarity.
And on Saturday, this has been when I got the news of yet another extra-legal killing in Minnesota.
Frankly, I just wanted to lock myself in and stay in bed.
And it was a constituent in my district, Wendy, who invited me to actually not do that, but to come out to Civic Center Park and stage a spontaneous protest.
And we did, and we were joined by more and more folks.
We saw a former state senator walking by, and she joined us for a few minutes.
A lady was driving down from Placer County, and she joined us for the entire hour that we were there.
And then the next day, the nurses at Oakland Children's staged a rally that was – I saw probably hundreds of people there.
I know that the community here is not braving sub-zero weather and these agents in neighborhoods to the extent that Minnesotans are.
But I want to just express my statement of solidarity and the community's statement of solidarity with the good people of Minnesota.
The arc of the moral universe is long, but it ever bends towards justice.
Thank you so much, Councilmember.
I have a couple comments I want to give.
First, I want to thank Councilmember Blackabee and co-sponsors and their staff for the partnership on this urgency item.
I feel privileged to serve on a body that is boldly standing up and saying that ICE must be abolished.
And I want to remind our community that for over a year, we as a city have been preparing for increased immigration enforcement in Berkeley in collaboration with our partner organizations.
And I have faith that our government and our residents are prepared to rise up and nonviolently resist if and when the Trump administration ramps up their attacks on our neighbors.
For those who want to learn more about how to support each other, reach out to the members of the Berkeley Immigration Collaborative, the Social Justice Collaborative, Multicultural Institute, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, East Bay Community Law Center, and Oasis Legal Services.
I also want to encourage people to join me at the rally for justice for victims of ICE terror at Sproul Plaza at UC Berkeley tomorrow at 2 p.m.
I also want to thank the mayor for adding myself and Councilmember Taplin to the AC Transit Liaison Committee.
For item 22, I first want to add Mayor Ishii, Councilmember Humbert, and Councilmember Blackabee.
Thank you for your co-sponsorship and my colleagues for your support.
I'm really excited about this referral.
It's been really a long time in the making.
And if you read all of the details of the referral, you can see a lot of the research that we've done.
From information as far as held in the UC Berkeley Library, this project was first introduced in 1963 and has been identified as a priority in a handful of items since then across iterations of councils and varying political landscapes.
As the item highlights, District 7 has the highest concentration of collision injuries compared to other districts, has the highest rate of residents who walk, bike, and take public transit, and households who do not own cars, and has the highest rate of housing development and population growth.
During my campaign in 2024, traffic violence in Southside was one of the biggest concerns among District 7 residents.
And while Southside Complete Streets has made a huge difference in the lives of residents, visitors, and students, Telegraph Avenue remains a high-injury, deadly corridor.
District 7 is uniquely positioned to become a citywide model for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit-centered design.
Given the city's considerable investment in new street safety infrastructure through Measure FF and the concurrent safety upgrades in the area, this is a prime moment to request the long-overdue funding to move this project forward.
The budget is also a top concern of mine and I know of our council as well, so I wanted to be cognizant of this when requesting such a large sum of money.
This item requests $0 from the general fund.
It, instead, requests funding from special funds with restricted uses, the most prominent being LRDP, which is restricted from UC Berkeley settlement to be used within a mile of main campus boundaries.
For future phases, I hope that the project can leverage county, state, and federal transportation funds as needed.
I also want to give a huge thank you to Director Davis, to Deputy Director Amiri, and their work for collaborating on this budget referral.
Your work is greatly appreciated.
I just want to note that, in terms of process, this is just the budget component of former Council Member Robinson's referral, which was passed in 2022.
This work also could not have been done without him, so I want to thank him, his staff, and the countless advocates for keeping this 60-year-long project alive.
I also want to thank, on Item 11, I want to thank the workers of Urban Ore for showing us such a powerful example of labor organizing, and I'm happy that this contract can finally move forward.
Thank you.
If there are no more comments from Council Members, we can go on to public comment on the consent calendar.
I would like to remind everyone that the consent calendar public comment period is the public's opportunity to speak on Item 20 as well, if you would like to, tonight, as well as Item 22.
So, please come up if you have a comment on the item, and if you're online, please raise your hand.
We're going to have one minute per speaker, given the amount of speakers that would like to comment.
Go ahead.
I want to speak on the ICE item.
When Renee Goode was shot, I believe the ICE agent that shot her is an eight-year employee, and when Alex Pretty was murdered, he was murdered by a border agent of 10 years.
This is really disturbing because it makes you wonder how many people have crossed the border from Mexico, from Central American countries, but there were no cameras there.
How many people weren't American citizens who have been murdered? And this didn't happen overnight.
Their personalities didn't change overnight, and so I'm not confident that even if Kristi Noem was gone, or Gregory Bovina was gone, and Stephen Miller were all gone, that we would not have this going on.
We are going to have a lot of repair to do.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
Next speaker, please.
Go ahead.
Hello.
I'm Mary Lou Van Deventer from Urban Aura.
I'm the general manager right now and co-owner with my husband, Dr.
Daniel Knapp, who is the founder, really, and I want to thank you very much, Council Member Bartlett.
I appreciate it.
And I thought your work was very good when you were on the commission.
I wanted to say, as you consider our contract tonight, that Urban Aura was called into by the city's 1976 solid waste management plan when the city of Berkeley was running its own landfill, which is now Cesar Chavez Park.
There was a nonprofit who tried to do this and failed, and we arose from its ashes, and we have succeeded.
So we've been going since October 1980.
We incorporated in July 1981.
And I wanted you to know that we've always been true to our promise to pay a living wage.
Everyone has one minute, but thank you so much for your comments.
Thanks.
Next speaker, please.
Hello, Council.
My name is Bryce Nesbitt.
I've been here before, but not for a while.
I actually drive more on Telegraph these days because of how my work ends up.
But every time I do, just like you, I feel like I'm in a different place.

Segment 3

Shoshana O'Keefe said that it's not the right place to be.
You love the car, really.
But I do have a challenge for you as council, and it'll be hard for you.
You'll be thinking of this as a bike or pedestrian or kind of greenie activity, but there's a lot of businesses along that corridor, and I challenge you to think of this as a business first move.
Because that corridor only makes sense in the context of those businesses being vibrant, being able to get their deliveries, being able to operate their business.
And I think that'll be hard for you as a council.
Other things in the city have not been particularly friendly to local businesses, including the corridors plan, but let's be super Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Thank you.
Next speaker, please.
Go ahead.
Hi, my name is Sonia Carabao.
I'm with Unite Here Local 2.
We represent hotel and restaurant workers around the Bay Area, including at the Doubletree, Berkeley, the Residence Inn, and formerly at His Lordships.
And we sent some concerns about the option agreement with TSA Holdings that's here in front of you tonight, relating to worker retention and to labor peace.
But we have discussed with the city manager, and as he said, we are comfortable moving forward with this tonight.
And we really appreciate both Vice Mayor Luna Parra's office and the city manager for working with us on this.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Next comment, please.
Good evening, council.
My name is Leila Hamidi.
I'm a UC Berkeley student, a member of Telegraph for People, and a former volunteer for the Measure FF campaign.
And I'd like to thank Vice Mayor Luna Parra and her staff for introducing item 22 to the agenda and urge the council to pass it on consent.
As we all know, pedestrianizing Telegraph north of Dwight is a long overdue intervention that will improve safety, livability, and environmental conditions for everyone who lives, works, and visits in the Southside.
District 7 was where I was lucky enough to experience life in a dense, urban, walkable environment for the first time, and I'm so proud to know that I was part of a movement to give other future UC Berkeley students the opportunity to experience the full potential of Telegraph as we know it.
So I'm very grateful to everyone in this council who supports this measure in allocating this money, especially in the tight budget year, and I hope that this momentum will be carried towards researching and investing in safe, green corridors across Berkeley.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Next commenter.
Go ahead.
Good evening, Council.
My name is Jacob Dadman, and I'm here representing the Sierra Club, Northern Alameda County Group, and we are here to speak in support of the car-free Telegraph option.
By limiting or removing cars on Telegraph, the City of Berkeley can create new public green space in the Southside, reduce car dependency, and improve the lives of the tens of thousands of people who use Telegraph every day.
By installing mature trees, water permeable surfaces, and amenities like benches and tables, Telegraph can become a welcoming, vibrant plaza that increases climate resilience and bring significant economic benefits to nearby businesses.
This vision aligns with the Sierra Club's goals to reduce car dependency and increase green space in urban areas.
Pedestrianizing Telegraph is a decades-old dream that increases safety, sustainability, and joy in the heart of the Southside.
With the right leadership and a thoughtful planning process, we can make that dream a reality.
We thank you for making Berkeley a more resilient and sustainable city for generations to come.
Thank you so much, right on time.
Next commenter.
Go ahead.
Hello, my name is Shane, and I'm the president of Telegraph for People, and I've lived in Southside for two years.
Every day I push through crowded Telegraph sidewalks, pause as I cross intersections larger than my entire apartment to wonder what else the space could be used for.
I've also noticed little joys on these sidewalks.
Chess games, live music, conversations with friends, inspiring murals.
I've also felt my skin jump as I try to dodge cars on my bike, wondering if one will honor my crosswalk, shouting over the traffic nestled between trash cans in one lane of walking room.
In the last few months, it's also been increasingly obvious that the dangers we've long brought attention to are not just theoretical.
Incidents of traffic violence have happened on our neighbor's streets, a block from where I live.
These are real people, our community members, not just theoretical or statistics.
I hold these very heavy in my heart.
A car-free Telegraph is a key to vibrancy and safety in our community.
This has been a generational project and I'm excited to see it move to the next phase for a hopeful future where the street serves us rather than cars.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Next commenter please.
Go ahead.
Hi, my name is Audrey Kramer and I am here on behalf of Cal Berkeley Democrats to voice our support for the car-free Telegraph item.
I'm a resident of District 6 but I'm here to say that the Telegraph being accessible would be good for all of us.
I am on Telegraph almost every single day even though I live all the way over there.
Telegraph is currently not bike-friendly.
I use my bicycle every day and I try to bike on Telegraph all the time and it is never successful for me so I'm very excited to see car-free Telegraph flourish in any capacity.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Next commenter.
I'm here to voice my support for Council item 17.
I think that maintaining a balanced budget is especially important for cities.
I think it'd be prudent to raise the tax by more than 0.5 percent but obviously you need voter approval so I understand why tax increases might be limited.
I'd also like to voice my support for item 22.
I think that it's great that, what's it called, it remains very budget conscious and I think that yeah collecting information about like how we can manage the economic structure in the city is obviously a good thing for the future.
I think it's a great investment and yeah that's about all.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Next commenter please.
Go ahead.
What up Council, Rebecca Mirvish speaking on behalf of Walk, Bike, Berkeley.
Thank you for moving the car-free Telegraph item to consent.
It really speaks to the popularity and common sense associated with this project.
As Council Member Humbert mentioned, people have been advocating for a car-free Telegraph for decades so it's about time we move forward with funding for it.
Even more pressing given the recent bicyclist fatality that would not have happened if cars were allowed on Telegraph.
And then I also just want to speak in a personal capacity that this is the project that I am most excited about.
This is the first thing that got me involved in Berkeley politics.
Probably the first Council meeting I went to was about Telegraph and so a special extra shout out to Vice Mayor Lunapara who served my partner in crime in getting started Telegraph for People at UC Berkeley.
And shout out to our other teammates who got it started and to Council Member Roger Robinson who also helped with this.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Go ahead.
Hello Council, my name is Spencer and I'm a UC Berkeley student and one officer as a Telegraph for People and I want to second the support of my that my fellow speakers mentioned for Telegraph, the continuation of support and monies for the vision of Telegraph and the continuation of the generation on process of hopefully pedestrianized and bike-only streets and I don't know if any of you went to the holiday market on Telegraph last month but it was truly amazing to simply walk across the street freely and safely and visit shops without worrying about cars.
So thank you for moving.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Go ahead.
Good evening City Council and Mayor.
My name is Rusco Kayangyang.
I'm speaking as an individual.
I'm a proud former Berkeley City Council staffer who worked with Lori to our now City Manager Paul Budahagen who went on to the California State Senate to work in the state capitol and I've seen Councilmember Trigub there many times in Sacramento.
I'm here to support speak in support of the emergency item and I recommend the council add some language.
I support abolishing ICE and when you abolish ICE which is the highest funded law enforcement aid federal agency we should emphasize the importance of reallocating the funding into investing in our seniors, in our youth, people with disabilities, people receiving SNAP food stamps at Medi-Cal and Medicaid.
Investing in our social services creates a healthy community and also I just want to thank the council for having this item.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
Okay great.
Two minutes.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
So I appreciate the sentiment of the urgency item.
I really do but I also come from a tradition that says words without actions turn to lies and that if you really are worried about the depths of depravity which we did see which we are witnessing in this very moment then we need to see the actions.
A lot of words are spoken but we need to see the actions.
How will this council protect us? ICE they're talking about infiltrating our signal chats.
And you council are poised as is your chief of police to continue to gather data on your people.
Data that you cannot protect.
The chief lies to you constantly.
Oh we won't give it to them.
You can't protect it.
It gets infiltrated all the time.
Yeah sure Berkeley won't say here's here's the data but hey you don't have control of it.
So we say if you can't protect it do not collect it.
Flock is dangerous to us and we need your acknowledgement of that and I gotta say when you guys are poised to impose you want tear gas against us now.
The chief said yes that'll be for crowd control.
She passes by it quickly but at least she was honest about that.
So I don't understand where you guys are at.
Will you work with us in this very dangerous time? How will you what will you do? Not what will you say but where will you meet us to protect us? It is very scary.
We're looking around with the Super Bowl is coming.
ICE is coming.
I don't need you to protest brother council member.
I need you to resist.
I need you to lead that.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Sometimes it's tough to be last because that was a hard act to follow.
All right and Cecilia you're doing just such a fabulous job.
Okay I want to thank you for honoring Barbara with MECA and I want to acknowledge Mary Lou here.
That's one of the items number 11.
I really support them because they are the hippie paradigm from waste for waste not want not.
There's treasures to be taken care of and shared.
I want to have an extra minute.
I keep forgetting to tell you it's that gentleman in the back.
So kudos to Urban Lore.
Please support them and thank them for this really hard work at creating a community hub for sharing resources and for taking care of the employees also.
All right so number seven I can vouch for the necessity and the capacity to have equitable community engagement.
I worked for over a year with the Ecology Center and the grant connected with the city of Berkeley and it was awesome.
So please let's support the Ecology Center and that number seven.
Number 13 I need to breathe and I really support whatever we can do to help ventilation because I'm forever running around opening up windows doors and getting into nothing but good trouble.
Number 15 more parking management and less traffic congestion please.
Number 17 no more sales tax.
There is more than enough money to be saved if we wouldn't waste it and other people that have more money to share it.
And number 22 I'm concerned about unintended consequences.
I'm into safety but we also need to have passageway for emergency vehicles.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Let's move to public comments online.
Okay we currently have seven hands raised.
We'll start with the first speaker Whitney Sparks.
Hello can you hear me? Happy New Year.
Thank you Ms.
Pritchett.
I am right here behind you to say if you're gonna have an ICE item and talk about abolishing ICE cancel the flock contract.
I have been away from meetings because they're extremely triggering with the institutionalized misogynoir that happens in the silencing and erasure of black women's voices but you've got to protect our community and our neighbors.
Cancel the flock contract if you want to abolish ICE.
You cannot collect data on us and not know where it goes and have it in the hands of law enforcements who kill and beat and abuse people citizens like me when nobody cared about black neurodivergent people mothers when we were getting killed that's when I was being silenced at City Council meetings just like this I haven't forgotten.
You can't collect data on us and then say you want to abolish ICE.
They're doing the exact same thing it's exact same pattern law enforcement ICE police they're all the same they're IOF.
If you don't want to have genocidal tactics happen to our community here I'm in District 7 I'm in Vice Mayor Lunapar's district.
Okay next is Cheryl Devlin a former council member.
I agree with the last two speakers you can't have abolish ICE without canceling flock flock is data is not owned by the City of Berkeley they will not I listen to your rules and they will do whatever they want to do give the information to whomever so you need to cancel your contract with flock the IOF the IGF it's not real aka Israel's offensive forces it's not real genocidal forces it's not real terrorist forces they train ICE we do not need ICE flock any of that shit because we're a sanctuary city and you know they're gonna come for us so you're not prepared even though you said you were earlier how are you preparing I don't see anybody out on the street talking your time is up thank you next is Alex Knox good evening Alex Knox a telegraph business improvement district on item 15 I just I want to say I respect the efforts by staff to address the critical financial issues and it's unfortunate that the debt service on Center Street is just driving rate increases citywide ever you know I understand that you know it's it's a big issue for us this the telegraph Shannon garage in the south side that bears what appears to be the brunt of the rate increases and I just ask that you know there be careful scrutiny and transparency on the expenses side as well as of course reviewing of the revenue side because you know services are not equitable and fair with the shameful conditions for long-term neglect at the telegraph Channing garage I also want to say that I appreciate the enthusiasm around item 22 and for improving the telegraph I strongly encourage that enthusiasm to translate to you know recognition of the challenges and complexity of implementing these changes but regardless of how this work ultimately moves forward we look forward to Thank You Alex okay next is Jennifer corn good evening my name is Jen corner I'm vice president of the Berkeley school board I'm grateful for tonight's urgency resolution denouncing ices lawlessness and violence and calling on our representatives in Washington to take decisive action to protect not only the people of Minnesota but all of us and all of our neighbors I intend to bring a similar resolution to our school board in response to the devastating impacts we're seeing on children families and schools including 600 children who've been detained by ice violent ice actions on school campuses in the Twin Cities and as a result huge numbers of families that are keeping their children at home because they feel unsafe sending them to school thank you to count to all of you for your partnership in this work thank you for your comment okay next is John Lindsay Poland good evening I wanted to let you know that a few minutes ago the Alameda County Board of Supervisors followed in your footsteps and passed unanimously a resolution for keeping ice out of county-owned facilities but you know that in response to what others have said that resolution there's actually two resolutions at the county level and the other one includes a lot of different measures to protect people within the county and so in terms of concrete action there does have dozens of points in that resolution I urge you to study it and and do what needs to be done in Berkeley what the city what corresponds to the city to actually protect people against ice operations on many different levels including getting rid of the flood contract because there's many different things that the city can do besides urge federal representatives to vote to against the ice funding that's coming before the Senate this Friday which is super important but there are many things that are practical and local thanks thank you for your comment next is Kelly hammerin thank you I appreciate the resolution but it's just words Tom Holman the one who's going to be in charge now is the one who planned the family separations so this doesn't mean that they're actually going to get any relief my family's in Minnesota we're texting it makes me cry every time I read it um I number 15 to go Berkeley how much more does it cost us to increase the rates I you know I just don't have confidence in this plan I feel like we're chasing the cost of operating the plan and I feel like there needs to be more analysis to follow up on 22 I think it's a great idea to make telegraph for people but what makes telegraph makes the people want to be there are are all the businesses and so I would like you to thank you thank you last hand raises Lana our back hello again I just want to encourage you that this emergency item be the very beginning the baby step yes it needs to be done and now we need tangible actions how are we organizing how do we know what are the police going to be doing how are people being trained are there know your rights what are the networks all of this stuff yes there is a lot going on in Berkeley that I imagine some of you know about and probably some of you don't have most of a clue of what's happening on the ground we need to coordinate we need to be ready you are our elected leaders words are empty without actions a first action you can do is item 21 and and you know adopt lack of ease a supplemental and stop flock so start taking actions that actually protect us show us that you are leading from a place that you want to abolish ice and not just words thank you thank you for your comment okay that's the last public commenter okay great thank you so much unless there are more comments from council members I'll entertain a motion so moved and one quick comment just wanted I would be remiss in not thanking Mary Lou and Dan of urban or as well as all the workers of urban or for their leadership and partnership and very excited that this is on the consent calendar second okay should we call the roll yes to adopt the consent calendar including the urgency item that was added to the agenda councilmember kisser wanting yes Kaplan yes Bartlett yes Trega I yes lack of e yes vice mayor Luna para yes customer Humber yes Mary she yes okay consent calendars adopted thank you so much thank you everyone for coming out moving on to the action calendar I think we should do item 18 and 19 and then do a quick break before we do item 21 so I'd like to open the public hearing for item 18 is there a staff presentation there's no staff presentation but we're happy staff is here if there are questions okay great thank you does council have any questions for staff okay is there any public comment on item 18 implement residential preferential parking RPP program on the 1700 block of Cedar Street seeing none in person are there any online no commenters on online okay is there a motion to close the public hearing second okay great and seconded close the public hearing councilmember kisser wanting yes Kaplan yes Bartlett yes Trega I O'Keefe yes lack of e yes vice mayor Luna para yes customer Humber yes and Mary she yes okay public hearings closed thank you council do you have any comments councilmember O'Keefe well this is in district 5 so my comment is I received exactly one email about this and it was in support so it's good and I'll move to approve it great Thank You councilmember customer Humber yeah I want to thank Public Works staff for their efforts on this it may seem like a small thing but being responsive on quality of life issues like this can go a long way toward positive public perceptions of city government it appears that the neighbors have followed the proper procedure to obtain residential permit parking in this area and so I'll vote yes thanks there's a motion do we have a second I'll second it okay can we call the roll okay to approve the RPP program for the 1700 block of Cedar Street councilmember kisser wanting yes Kaplan yes Bartlett yes Trega I O'Keefe yes lack of e yes vice mayor Luna para yes customer Humber yes and Mary she yes okay item is approved great thank you so much now I'll open the public hearing for item 19 selected marina fee increases is there a staff presentation for this item again there isn't but staff are available for questions thank you so much colleagues are there any questions on this item Oh customer Trega okay okay seeing no questions is there any public comment on item 19 selected marina fee increases you're good it's okay you don't have to run I see you go ahead you guys are just so nutritious I guess I had an extra burst of energy I'm not familiar enough but again raising fees on such a popular place for people to congregate it's like please let's not keep hitting on the little people I don't want to hit on anyone by the way but we need I mean we lost people's park we're not we need spaces to oppose our soul and I would prefer that we don't raise fees to just enjoy the quality of life unless of course I don't understand but that's my public comment thank you thank you Maria are there any other comments in person any online no hands raised online okay thank you is there a motion to close the public hearing so there a second I'll second okay can we take the roll okay close the public hearing councilmember Kester wine yes Kaplan yes Bartlett yes yes yes vice mayor Lupara yes councilmember Humbert yes Mary she yes okay public hearings closed thank you are there any comments from councilmembers on this item okay seeing none is there a motion move to approve second about customer Bartlett can you take the room okay to approve the selected mean of Marina fee increases councilmember Kester wanting yes Kaplan yes Bartlett yes try to I O'Keefe yes black to be yes vice mayor Luna para yes councilmember Humbert yes Mary she yes okay the item is approved great okay thank you let's take a 10-minute break and come back at 740 okay thank you recording stopped.

Segment 4

Board of Trustees Meeting, Council of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting, Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees Meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting Board of Trustees meeting If you want to see that language, let me pull it up.
Sorry for the fast scroll.
Here it is.
Okay.
That's the clause.
Okay.
So that would that would would be this proposal to be to strike that language.
Thank you.
And I just took a picture of it so I can review it a little closely more closely and no worries.
That's fine.
And.
I also have some questions about how this would look in practice for the 30 days.
Because I think my primary concern is that what happens sometimes when we send things to have is that.
I'm not sure if we have.
30 days should be enough for them to review it, but they may not get it or have a meeting.
At the beginning of that 30 day window and so I'm a little concerned about just.
That the timing, so I don't know if someone's there can speak to that.
I'm not sure if we have a representative on the line.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Would you like to comment on this? Oh, yeah, he's hand raised there.
Oh, and then, Josh, I think.
Okay.
Chair is the phone number ending in 4, 5, 3.
Can we promote them to panelists? Okay.
Okay.
Great.
First of all, thank you.
For your supplemental proposal.
In terms of the 30 day period.
I appreciate Mary.
She's comments.
I think she is spot on.
We have had issues with.
Some of the 30 day process.
I think one of the issues is that.
The 30 day window.
Right now.
As it is currently implemented.
The 30 day window.
Starts when.
The proposal was emailed to us.
And the expectation right now.
Is that the council will then hear it.
At a public meeting.
On the merits 30 days later.
So if the 30 day window was such that.
30 Days after the PV were to review it.
Then the department submitted it to the rules of agenda committee.
And then the council.
The council hears it 30 days.
After we first see it.
It has to be submitted after we have 30 days.
The full 30 days to review it.
And so if that is made clear.
I believe that 30 days is sufficient.
And I think that that proposal should be implemented across both of the FTO ordinance.
And the BMC 2.100 ordinance.
But if that's not the expectation.
Then I believe that 30 days is sufficient.
And I think that that proposal should be implemented across both of the FTO ordinance.
Thank you.
Thank you chair.
Is that are those all your questions.
Yeah, those are my questions for now.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Are there any other questions.
My I had a similar question to Mary she, I'm just wondering.
Are there any plans for violations of this ordinance.
If you have any, any thoughts on that and how it has affected the current iteration of the.
Of the ordinance.
Are you speaking specifically of the private right of action? Correct.
I believe it is, is it in the current version of the ordinance? Look, I know this was a request.
Let me go look.
Is it in the current.
Sorry.
Yeah, it's in there.
Similar languages.
Okay.
Thank you.
Okay.
Those are my questions.
Oh, Yeah.

Segment 5

Thank you.
I wanted to go back to the 30 days and just try to understand, is there a standard definition of when it says 30 or 60 or 90 days, for that matter, effective from when? So what is the trigger right now? It would be delivery of the materials to both the chair of the board and the director of peace accountability.
So as defined right now, and this might be a question for either council member Blackabee or staff, is the expectation if we go with 30, would it be within 30 days, the PAP needs, the PAP would have to make a recommendation and bring it to the council? I think that's, I mean, that's the question I think we should talk through.
I think the suggestion with the PAP is it should not be, you know, it should not be agendized, their suggestion is it should not be agendized to come to us before the 30, before they've had the 30 day window.
So 30 days, and then it could be taken to the agenda, go to the agenda process, I believe is their intent.
In terms of how it works now, kind of defer to the chief, but that's, that's the ask.
So not put it on a parallel path so that it's submitted to PAP and then within 30 days of the submittal, it comes.
I think they want the full 30 days before it goes through the agenda process.
So the PAP would have an opportunity within 30 days of receipt to review, and that would be the clock.
So like, let's say PAP looks at it on day 30, the clock would stop at that point, but as long as they looked at it and made a recommendation on day 30, it could come to council and be added to the agenda process.
Yeah, I think it's, and I don't believe, again, defer, it's not that the clock ever stops.
I think it's just a question of once the 30 days start, at what point should BPD bring it to us and advance it to us? And should it be with the goal that it hits a council agenda 30 days later, in which case they would submit it after however many days, at 10 or 15, to then start the agenda process? Or should they wait the full 30 days before it gets submitted to the agenda process? I think that's the, that's a question that I think we can talk through.
Yeah, okay.
I'll save the last four comments.
Thank you so much.
If there are no more questions from the council, let's go to public comment.
Can I ask how many people would like to speak on this item? How many Zoom comments are there? Hand raise? It's currently four hands raised on, but five.
Okay, let's do one minute public comment each.
And people can yield time up to, you know, as well, so.
Yes, if you would like to give public comment on this item, please line up now.
Go ahead.
Hi.
Well, I was shocked when I saw this on the agenda.
Resend and replace the police equipment and community safety ordinance consideration of less lethal deployment policies, use of controlled equipment.
But it turns out it's just about reporting, huh? Well, be generous.
Give them 60 days.
Your police accountability board, they are volunteers, are they not? Why not give them 60 days? And if you think it has to align with the surveillance tech ordinance, then revise that ordinance to 60 days as well.
And thank you, Council Member Blackaby, for the supplemental.
I like that better than the original.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next speaker, please.
Yeah, I just wanted to point out that having reporting requirements and having those reporting requirements actually work and be fulfilled are two different things.
And as the last BAB report illustrated, I don't have any confidence that they will be followed.
Thank you for your comment.
Yeah, I guess I just I just cannot imagine 30 days.
Nothing happens in 30 days.
This town doesn't look like that.
It just doesn't.
By the time there's delays in information gathering and delays in reports and delays and delays and stonewall and foot traffic.
30 days, really? You know, it just doesn't feel sincere.
You know, give the people what they need.
They they need some support from you guys.
So please, you know, give them the time they need to do the job.
And let's encourage the chief to provide the information that they need to do the job.
Thank you.
Are there any other public commenters? Oh, sorry.
I didn't see you, Maria.
Go ahead.
No, I'm just so tight.
Is it just on this one item or is it the action? It's just on this item, which includes both council members versions of the recession and replacement.
Yeah, but I'm wondering, is it item 20 and 21 or just 21? It is just item 21.
We finished item 20 already before the break.
Oh, OK.
So I'm just.
All right.
So I'm concerned because it's so easy to start a fight, start a war.
It's a lot harder to stop it.
And I'm a tool girl.
I got it.
I got tools for the tools and I'm tempted to use them when I've got them.
And I was out in Contra Costa County with races.
And they started this urban shield program just so eager to get more and bigger and better toys.
And I almost killed.
So I'm just concerned.
It's not that we don't want to protect because we do, but we also want to serve.
So, again, I'm an old hippie.
I really want peace and harmony.
So I'm concerned.
I don't know what the logistics are, but I caution us because once you've got them, it's hard to get rid of them.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
Come on up.
Go ahead.
I had to say something.
I've been a part of Berkley Copodge for 20 years now, and I've seen the police do.
I do not trust them at all through the years.
It doesn't make sense to let them slide on anything.
This shirt represents Rodney King and the police at the time commented on their reports after they beat him.
They said nothing unusual happened during the arrest.
Nothing unusual happened.
I was told of my first arrest in 1974 in Berkley by the cop.
I was down on the ground.
I had my adrenaline going.
He said, relax, relax, sir.
We're not going to hurt you.
I relaxed.
They slammed my head into the ground.
I don't trust the police at all.
I think everything, everything that they said right in the report means you're not on the street messing with people.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Can we go to online comments? Yes, we currently have seven hands raised.
We have John Lindsay Poland.
Good evening, and I may ask for another minute if it's possible.
I am with the American Friends Service Committee, and we review AB 481, the state law implementation of military equipment ordinances across the state.
You know, the annual reports that are under AB 481 that would also be required under this revision include requests for new equipment.
And under the state law requests for new equipment, the clock starts when the proposed policy for that equipment is published on the agency's website.
And that clock then requires the council to review the item at least 30 days later.
So, if you're going to have the PAB review this, and that PAB review results in any adjustments to the proposed use policy for new types of equipment, then you're going to need at least 30 days from when the PAB reviews it.
So, giving the PAB 30 days to review is really important because these are very complex policies and documents to review.
I know that the BPD wants to start a new drone program, but new equipment applies to any new model of anything.
So, you could have a projectile launcher or a new type of assault rifle that comes under the item that comes under the military equipment policy.
If there's a new model, then that has to have a review by the council again, at least 30 days after it is published by the agency.
And so, if PABs review is going to have any meaning, then there needs to be a possibility that PABs review will result in some changes to the proposed policy for that type of new item.
So, I urge you to expand this to 60 days for the PAB review to allow that margin for your review of the item.
Thanks so much.
Thank you for your comment.
Sorry, I realized, is Maria still here? Okay, we did public comment on item 20 during the consent calendar comments.
I misspoke and said that we did it before this item.
Please continue.
Thank you.
Okay, next speaker is Kelly Hammergren.
I also support a longer review period for the PAB since I go through the agendas every time they're published and attend the agenda committee meetings and see how long the delay is often when something comes from one of our committees, one of our commissions, that it can be a very long time from when it leaves the commission to get posted.
And my concern is that even if the PAB has a time to review it, will it actually reach the agenda committee and get published with the agenda before you consider it? And so the longer period of time, the 60 days, I believe is what is needed.
And there also should be something that the PAB's response is.
Thank you.
That's your time.
Thank you.
Next is virtual meetings.
Hi, my name is Wendy Alston with the Berkeley Friends meeting, and we too would support the 60 day timeframe from the point.
And if you phrase it as 30 days, that the 30 days is for the PAB review prior to it being agendized for council.
This particular ordinance today is a good example.
The PAB met last week on Wednesday.
It was agendized before they could meet and for you to consider it required a lot of last minute shuffling and supplementals that didn't make the regular agenda packet.
And by having a period of time that's required for the PAB before it's put on the agenda would allow for the.
Thank you.
Orderly progression usually.
Thank you.
Next is Barb Atwell.
Yeah, hi, my name's Barbara.
Well, thanks for taking my call.
I'm a resident of Berkeley and a member of the Berkeley Friends meeting.
I just wanted to reiterate what Wendy was just saying, and the fact that we do support the 60 day review timeframe, and we've written a letter to the council.
To make sure that we, you know, that we oppose the, the whole council agenda.
Item number 21 is drafted, but support the adoption of the recommendations of the PAB on military equipment, use oversight, transparency and accountability.
And we support the council adoption of the revised police equipment and community safety policy.
Thanks for your time and for your efforts.
Thank you.
Next is a phone number, ending in 453.
Hi everyone, Josh Gaetano, chair of the Berkeley Police Accountability Board.
You know, we need transparency and oversight of the acquisition, use and deployment of military equipment on Berkeley streets now more than more than ever.
The PAB supports council member Blackabay's supplemental proposal, including most of the proposed edits, which would make the city's processes more efficient without losing the MC 2.100 critical oversight and transparency.
Thanks to council members for working with us.
In terms of the 30 day review period, I would just note that, you know, 30 day is the minimum amount that is needed for us to review.
You know, the department does not have to submit it after 30 days.
They could continue to collaborate with us if we had questions for them.
And, you know, that is what we ask of the department, not to just like stick so strongly or like so close to that 30 day period that we can't collaborate with them, that we can't make informed recommendations to council.
So I do think for purposes of the ordinance, 30 days is sufficient.
But if you want collaboration between us and the department to provide informed recommendations, then you would need 60 days or 30 days if it's okay with us.
And, you know, that additional time to talk with the department.
Thank you.
Next is Nathan Mizell.
This is Nathan Mizell.
As you all know, I was on the PAB for several years.
A long time ago, I was the chair for the subcommittee that considered the original proposal for the acquisition of controlled equipment.
You know, I'll just say briefly, I'm in support of the supplemental from customer Blackaby.
I've been critical at times of this council on its actions and rewriting a lot of the work that's been done over the last several years on police accountability and police oversight.
But I want to really appreciate supplemental bringing many important points that the PAB has pointed out.
And ultimately, if this council wants the PAB to have time to actually give input and meaningful changes and do the job the community voted to do, then it needs to give it more time and to at least honor the proposal brought by the council member and actually allow it to have meaningful work in this process.
If the council doesn't want meaningful work, it should just say so.
Nathan, thank you so much.
Next is Ilana.
Hi there.
So I want to just echo what everyone's saying.
This is an opportunity for you to take action and not only have words like your emergency item at the beginning of the meeting, take action and show that you support the police accountability board.
You want oversight of our BPD because we all do.
We all do.
We certainly do.
So please give them the time.
Push it back to 60 days.
Let them collaborate.
This is an opportunity for you to take action to show that you are with the community and you are with police oversight and you are with the police accountability board.
So please do so.
Please vote for the supplemental and make it 60 days.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Last speaker is Cheryl Davila, former council member.
Yeah, I have to echo what everyone said about the 60 days.
You know, Berkeley doesn't do anything in 30 days and you need to set them up for success.
The police accountability board and the only way you can do that is to extend the time.
You've already made all these changes to all these different things to hinder them and we need to make sure that they're successful and that things are transparent and really, they don't need any more tools and they need to report them.
So, I'm actually think that they should report it in March and in June, because I think we need to hear more about what they're doing and have an opportunity to ask questions 2 times and not just once a year.
Okay, that's it for online public comments.
Thank you.
I want to hand it off to the city clerk who has some minor technical issues with the items proposed that he would like to raise.
Yes, thank you.
Vice mayor.
There's just a few quick things that would be good to include in the motion.
The first one is that in section 080, it has paragraphs 1 and 2.
Those should be paragraphs A and B for consistent codification format.
And then the severability section is numbered 010.
I think that's supposed to be 100, 2.100.100.
And then lastly, it's the effective date.
You know, per the charter and ordinance is effective 30 days after final adoption.
So, the ordinance would be effective 30 days after the second reading per the charter and the elections code.
So, just those three quick minor technical edits.
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr.
Clerk.
Council members, do you have any comments? I turned the parliamentarian back on to see if it will behave.
Council member Blackaby.
Just to dig into this, the timing point really quickly, and I want to reread and see if this gets us any closer.
I want to reread the proposed language here, these edits.
Both 5 and 6.
Failure by the PAB to make its recommendation on their proposal within 30 days of submission shall then, basically, enable city staff to proceed to the city council for approval.
And similarly on number 6.
After review by the PAB or 30 days, whichever comes first, then the police department shall submit the end of the report to city council.
So, my reading of this language, and curious, again, feedback of staff, is that this then says nothing comes to us or to our agenda process until that 30 days runs out, at which point then it would be submitted.
Is that a fair read? Is that how you read it? Is that how you would interpret it, or how would you interpret that? No, I would interpret that to say that it would not come before council to make a finding on or to approve or accept the either purchase of new equipment or the acceptance of the annual report unless 30 days had passed for the PAB to have review of that item.
I'm happy to make some comments on why and how that aligns, if it pleases council.
And so, I think about all the things and all the places that we have PAB review, the valuable PAB review on the process that we have.
For example, the charter allows them, within 30 days of us implementing a policy, any policy or operational plan, to make review of that.
Surveillance technology ordinance also envisions and expects us to give 30 days of review time to the PAB to go through that process.
Our reporting processes through the city process, which is city attorney review, review through the budget processes and city manager's review processes are also set on a 30 day cycle.
The specifics of what they're reviewing as part of this military equipment ordinance is primarily the reporting of an annual report.
Much of the data that is reported in an annual report is available in near real time on our transparency hub.
The equipment is clearly identified.
We have already gone through an approval process, so the PAB knows exactly what equipment that we have in use in our department.
So if there was a specific tool they were interested in digging into, if there was a policy around one of those pieces of equipment, nothing precludes them at any point in time during the year initiating a process in that or preparing for that in advance of receiving the annual report from us.
Further, what I had heard the chair of the PAB share at least two times tonight was that there are many times when they can achieve a 30 day review process, but there are times when he would like to step into a collaboration process around that.
All we're asking for is a timeline that matches what many of our other timelines are for review with them.
Council also has the ability to hear from the PAB with a communication saying, can you push it to a later meeting? We have the ability to pull back an item and not bring it if there's collaboration or effort happening around that.
I will also just kind of reiterate, this is a annual report about uses that happened a year prior.
And so nothing would preclude us from council from receiving the annual report as required by state law, but then directing us to move into a collaborative process with the PAB to explore alternatives to equipment or changing the use policy around equipment or doing any other work which would affect our actual current use.
We're talking about accepting a report that already occurred.
Thank you.
Council Member Blackaby.
Okay, thanks.
Council Member Bartlett and then Trayton.
Thank you.
So it looks back, you're saying, right? Okay, I guess I'm curious.
I served on this commission a long time ago.
It was a different form.
So this body, of course, has been somewhat disappointed with the PAB this last year, if we can be honest here, with their work output.
So I'm wondering, is this amount of work feasible for this commission? This is a real question here.
Or is the staff doing much of the work and then the appointed members are sort of approving and commenting the way we do? Is this a question for the chair? Anyone from the commission here? Yeah, the chair of the commission is online.
If we can..
He should be able to unmute.
Okay.
That goes to the question I'm asking here.
Chair Cayetano, do you have an answer to Council Member Bartlett's question? If the commission is able to..
Yes, Council Member.
Yes, we have the ability to review it.
We have been understaffed severely, and we would appreciate more nominations.
But we asked to review it last year, and we're asking to continue that review.
And as the chief pointed out, it's based on a report.
The report doesn't require more than reviewing that report.
So we would have the ability to do that and provide you with an informed recommendation.
Okay, so all right.
So you feel that the appointed members can actually do the work, as opposed to the city staff who are appointed to the commission that we usually have, right? To do the brunt of the work.
You can do this, you say, if you're fully appointed.
Is this what I just heard? Being fully appointed would definitely help.
But yes.
Okay.
I'm just asking because I just want to make sure that we do have the alignment of timelines and the predictability and ease.
But I also don't want to set you up to fail and have you unable to fulfill your voter-mandated duties.
And it's been tough.
It's been tough.
Okay, thank you.
Yeah, I appreciate that.
Sorry, I don't think that was on the question, but I'm happy to say something else if the council pleases.
Thank you so much, Chair.
We're going to go to Council Member Trager, then Mayor Ishii, and then Council Member O'Keefe.
Thank you so much.
For at the outset, I just wanted to thank Council Member Blackaby for the supplemental.
I definitely support the main thread on it, and I just needed more time to review it.
It had to get into the supplemental two packets, so that's I think the primary reason.
It doesn't include my name as a co-sponsor, but I really support the effort to get to a win-win here.
And that is what a negotiation looks like.
So my remaining question is really on the 30 days.
And Council Member Blackaby, would it be possible for you to pull up the number six and seven right now? The edits, right? Okay.
Yeah, the edits.
Oh, sorry.
And then actually it's five and six.
Five and six.
So I first wanted to just understand, because I think six says whichever comes first, and five says within 30 days.
And I was curious if the intent is for there to be consistency.
But let me ask the question that, well, this is the edge case that I've been thinking about, and I wanted to see how this would work operationally.
And I appreciate the Chief's comments that has partially answered my question.
But let's say the Commission gets a report the same day or maybe the day after they have a regularly scheduled meeting.
And so I believe they meet monthly.
Is that correct? Oh, is it twice? Okay, it's twice a month.
So maybe that actually gives me more warm fuzzies that 30 days may be appropriate, as long as we are very clear in the language that it's not 30 days for the entire series of actions up to getting to the Council.
This is just the 30 days for the Commission.

Segment 6

Yeah, I just wanted to make sure that the language in five and six are consistent with each other, and that everyone understands what this means in practice.
Thank you.
Are those your comments for now? Yeah, maybe this is a question for, um, could be, um, reviewed by the police accountability board or 30 days, whichever comes first, um, how are you envisioning this play out? Uh, it's similar to the previous, so just to be clear, so oh, 50 D three is about the Pabst review of any acquisition and use of police equipment.
Oh, 60 before is review of the annual report.
Um, so they're both on a 30 day timeline, and they both say that there's a 30 day window to do the review after which point, whether staff has heard feedback from Pabst or not, they can then proceed.
But my read of the item is one of them has to do with the report, the sorry, the, um, use, um, reports on the, so the report, oh, 60 is about the report, the annual report, and oh, 50 is about the acquisition and use of police equipment and potential new acquisition of different kinds of police equipment.
So this says, um, uh, six says, uh, it like, let's say the Pabst provides its feedback within 15 days at that point, and they make it clear there will not be more feedback forthcoming within that 30 day window.
The item can be sent to council.
Okay.
Okay, I am, um, I am clear.
I did, um, admittedly have misgivings about reducing, uh, 60 days to, um, 30, but I also understand the point, uh, to be consistent with other 30 days, uh, parameters.
The fact that this is a look back, it's not, um, this is a report on what happened in the preceding year.
And in particular that, um, I, I, um, yes, this is new information for me.
I was not aware that the Pabst meets on a twice a month cadence, and that definitely feels like, um, I can live with 40 days.
And, um, if, if that, if, if this language is what can get the entire council to get to a, yes, I certainly support that.
And again, appreciate council members block of these work.
Thank you.
Council member, um, mayor, and then council member, and then I have some comments as well.
Yes, I'm going to ask another question because I, I think it's just hard for me to read and listen and so I just want to make sure I'm understanding is this 30 days.
Before it's submitted to agenda and rules, or is it just 30 days like, uh, actually.
Yeah, it must be 30 days before general's.
Is that right? Is that a question for submitted.
For staff or for customer black be for staff.
So, it's so it would be submitted 30 days.
Before agenda and rules before it's submitted to agenda and rules to have.
No, typically the way our work processes work is that because of the length of time when we upload an item, and then it comes to agenda and rules, and then it finally makes it to council.
That's the time period with that, with which have could be doing its review processes and then weighing in to provide an item that's either included as a sub 2 or as in within the original item.
If they can finish their review, like that's that's the fact of us not having to wait for additional processes that then stretches out an approval process of a of an annual report upwards of 60 plus days because we're waiting to hear back of 30 days and then artificially having a review a review note or or a complete sign off from the path.
Then have to sit for another 30 days before it can get to council because of having to hold before we get into the cycle of reporting.
Thank you.
Okay, I, um, all right, I need to sorry.
I need to chew on that because I do just want to make some comments as well.
So I want to, I want to start by saying I agree with the intent of the proposal to consolidate reporting into 1 annual report and appreciate the importance of avoiding.
Added burden and redundancy and reporting.
I just want to remind folks, like, that's what this item was created for in the 1st place was because there are some things that are redundant and are reporting.
And so we're trying to streamline that.
So, I want to say, I absolutely agree with that.
I think that makes a lot of sense.
And I also think it's important that we retain the categories of equipment, which are not explicit or included in a B41 as well as retaining the requirements to include geographic location.
I know from having conversations with the chief that geographic locations are already part of the transparency hub.
However, I think it makes sense to be explicit in the Berkley municipal code, because it allows the city to analyze frequency, disproportionality and other interactions between BPD and the community.
I think it's just important to be explicit.
Um, so I'm going to chew on this 30 days piece from what I'm hearing from the chair.
It sounds like 30 days could be sufficient.
It's just.
I want to make sure I understand the timing and how it works.
So I'm going to let other council members comment.
Thank you.
Thank you mayor council member.
Okay.
Thank you.
I really want to highlight something that the chief said, and I think a number of other members here have said, but it's really important and I just don't want us to lose sight of it, which is this report is not only is looking backwards.
So there's not exactly new information contained in it, but it's looking backwards at information that has been put on the transparency hub in almost real time.
Not literally real time, but like a day.
Um, so this is not, we're talking about, and this seems to be, I think, the only issue that's really being debated right now is the amount of notice.
And it's just shouldn't be that big a task to review something that has, that is not containing any new information.
And I just, I really don't want us to lose sight of that because we're really getting into this, you know, these, these really detailed conversations about the timeline of what it looks like.
And that's fine.
And we should understand it.
And we should, however, people want to vote on that.
It's fine.
I'm open to whatever, but I just.
Let's just not forget that it's, there's no scenario where some big, huge revelation is going to be put forth.
That's going to take a lot of analysis.
It's information that is out there.
And I actually, while I'm saying this, I really want to make a plug for the transparency hub.
There's been, I'm in a lot of conversations about different things regarding police accountability.
And, you know, it's a very important thing, and we're doing an excellent job.
Arlo is doing an excellent job.
We have the police accountability, the guys right here, and it's, it's really, it's a wonderful tool.
It's very, very important to me that the police are held accountable and have to be incredibly transparent about their use of force.
That is, you know, I take that very seriously, but we have this amazing tool already, and let's just not lose sight of it.
And let's just remember that that's part of the universe that we're working in when we're debating how many days of notice we have to give the PAB.
Thank you, council member.
I have some comments and then I'll pass it over to council member Blackaby.
I want to talk about the 30 days, but there's 2 other pieces that I also want to mention.
I'm concerned about removing.
The pepper spray portion.
Of the item as our current resolution requires restricting reporting requirements, which is, which is, which is good, meaning we wouldn't need it, but there is an item going through the process right now to change that.
And so I just want to make sure that that that that is that the pepper spray is going to stay in the conversation with this item as we potentially change that resolution.
I also, I don't really understand the need to remove the private right of action piece if it is restricted as it is currently, and if it hasn't necessarily been used, so I would like to have a further conversation about that.
And then finally, about the 30 days, I have a couple of different comments to make 1st.
I think that when.
Although the uses of the equipment is automatically populated into the transparency hub, it's a pretty different.
When we're trying to analyze patterns, it is pretty different to see it all laid out.
And I think that also, given that the is a volunteer body and is understaffed.
That for them to individually be looking at each time that a that the equipment is used.
That is, is separate from approving the.
The report altogether also, when the report, from my understanding, and either the chair or stop can correct me if I'm wrong.
There is more information added into the.
Report than there is on the transparency hub.
There's the standard is.
That the use of the equipment is necessary because there's no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety and.
We need to be able to be able to rely on the narratives of the department, which is new information by the time that they get the report.
Um, so those are a couple of comments I wanted to make.
I wanted to thank council member.
Um, Humber and council member black could be for their items.
Um, I.
Support council member black changes with these.
Small comments, thank you.
Go ahead.
Council member black to me.
Thanks, this is maybe 1 more question for the clerk.
Just put the clerk on the spot.
Um, just again to think about the process for all of us on the 30 days.
So, um, item is submitted sort of the department has the item submits it to the pab and then also, at some point, starts the agenda process for council when pab considers and reviews and potentially writes up a response.
Um, as long as they need a timing for sub 2 or whatever, it can still be seen, heard alongside.
I just want to think about how this works when it comes to us, because, like, ideally, then we have the report if the pabs already met in the 30 day window, there's a way of.
Squaring those and bringing those together at the end when it comes to us.
Is that right? I mean, that's basically done through a sub 2 can they can they file it in that way? Or I guess there's potentially even an earlier part of the process.
They could put it into the stream.
Yes, there's, um, there's 3 deadlines for when a communication and there's 3 different places.
A communication like a letter to the council could be published.
You know, if it's submitted, you know, basically, the day of the agenda rules committee, it could go in the agenda packet and then there's the sub 1 deadline, which is 7 days before the meeting.
That that packet goes out 5 days before the meeting, and then there's the sub 2 deadline, which is new in the day prior to the meeting that gets published that afternoon prior to the meeting.
So there are those opportunities along the way, and then those yeah, so those supplemental communication packets are, of course, available to public and the council.
So it's all published on the record.
Okay, I think it's just refreshing our as we're thinking through the process, just making sure because then if they hit 1 of those on ramps, then it's basically comes into the flow at the same time before it comes to us.
We can have a discussion both about the report and the feedback we've received about the report, and then that's how we would hear it in that way.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you council member.
I also wanted to mention I forgot that council also meets twice a month, but we also have large portions of the year where we're not meeting and so I want to make sure that we're giving the PAB this similar leeway than that we would have so that they do actually have the chance to meet and agendize before we hear something.
Yeah, because if in a, for example, if in 1 month, they only meet once, and it's 2 days before our council meeting, that makes it really difficult for them to submit materials that they need.
So maybe we can carve out and make sure that there is a regular meeting of the PAB scheduled within that time within a reasonable time before the council meeting are there any other comments.
Council member Trayton.
Yeah, thank you.
I wanted to also, I was remiss in not thanking council members Hamburg and O'Keeffe for just thinking through how, how do we take advantage of existing state and local resources, and how do we make sure that we're giving them the opportunity to meet and agendize before we actually have a council meeting.
And make sure that the oversight that we are exercising as a council that all of it adds value and that, you know, reduces duplication.
So I wanted to just say that I echo council member O'Keeffe's points about the incredible value of the transparency hub.
Again, I appreciate and will be voting in support of council member Blackabee's supplemental subject to well, or as incorporated into the main motion now with additional conforming changes by the clerk as, as discussed.
I, I want to end on just, I, I wish to echo vice mayor Lunaparra's points.
30 days is actually not a lot of time and I definitely want to make sure and, you know, have, have confidence that to a collaborative process.
This is doable, but that the pub actually has enough information, you know, provided to them prior to such time when they are having regular meetings, not say during the winter recess time to make sure that they do have the capacity to provide the review that they need.
So, and we can get quality information back to the council.
Thank you.
Council member, I do want to clarify that there's no motion on the table, so we don't like to make a motion.
Okay.
First, we're going to go to council member Taplin and then council member Bartlett and then council member Humbert.
Thank you.
Along those lines, I was because we do have to recess periods, but it's my understanding that our recess periods are our factor into the timing of of of critical things.
So I was wondering if someone could speak to that.
Well, as it relates to this specific report, which is delivered in June, that's neither council recess or fab recess time.
Typical recess times.
They work on a very similar recess schedule that the council does.
They take a short recess and in the fall and then also recess around winter.
And I don't think they take a spring recess.
Thank you.
Yes.
And so to the extent that are, that this can be timed.
Together, that's to our greater benefit.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Council member Bartlett.
Thank you, Madam acting mayor.
It's not vice mayor tonight.
Yeah.
Acting mayor.
Okay.
So that was that was my question, too.
So I guess in terms of our, our.
Our particular, you know, government business day or business week, right? A business calendar.
It still aligns because they're also on break.
And this, this, this report is due in the month of June.
And it looks back to the prior year.
So they're, they're, they can structure this time accordingly.
And I wonder, you know, I guess just because at this point, I'm, I'm, I'm persuaded that the 30th of June is the 30th of June.
I guess just because at this point, I'm, I'm, I'm persuaded that the 30 days is doable.
Typically with a, with them fully staffed.
And I do hope that they are incorporating, exploiting incorporation of certain tools to help them do this work faster.
We all know they're out there.
And, you know, while there's no, there's no policy guidance that used guiding its use in the city.
We do know that it can be used for the benefit of processes like this.
More on that tomorrow.
Thank you, Council Member.
Council Member Humbert.
Yeah, I'd like to make the motion.
The main motion to, for the item that Council Member O'Keefe and I have brought.
And incorporate the, the supplemental brought by Council Member Blackaby.
And with the edits that he made that we've seen on the screen.
Thank you.
Just to clarify that, does that mean that that's the motion to approve Council Member Blackaby's item with the changes? Because he built off of.
Yes, I suppose it is.
Yeah.
I think that's, yeah, you can look at it that way.
Sure.
Is it also with the clerk's comments? With the clerk's comments added as well.
Okay.
Thank you.
Second.
Thank you.
I, and just to make it very, very clear, because I think I'm still a little confused.
The.
Does the police department have to submit the.
The item 30 days before the council meeting where it's going to be heard or 30.
Is that is that the right timeline? We're hearing from staff the proposal and how they're reading our language and how they will interpret it as it exists is it will not come to us at a meeting.
In less than 30 days, but they may come to the agenda process to start the process before the 30 days.
Okay, thank you.
Right.
How do we feel about a friendly amendment to 45 days so that we can give the enough time to agendize it? It gives them just a little bit more time, but we're hearing from them that the current process for the other reporting periods are not sufficient.
And have caused conflicts in the past, and so in attempts to.
Minimize those.
Just.
Do they not have a regular schedule? Look, a regular counter when their.
Agenda is.
They do.
So.
I'm just trying to in what scenario.
It would take.
Longer than what's proposed for them to agendize it.
There's been some issues with getting from what I understand that there's been issues with getting the.
The P.
A.
B.
members the information within that time due to low staffing at as well as as for my understanding of how commissions.
Work the chair meets with staff 2 weeks before the meeting to agendize to figure out what's going to be on the agenda and then the agenda solidified 1 week before the meeting and I'm not sure how urgent items work.
I don't think that.
Commissions are allowed to accept urgent items, but the P.
A.
B.
might be different, but if they're agendizing.
A meeting to discuss a previously.
Submitted report that's already posted.
Can we.
I think that the chair of the P.
A.
B.
might have an example of how this might work.
If we can.
If I can ask him to provide 1 of how this has been an issue just in getting them to actually hear it in time.
Is he's unmuted.
Go ahead chair.
So, if the department to us.
On.
The 27th of May.
And our 1st meeting in June.
Is not until the 2nd week of June, so we just did the.
What the 12th of June.
And for that to happen, it would go to rules and agenda.
I believe what 10 days before that.
So we would really only have the ability based on our calendar.
And our 1st meeting in June.
Is not until the 2nd week of June.
So we just did the.
What the 12th of June.
Technically under the current proposal.
The council would be able to.
Consider and vote on it.
The 27th of June.
And our, our, our biweekly meetings.
To consider it at 1 meeting.
And in that meeting, we would not only.
See the, see the report for the 1st time.
Try to make, you know, usually we would.
Filter that out to a subcommittee.
Have the subcommittee at the next meeting.
Bring it back.
To the 2nd weekly to the 2nd bimonthly meeting.
And then from that approved a letter for council.
So the 45 days that council.
Would actually make a material difference.
Based on the current process.
Based on that example that I'm providing there.
Thank you, chair.
I think.
I'm not sure.
Are you still wanting to speak? I don't know if this is if the.
I'm sorry, chair.
Thank you.
I meant the council members.
Your hands raised on the parliamentarian.
Yes, I'm number.
Oh, I guess.
Number 1.
But I, I would support the 45 days based on.
This operating experience.
Thank you.
I think if we want our commissions to be.
Collaborative with this.
I think that this, this would be a good compromise.
She.
Yeah, I want to make a comment about that.
I think the 45 days makes sense because of this example that chair just gave.
I think it's, it's helpful to understand just like.
How, how it can be calendared out and I hear what the chief and council member said about that information being on the transparency hub.
But I think there, there really is a difference that's important to be made here between what is available versus what has actually been said.
Submitted to them for review and I think with that logic that, I mean, they should be checking it all the time and in preparation for the report and that's not an expectation that we've we've set for them.
So, I would support the 45 days, but I think that I'm hoping we can come to an agreement on a number because I think the reality here is we do want to be able to have that collaboration.
And I, and I understand that I understand that the chief is what the chief is saying about.
You know, having that opportunity throughout, but I want to make sure we.
We, we build that in the time in.
Thank you, mayor council member Humber.
Yeah, I guess I have a question for the, for the chief.
Yeah, I guess I have a question for the, for the chief is can you work with 45 days? Well, a couple of things.
One is, and I'm not an expert on how materials can come to the, to the board, but we submit those materials to the chair and to the DPA with a request for it to go to all board members, which 30 days for them to review and then participate in a meeting.
Our experience is that, that has given them adequate time.
And in fact, Josh shared that in plenty of times that he's able to look at that and say, that's fine.
The challenge I have with 45 days is not that 45 days is hard.
It's that every time there's a different reporting period for different pieces of material and different annual reports.
It puts an additional burden on staff to make sure we're tracking, tracking all those instances.
The 30 day time period aligns with the way we submit other materials to, to the PAB for review.
That doesn't mean that we don't try to get things to them as soon as possible.
In fact, often with the control equipment ordinance over the last several years, I'm typically broadcasting to the director.
I expect to have this report done on this day, reminding you this is coming.
And as we get a run up to that, being mindful of the calendar.
And certainly as we're looking to land the date that we're coming in June, nothing requires us to be a certain date in June or even to necessarily come in June.
That's just when our annual cycle has been.
Certainly we'll be looking at the calendar and I'm happy to look at the calendar and communicate early with the PAB about when we anticipate landing that report, ensuring that they have a meeting timed out.
I mean, I'm happy to hear from them about deliver it closer to a meeting or farther from a meeting so that they can have adequate reporting time.
Those are just hard things to work into an ordinance and for us to make sure we're hitting deadlines and timelines.
And what I'm asking for is to reduce the burden of having a lot of varied time, time reporting, connecting it to general rules or connecting it to set up to and things like that.
Just make it more challenging on our end.
Thank you.
Yeah, thank you, Chief.
And I hear you on the administrative burden.
I am wondering.
I mean, there are.
Maybe this is a conversation that needs to be agendized in the future around trying to make everything consistent to 45 days.
And I get that that is not what is before us tonight in those broad terms.
I'm wondering, I would support anything that can be done outside of a council decision with a date to look at a cycle that brings it back or brings it to the PAB at a time when they're meeting, you know, not around a recess and frankly, not around council recess either.
I did have a question.
I believe the previous language said 60 slash 90 days because I think the number was different than the letter.
But but then it said or.

Segment 7

30 Days if there is a grant-directed timeline.
So I'm wondering if a less elegant compromise, but still a compromise, could be to go with 45 days or 30 days, you know, keeping the, retaining the 30 days for the strict grant-directed timeline.
And this this is probably a question for the chief.
I agree that especially with grants we need a shorter window to be able to operate.
Sometimes we hear about grants at the last minute.
I would refer back to what I said earlier about the challenges around a 40-day timeline and especially if in within an ordinance we have there based on the action that we're taking it just it creates more administrative work for us to track those things.
Okay I'm going to try and substitute motion just for discussion and that would be to change part 5 proposal within 45 days and then we keep the text around 30 days in instances where the proposal is subject to a time-sensitive grant application and everything else would be the same as the main motion if there's a second.
Who was the second? Thank you councilmember.
Councilmember Chaplin.
Yes thank you.
I just want to make sure I'm understanding.
So they would be needing to discuss a report submitted the previous year, the year prior? That's correct.
They are looking at a report of uses over the year prior and then are have an opportunity to make a recommendation to council about whether we should continue to use the material the equipment or change how we use it.
And what triggers them to meet to discuss that? Is that on completely on their end or is that responsive to something on our end or? Like could they do it sooner? Could they do it later? I'm trying to understand like what like what is the time constraint for them to initiate that review? They could initiate a review of equipment or policy at any point in time pursuant to the Charter but their review of this report begins when we submit the report to them.
I see I see.
Yeah I I I really don't want to have a scenario where we have like okay this report is 30 days, this reports 45 days, this reports 90 days right? I think that's inefficient and if we are going to talk about how to have consistent uniform timelines I would like for that discussion to be grounded in operational clarity and and efficiency.
And it's still not it's still not quite clear to me what the extra time would allow them to do that they don't already have the ability to do.
Thank you Councilmember.
I can I offer a quick amendment to the motion and I'm I'm open to this not being accepted.
I think I just want to understand it better.
Adding back the right of private action as restricted in the current in the current ordinance because there's no way there's no other form of remedy if this is not followed other than that very small private right of action.
To the substitute motion.
This is a substitute.
I will accept that for the purpose of discussion.
I anticipate someone may well sever out that provision before we vote.
That's okay.
I think I want to just hear that argument also.
I want to kind of talk through that as well.
Councilmember do you accept the friendly amendment? Well so for discussion yes but I typically when it comes to you know rights of action and city attorney might want to comment on this as well.
You know this body is the one that creates fines and fees and creates you know legal legal moments of jeopardy for for people in the for our city, our staffers, our people in the community.
I don't I don't know that appointed appointed civilians necessarily have that charge.
Thank you councilmember.
I guess the current the way that it's currently written states that if the alleged violation is substantiated and cured then a notice has to be posted.
So the primary reason for having a private right of action is curing the issue and not necessarily holding up the city in bigger a bigger violation since the prevailing complainant may only connect from collect from the city reasonable attorneys fees in an amount not to exceed $15,000 if they are obligated to pay such fees.
Again something that hasn't happened since we've had this.
If it's only $15,000 that's nominal and does not really accomplish the task.
If the goal is curing the issue not necessarily the financial.
Yes, city attorney I mean I was just going to go back and forth here but I mean when you get into these you know the government's role as a what's the standard you know the where our rules are come up a good place or a bad place or arbitrary and arbitrary and capricious right? If that standard still exists I mean this gets this sounds already sounds to me kind of weird that's only $15,000.
That seems like it's not meant to do anything.
I think the origin of the $15,000 is that verbiage is taken out of the the other ordinance that yeah the STO so.
Okay that's fine.
I'll retract that.
Are there any? Council Member Trago.
Yeah thank you.
So if you can pull up the language again five and six.
I think in my substitute I inimportantly neglected to make a conforming sub change to item to part six which would also say after you by the Police Accountability Board or 45 days change 30 to 45 days whichever comes first.
Thank you Council Member C.
No more comments from Council.
Sorry.
Go ahead.
That's okay I just I just put my hands up.
I just want to give one last push for 45 days because I recognize Chief that this creates an additional burden and having to track a different time frame can be really complicated and I think that our hope here and the reason why I'm supporting 45 days is to allow for more collaboration and conversation and given that part of the issue is staffing and the fact that we know that we're gonna continue having issues with with our budget and staffing may continue to be an issue for a while I do really want to give this time and I think like you know as we are trying to reduce other administrative burdens I'm hoping that that by doing that by having one fewer report that this 45 days really is is us trying to to meet in the middle of making these changes and and also still keeping up with our with our values and supporting the work that the PAP's doing so I want to thank you all I really appreciate the discussion and and really thank our our our vice mayor for for holding a great meeting today so thank you.
Thank you.
Could we call the roll on the substantive substitute motion? Okay on a substitute motion which is it's the same as the main motion except it changes the 30 days to 45 days in these two sections here D3 and B4 050 D3 and 060 B4.
And there was a second element to it where we would revert back to the old language in five or 30 days in instances where the proposal is subject to a time-sensitive grant application.
Okay on the substitute motion councilmember Casarwani? No.
Caplan? No.
Bartlett? Yes.
Trageb? Aye.
O'Keefe? Yes.
Blackabay? Pass.
Lunapara? Yes.
Humbert? Pass.
Mayor Ishii? Yes.
And councilmember Blackabay? Yes.
And councilmember Humbert? Yes.
Okay motion carries.
Thank you so much.
That is our final action item for the night.
Thank you for the discussion.
Thank you so much for being here.
Thank you to the PAB's representative for being here as well for to chair Kariyatana.
Councilmember Blackabay will you send me the edits you have on the screen? I will.
We just have public comment on items not listed on the agenda one last time.
You'll have one minute.
Thank you.
Just for items not listed on the agenda in terms of process I guess I have to say that you all just spent a lot of time debating something that's really small and if that's an indicator what if the PAB actually didn't just rubber stamp a report but actually wanted more information and then they would send it back to the police and then the police would drag their feet as they do.
I'm coming back to you to tell you seven months ago I filed a complaint with the PAB.
It's not just a work slowdown.
It is that the chief is not cooperating with requests for information.
So if you standardize all these timelines it's just mindless.
It's not it's not it's not it's not responsive to the needs of the people.
A hundred million dollar operation should be able to track a deadline.
I just don't understand why we defer to the chief constantly and require nothing.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
Go ahead Carol.
So I know that you're going to be bringing forward a joint item regarding the an eviction moratorium in Minneapolis from the the rent board and the council.
I want to say to add to that there was a meeting of the national low-income housing coalition today that there were two presentations.
The first a dismal one about how disparate impact is going to be eliminated in the in a housing discrimination by the Trump administration and the second of which was expressly on the Minneapolis issues with housing.
While you are working with a council member you might if you go back to that recording or contact their office you might be able to receive some additional information and resources and a sense of how the community is addressing those issues.
There are three times as much housing application or applications for rental assistance.
Thank you.
Thank you Carol.
Do we have any raised hands online? Yes and again this is for public comments on items that are not on the agenda.
We have hand raised John Lindsay Poland.
Good evening.
Yeah I just have to respond to comments that military equipment reports are only backward-looking.
They are not only backward-looking.
Any request that was on our agenda.
Okay the one other thing that I want to say then is that I find the chief's comment that these are burdens for the department to be disingenuous because the 45 days is for the PAB.
It's not for the department.
It's a it's a calendar that the PAB has to track not the department.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And phone number ending in four five three.
I think this is the PAB chair.
Mr.
Cayetano did you want to give non-agenda public comments? Sorry I don't have a comment but thank you council members.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Last is phone number ending in two one one for non-agenda public comment.
Michael tonight in memory of the great Berkeley police chief Dash Butler.
He was a great man and Berkeley always had one of the best police in the police department in the country.
My comment though is about the monstrosity and the the unbelievable barbarism and brutality this man doing across the country.
I don't see anywhere.
I live 62 years.
I'm 85 years old.
You never see that anywhere anywhere in the world.
What is worse, I'll be very quick, he has access to the nuclear football written bottom in a briefcase read by a Navy man behind all behind him.
That's within 12 feet from him.
When he pushed that bottom we are into the middle of World War 3.
If it happens 98% humans on earth will die within minutes or hours.
2% will die painfully within days.
And by the way you know I'm nuclear engineer so I know the field very well.
Thank you all the great people and thank you.
Okay.
Thank you so much.
Is there a motion to adjourn the meeting? I'll second.
Can we take the roll? Okay to adjourn the meeting.
Councilmember Casarwani? Yes.
Taplin? Yes.
Bartlett? Yes.
Traeger? Aye.
O'Keefe? Yes.
Blackabay? Yes.
Vice Mayor Lunapara? Yes.
Councilmember Humbert is absent.
And Mayor Ishii? Yes.
Okay we are adjourned.
Good night.
Get some sleep.
Thank you.
Thank you Madam Acting Mayor.
Thank you so much.
Bye everyone.