Transcription
June 9, 2026 · 7:00 PM
Document Information
- Whisper version
- 2
- Generated
- July 15, 2026
- Archive URI
- berkeley_052d210a-8437-4c05-a8e0-ff726077dcd6.ogg
Segment 1
Thank you. Hello everyone, good evening. I'm calling the meeting to order. It is, oh my gosh, Tuesday, June 9th, 2026, and it is 6:09 p.m. Clerk, can you please start us off with a roll? Council Member Kesarwani? Here. Taplin? Present. Bartlett is currently absent. Tregub? Absent. O'Keefe? Here. Flackby? Luna Parra? Here. Humbert? Here. And Mayor Ishii? Here. Okay, quorum is present. Okay, so for the report out from closed session, the City Council met in closed session on June 8th, 2026. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, Subsection D, and provided directions to outside counsel and approved a settlement by compromise and release as to a workers' compensation matter assigned claim number B-E-R-2-3-0-0-0-4-6 and W-C-A-B-8-5-8-5-8-8-5. Okay, very good. Ah, I just realized it's the first meeting of the month, and so I will read us the land acknowledgement statement. The City of Berkeley recognizes that the community we live in was built on the territory of Huchun, the ancestral and unceded land of the Chochenyo-speaking Ohlone people, the ancestors and descendants of the Sovereign Verona Band of Alameda County. This land was and continues to be of great importance to all of the Ohlone tribes and descendants of the Verona Band. As we begin our meeting tonight, we acknowledge and honor the original inhabitants of Berkeley, the documented 5,000-year history of Ohlone at the West Berkeley Shell Mound, and the Ohlone people who continue to reside in the East Bay. We recognize that Berkeley's residents have and continue to benefit from the use and occupation of this unceded stolen land since the City of Berkeley's incorporation in 1878. As stewards of the laws regulating the City of Berkeley, it is not only vital that we recognize the history of this land, but also recognize that the Ohlone people are present members of Berkeley and other East Bay communities today. The City of Berkeley will continue to build relationships with the Lijan Tribe and to create meaningful actions that uphold the intention of this land acknowledgement. We are now moving on to some matters. So I will actually call forward Stephanie Allen. Thank you, Mayor. I'm here tonight on behalf of the School District Gardening Program. It's called Cans to Carrots. And as you know, funding for education has been devastated in the state and this country. So we have to do a number of things in order to keep programs going. The gardening program exists at every school in the district. It's very popular with the children. And we recently began a campaign to collect cans, which could then be turned into the recycling center for money to help fund the program, but also to teach children about recycling. The program got kicked off with the essential help of City Manager Paul Budenhagen. We wouldn't have been able to do it without him. So this award is for him. On behalf of the program, from our students, our staff, thank you very much. I don't know. That's so cute. It has carrots. Okay. Go ahead, Paul. I'm not a big speaker. Let me take a picture of you guys. Oh, God. Thank you. That's so nice of you. That's very thoughtful. Oh, no, we wouldn't have gotten started without you. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, everyone is welcome to bring an award for Paul during ceremonial matters. Okay, well, it's actually time for your comments, so I'll give you a moment to walk on over in case there's anything you want to add. Oh, no. Thank you. Anything for your City Manager comments section? I'm still so stunned and pleased. Thank you. No, I don't have any comments other than thank you to Ms. Allen, and I want to thank her also for the outstanding work that they've done on the Kids to Carrots program. It's a really important program, so thank you. Very sweet. Thank you. Okay, and so we are also actually adjourning in memory, so apologies, for Alan Tobey, which was requested by Council Member Tregub. And so would you like to read? Go ahead, Council Member Tregub. Thank you. Yes, I would like for us to adjourn in memory of Alan Tobey. We also have his wife, Ruth, here, and we have his son, John, online, who may say a few words. We were all very saddened to hear that Alan Tobey passed away on February 24th of this year following a long and courageous struggle with Parkinson's. But the terrible disease did not define him. The zest for life and commitment Alan put into everything he did did define him, and this is his story. He was born in Brooklyn, New York, on December 11th, 1944. He graduated from MIT in 1966 with a Bachelor of Science in Literature and Biology and went on to earn a Master of Divinity degree from Luther Seminary in 1970. In June 1968, he married Ruth Jensen in Cambridge, Massachusetts. They raised two children, Chandra Tobey and John Tobey. After hearing Ron Dellums speak on the UC Berkeley campus where he enrolled to study sociology, he volunteered for Dellums' first congressional campaign, beginning a lifelong commitment to civic engagement and progressive causes. Alan became active in the Berkeley Tenants Organizing Committee, which promoted the city's rent control ordinance. He was also a founder of Stop Institutional Creep, a community effort that sought to preserve a historic residence at the corner of Ridge Road and Scenic Avenue, where the Graduate Theological Union Building and Library now stand. Alan's work at Wine and the People, a Berkeley store specializing in home winemaking and brewing supplies that also produced its own wines, led him to advocate for legislation allowing brew pubs to manufacture and sell their beer in Berkeley. He was both an inspiration and an instigator in Berkeley's becoming a pioneer in the legalization of microbrewing. Professionally, Alan built a career in management and marketing for high-tech companies. In retirement, he continued his commitment to public service and environmental stewardship, serving on the boards of the Sierra Club and Berkeley's Livable Berkeley organizations. And the Sierra Club is when I first got to work with him as a fellow member of the Sierra Club's Northern Alameda County Group Executive Committee. I got to watch how beautifully he brought together people that normally wouldn't agree or even talk to each other, and how prescient his commitment to housing for all was, getting them to actually do it together. At his West Berkeley home, Alan was well known for bringing neighbors together and strengthening community ties. Among his many local accomplishments was being the squeaky wheel that led to the city's installing a stop sign at the intersection of Gilman and Peralta, which he would tell me was one of his proudest achievements. Throughout his life, Alan championed big ideas, but never lost sight of the wise learning that for those ideas to be embraced, it was on us to meet people where they were at. We will always remember him for his dedication to social justice, environmental advocacy, community building, public service, and his slogan of choice, for the people. Alan, you truly epitomized always being there for the people. Present here. We have, I think, John online, hopefully. Yes, I'm here, Igor. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Excellent. Thank you for those very kind words. Good evening. I'm John Tobey, Alan's youngest son, proudly born and raised in Berkeley. Mayor Ishii, Deputy Mayor Tregub, members of the council, thank you for honoring my father today. Alan believed a city reveals what its people value, the shape of a street, the scale of a building, whether a neighborhood stays walkable. These are choices about what kind of life people are allowed to have. He lived in Berkeley for more than 50 years, and he became part of its fabric. He paid attention to it. He argued with it. He defended it. He believed in the city that was something you participated in, not something you occupied. He loved his little neighborhood of West Bray most of all, a neighborhood where people knew each other because they were so often on foot, passing each other's porches. As Igor said, he spent considerable energy fighting for a stop sign at the corner of Gilman and Peralta, a simple stop sign, because he understood that small things are where real life happens, kids crossing the street, neighbors walking home, the ordinary details that tell you a place is cared for. Through livable Berkeley and his writing for Berkeley Side and other venues, he carried those values into the wider city, affordable housing, preservation alongside progress, a Berkeley that made room for people instead of pushing them out. His guiding idea was simple. In the words of one of my favorite chefs, Jose Andres, you should build longer tables, not taller fences. He had very little patience for posturing or for process used as theater. If he thought something was standing in the way of a livable city, he said so, sometimes diplomatically, as Igor said, sometimes not. But even that came from caring. He expected better because he believed better was possible. To many people, Alan was a planner, an advocate, a public voice. To me, he was just dad, the person who made dinner every night, who loved a terrible pun, who asked impossible questions about everything. Losing him leaves a silence, but it also makes something clear. Love leaves an inheritance, standards, curiosity, the belief that paying attention is its own form of love, that if something matters, you should care enough to say so. Alan gave Berkeley 50 years of that, and.
Segment 2
My name is Andrew Fisher, and I'm here to say a few words on behalf and in support of the Live Free organization. I've lived in Berkeley for close to 50 years. I've built a small business here along with my wife that has grown and flourished in this community for 20 years and counting. Our kids currently attend BUSD, that community. Much like you, I'm thankful for where I live, and I feel a strong sense of pride, especially seeing the city's evolution over the course of my time here. There's no other place on earth like Berkeley and I think the surrounding communities. As part of this community and with an interest in keeping to what I think are our core beliefs of compassion and leading and lending a helping hand to our neighbors and our people in need, I would like to strongly encourage you, Honorable Mayor, to fund Live Free. Thank you. Hi, my name is Malik Loudermilk. I would like to pass my minute over to Reverend Angela. Thank you. Hello, my name is Reverend Angela Jernigan. I am a resident of West Berkeley, and I am here to really morally insist that the city find the money to maintain the baseline for Live Free funding. This is a program that pastors and community leaders fought hard for to get to this city for a decade, and we finally got the funding, finally put it in action, and it ended gun violence in this city in one year. It is the cheapest way to intervene on gun violence. If you just look at the numbers, numbers alone, it is the cheapest way to maintain the peace. It is also morally unconscionable to not fund a program that we know saves lives. Please read the letter that I and a dozen other clergy and community leaders signed for you. Thank you. Okay, we have going to speakers on Zoom now. First one is Russell. Hi, everybody. Russell Bates here. The murderous rampage by the Zionist entity all around the Middle East and Palestine and Lebanon and Iran is going on and on and on, and I insist at some point in the near future that a Gaza genocide remembrance day be brought forward to the City Council of Berkeley. Thomas Massey had guts enough to bring up the USS Liberty attack by the Zionist entity. Yesterday in Congress, it was a great speech, 25 minutes, I should just listen to it. They need to be stopped. Gaza needs to be remembered, and I would ask you very politely at this point to consider that for the future. Thank you very much. Thank you, Russell. Next is Sandhya. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes. My name is Sandhya, and I represent Anubhuti Meditation and Retreat Center in Novato. Anubhuti is part of the Brahma Kumaris, a worldwide woman-led nonprofit organization with centers in over 140 countries and affiliated with the United Nations through economic and social council, ECO, SOC, and UNICEF. Our mission is to empower individuals through meditation, self-awareness, and spiritual values to create a more peaceful world. Today, I'm delighted to invite you and your family to our Wellness Wonderland Family Fair on June 20th, celebrating the International Day of Yoga and the spirit of family and community. This free event is being organized in collaboration with several Bay Area organizations and will feature wellness booths, yoga, meditation, Ayurveda, holistic health, scientists, and speakers exploring well-being and consciousness. Cultural program and activities for all ages. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Taveo Smith. Hello, can you hear me? Yes. First and foremost, hello to you all. Hello, my name is Taveo Smith. First and foremost, I want to say that I am a proud member from Berkeley along with my family. I've been here for many generations. I want to say that the Live Free program is extremely important to me and my community, and honestly, it should be to you, too. Todd Walker, my coach slash mentor and role model, showed us as a kid violence wasn't the way, and he showed us this through a scare straight program. The lessons that he taught us was if we wanted to go down that road, there's only two ways that we're going to end up, either dead in the streets, in a violent way, or in prison with that lifestyle. We are here to police our community, so I just want you guys to let us police our community. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Last is a phone number caller, phone number ending in 211. Well, first of all, I'd like to ask a prayer for this beautiful woman who was murdered by her boyfriend in California Street. This is awful. This is awful. This is Berkeley. Berkeley is a peaceful town, town of peace. Roy Hunji, Manager Roy Hunji, a bunch of people. Mary, if you look at it, I think I recommend a friendly meeting. People in Berkeley actually need us more than ever. We've been in business 53 years. What we're looking at right now, we're seeing our country dismantled, demolished. I can't describe it. I've been in Berkeley for 63 years. I have never expected to see the beauty and elegance of the city and the state and the country getting demolished. I agree with Russell Bates, by the way, about Gaza. Senator Masey was great. This comes from the USS Liberty. I was a kid in Egypt when my head was bombed in 1948 and 1956 by Israel. Egypt defeated Israel. Thanks for your comment. That's it. That was the last comment. Okay. Thank you very much. We will move on to the consent calendar. I should note that there is another opportunity for non-agenda public comments at the end of the meeting. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Do any of my.. Sorry? Yeah, I'm so sorry. It got deleted from my agenda somehow. But yes, are there any public comments by employee unions? Anyone online from an employee union? Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. My gosh. Okay. Anyone have any comments from the consent calendar? My colleagues? Yes, Council Member O'Keefe. I have other comments I'll make in a second, but I want to recuse myself from one of the items. Item 22, hot tub item. I don't know, do I have to leave the room or something, or can I just say I'm recusing and then not talk about it? Yes, we'll have to take two votes on the consent calendar. We'll take one vote separately on item 22 and then another vote on the remainder. Okay. Sorry about that, everyone, but trying to do it right. Thank you. I appreciate that. Council Member Casarwani. Thank you very much, Madam Mayor. I'd like to be recorded as donating $100 to item number 19. This is the Poet Laureate Program, and $100 towards item number 21, which is the Holocaust Remembrance Day Program, and I would like to be added as a co-sponsor to item number 22 to streamline our approval of hot tubs. Thank you very much. Thank you. Can we move on to Council Member Humbert, please? Missed that. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I want to draw attention to items 18A and 18B, policy recommendations for the City of Berkeley regarding event producers and civic events. That's A, and companion report is B, policy recommendations for the City of Berkeley regarding event producers and civic events. I just want to confirm that when we vote on the consent calendar, we'll vote on adopting the recommendations in the City Manager's companion report, 18B. Yes, we would be adopting this for the purposes of adopting 18B. Thank you. Yes. And then with respect to 19, which is the Poet Laureate Program, I'd like to contribute $100 from my discretionary office account, also $100 to 20, which is the Chavez Huerta tribute site or formerly named, that, $100. I would like, as to item 21, the 2027 Holocaust Remembrance Day Program, I'd like to contribute $500 from our G8 discretionary account. And then with respect to item 22, the final item on the consent calendar having to do with amendments to Berkeley Municipal Code section that relates to hot tubs, I'd like to add council members Bartlett, Kasarwani, and Trigub as co-sponsors on this item for their requests. That's all I have, thanks. Thank you very much. Council Member Bartlett. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Through this, item 19, Berkeley Poet Laureate Program, I'd like to donate $200 from my D13 account to support this wonderful program. Item 20, thank you, Council Member Kasarwani, for this. Oh, Mary Ishii, this is yours, thank you. $200 as well to the Chavez Huerta tribute site. Should be wonderful. Item 21, the 2027 Holocaust Remembrance Day Program, another $200 to support this wonderful annual event. And I think that's it. But lastly, for the Live Free people that are here, I want to just recognize you and thank you for the work you've done so many years working on this and now finally got it funded. It's working tremendously. I want to thank you for all your work. Thank you. Thank you very much. Council Member Lunaparra. Thank you. I'd like to donate $200 each to items 19, 20, and 21, and thanks to the authors. Thank you. Trying to do math while I'm calling on you all to add these numbers. Okay. Council Member Trigub, Vice Mayor Trigub. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And thank you to our staff and administration across all departments for your work on many complex items. There are several items that I'm excited about in terms of continuing our partnership with Business Improvement District, such as the North Shattuck Association and Visit Berkeley. On item 10,.
Segment 3
An adolescent health program, the city is estimated to provide $123,550 in matching fund revenue and draw down $105,089 in state revenue each fiscal year. Thank you so much to the Civic Arts Commission for their policy recommendations. And as was mentioned by Council Member Humbert, we will be accepting this report 18B with the intention of accepting 18B. And lastly, thank you so much to everyone who put in funding towards the Poet Laureate, the Tribute site, and Holocaust Remembrance Day for FY 2027. And I think that that is it for me. Okay. Do we have any public comments on consent calendar or information items only? Come on up. Good evening. My name is Daniel McChesney-Young and I'm the Ecology Center's Farmers Market Program Manager. I am here this evening to speak in support of items 18A and B. I'll just say that I appreciate the city staff's commitment to working with event producers and especially thank Peter Redue and Kerry Arredondo for their thoughtful consideration of the event producers' Bill of Rights in item 18A. The Berkeley Farmers Markets advanced the city's cultural, economic, climate, health, and strategic goals and we look forward to the continued city support to ensure the future of Berkeley's farmers markets and other special cultural events. Thank you. Anyone online to speak on the consent calendar or information items only? Oh, I'm sorry. Moni, were you coming? I want to thank Council Member O'Keefe about the comment on the civic organizations and the arts and culture. That's what Berkeley is all about and the Indigenous Peoples Day Pow Wow Committee, I'm honored to be a part of that. Choctaw, Mississippi relatives that I have. I've been in Pow Wow Committees in Yakima, Washington, Seattle, and here and we want that to thrive and continue. So I really appreciate the council's support of that and Live Free and Prevention of Violence. My aunt was killed in her bed and my cousin as well. Violence made a rise at that level. Prevention is everything and this program is saving lives. So I really appreciate also Council Member Bartlett's comments. Thank you. Thanks. Anyone online for consent calendar or information items only? Yes, we have seven hands raised. First speaker is Lisa Bullwinkle. Hi, good evening everyone. I want to thank you so much for your contributions to the Poet Laureate Program. Susan Felix, who was our art ambassador to the city, really encouraged me to kind of push this through the Civic Arts Commission and lo and behold, we've raised almost $5,000 for our next Poet Laureate. Thank you so much. Also, I want to thank the city staff for their amazing work and positivity in going forward with the event producers policy. This was no small task and we're really excited to see how much joy we can bring to the city by producing events in collaboration with you. And so I thank you again, especially Peter Redue and Kerry and the city manager. It's just been great trying to get this done and I think we're there. Thank you, Lisa, and thanks for all your work. I know you do a lot too. Next is Cameron Wu. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for taking my comments. I come to you tonight to speak as a private citizen of Berkeley, not as an art commissioner, which I am on the Civic Arts Commission, but I come to you tonight as a private citizen. I'd like to mention kudos to the mayor and the Berkeley City Council for contributing to Berkeley's Poet Laureate program with passing item 19 tonight. With Berkeley's long and rich tradition, literary tradition, it would be a shame to lose this valuable program. It's a modest sum, but one that is greatly appreciated. Also, thanks for all the work you've done and the hopeful passage of item 18, the events producers comments and revisions. Much needed. Thank you all for your hard work. Thanks again. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Cameron. Next is Kelly. Thank you. Can you hear me OK? Yes, loud and clear. OK. I have a problem with Holocaust Remembrance Day, as it is as if the Shoah, the Holocaust, was so horrific that it is the only genocide to remember. We don't recognize the Nakba and the current genocide that we as a country participate in through financing and arming. We recited our meetings the land acknowledgement, but we don't state that we live in a country created through genocide and ethnic cleansing. I'd like us to live in a city, a country, and a world where we condemn all genocides instead of blinding our eye and excusing some depending on who is suffering and who is committing them. Thank you. Next is a caller with a phone number ending in 211. You should be able to unmute. Hi. Consent item four, go down, walk down Telegraph. About four out of five storefronts are closed, shut down forever. Do something with the people who have this place empty. Second, with the fact Holocaust, human memory is very short. Hitler killed so many beautiful Jews in the dark. Now with TVs, every day you watch little kids in Gaza, in Lebanon, getting shot in their heads. They think 70,000, no, it's more like half a million Palestinians are dead. By the way, the word Semitic, somehow can you elucidate Semitic? Don't wait until it's too late to let Hitler do. It's worthless. It's a criminal. Thank you. Next speaker is Alex Knox. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Alex Knox, Telegraph Business Improvement District. I just want to say echo Council Member Blackley's thanks for the Office of Economic Development and their critical work to ensure that we're able to continue operating and put these steps through motion. I'm also very pleased to report that just today we approved and finalized our new strategic plan for the Telegraph District, which we will be unveiling and publicizing over the coming weeks, but really establishes an ambitious, forward-thinking vision for the Telegraph District. We'll be pleased to share that with you. As also a contributor and collaborator on the policy recommendation from the Berkeley event producers, I want to say that I really thank the group of people that came together to bring those recommendations together, but really recognize and thank the City Manager's Office for their good faith efforts. Thank you. Thank you, Alex. Next is Russell. Thank you, everybody. Norman Finkelstein wrote a book called The Holocaust Industry, where he details how it's become big business and a way to guilt trip people out of money. I suggest that for the sake of balance, the City of Berkeley does the Gaza Genocide Remembrance Day at the same time the other Holocaust Remembrance Day goes on. Otherwise, it's proving the oppressed become the oppressor the first chance they get, and the Palestinian people have been oppressed for 78 years. So for the sake of balance, consider the Gaza Genocide Remembrance Day. Thank you very much. Next is Della Luna. Yes, I agree with some of the speakers seeking balance in regards to Holocaust Remembrance Day. I mean, we don't want to only just remember one genocide. It just honestly doesn't make any sense to take that stance. But I wanted to speak about number 18A and 18B, and I'm really glad to see that this is on the agenda and I guess being passed. I hope it's being passed. And I wanted to say I hope it means that the bathrooms will be open again for the farmer's market. For years, we've had access to bathrooms at the Saturday farmer's market specifically, and we've used the park with no problems. And it seems in recent years, the way the city has tried to manage that space has only just made it worse. And the numbers are going down at the market, and the vendors are upset. Like, everything's just cranky. And so I just hope that you can restore it to a space that's actually an event that's normal to be at, like a regular Saturday afternoon. Thank you. Thanks, Sarah. And the last speaker is M. Jervis. Hi, everybody. Matthew Jervis. Thank you, everyone. I wanted to speak, and obviously we're excited about 18A and B and the direction of the conversations that have been going about the event producers and the partnership with the city. The community really expresses itself in these amazing events that we're able to put on, and I'm looking forward to partnership with the city and making more of them. So thank you very much for your help and all the city staff and event producers that have come together in this very constructive conversation. Thank you. Thank you. That's it. Okay. Thank you. All right. So is there a motion to.. Oh, sorry. I see that Council Member Taplin has his.. Thank you very much. I wanted to thank the mayor and the vice mayor again for their authorship of the Holocaust Remembrance Day program item. This is a very important event. I'm very proud that this council has continued to support this event. And even today in 2026, we see on an almost daily basis the grim reminder of both the impact and the presence of noxious anti-Semitic thought and conspiratorial thinking. And with that, I move adoption of the consent calendar. Second. So the consent calendar perhaps.. Yes, so.. Minus the.. Yeah, minus 22, and then we can ask Council Member O'Keefe to second. Right. Is that okay? Yes. Okay. And okay to the seconder as well. All right. So this is.. Well, this is when you would be recused on. Everything except.. Everything except 22. Right. Oh, yes, you're correct. Sorry, so it is items 1 to 21. Council Member Kesarwani? Yes. Taplin? Aye. Bartlett? Yes. Trago? Aye. O'Keefe is recused. Blackaby? Yes. Munipara? Yes. Humbert?.
Segment 4
Segment 5
tonight and I'm sure there's going to be a lot of healthy questions afterwards so I'll hand it over to Elliot to start the presentation and then from there we'll be happy to field any questions and inquiries. Thank you. Good evening Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Members. My name is Elliot Schwimmer, Senior Planner. Tonight we are presenting a comprehensive proposal to adjust Berkeley's parking management program to ensure the long-term fiscal sustainability of our parking funds. Council is being asked to take four key actions tonight. First, to repeal and reenact Chapter 14.52 of the Municipal Code to allow for extended meter operating hours from 6 to 8 p.m., operate meters in new commercial areas of the city, and authorizes a transition to cashless hardware to reduce long-term costs. The second action is to authorize Public Works to pass through parking vendor service costs to the customer. Third, we are proposing updates to the residential parking permit fee schedule for 2028. And fourth, a long overdue realignment of our parking violation fines to keep pace with inflation and align with nearby jurisdictions. To start, I want to provide a quick picture of what the city's parking program looks like today. For on-street parking, the city operates 1,945 single-space meters and 242 multi-space pay stations, generating $8.8 million in FY25. On the off-street side, the city owns and operates three parking garages, Center Street, Telegraph Chaining, and Oxford Garage, with 1,239 spaces in total. The garage has generated $4.9 million in FY25, combined parking generated $13.7 million last year, with on-street meters accounting for about 64% of that. That $13.7 million is what funds our parking services team, including parking enforcement. It also funds our meter hardware, garage operations, and a $1.9 million annual debt service on the Center Street garage reconstruction. As you'll see, it's not currently enough to cover all costs, which is what brings us here tonight. The core issue is this. Without action, the city's combined parking funds are projected to carry a deficit of roughly $1 million by the end of FY27. The near-term strategies Council approved in January 2026 make progress, but they're insufficient on their own. Second, our parking infrastructure is aging. Mechanical coin and receipt mechanisms are the primary cause of meter downtime, and manually collecting physical cash from nearly 2,200 devices requires significant staff and armored transport costs. Third, evenings and Sundays consistently show high parking occupancy in our commercial districts, but those are the hours when our meters are off, so we're not able to manage parking during these times. Regarding RPP, or Residential Preferential Parking Program, the current price for a permit is the same regardless of how many permits you have, but this does not promote the city's environmental goals. These aren't just financial problems. They go directly against the four goals of the GoBerkeley program, making it easier to find parking, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from circling vehicles, improving turnover for local businesses, and making streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists. Our first recommendations address parking demand after 6 p.m. and on Sundays. Currently, meters operate Monday through Saturday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. We're proposing to extend that to 8 p.m., two additional hours every day, and to add Sunday operations from 9 to 8 p.m. as well. The data is clear. Parking demand in Berkeley's commercial cores remains high during evenings and on Sundays. When meters are inactive during peak demand periods, we lose both revenue and the ability to manage turnover. Drivers circle longer, double parking increases, and blocks fill up in ways that lock out short-term customers and delivery vehicles. These two changes are projected to generate approximately $1 million in net new annual revenue after accounting for the added enforcement costs. I'd also note that Berkeley would not be unusual here. San Francisco operates some meters until 10 p.m. and on Sundays. Oakland began Sunday operations from 12 to 6 p.m. citywide in January. Walnut Creek, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Monterey also operate on Sundays. On zone expansion, we're proposing to install about 30 new pay stations in high-demand commercial areas that currently have no meters. Our data shows that these areas regularly exceed 85% occupancy, and that's the threshold at which parking availability effectively breaks down and cars begin circling looking for spaces. Adding meters to these blocks encourages turnover and ensures a space or two is consistently available. Net new revenue is projected at $317,000 in the first year following a one-time capital cost of $296,000. On the cashless transition, we're seeking authorization to replace aging meters that accept coins and print receipts with tap-to-pay units. Coin jams and printer failures are our top causes of meter downtime. Eliminating physical cash also removes roughly $95,000 in annual costs from armored transport, fewer parts, and less maintenance. We'd start with a pilot, survey users after 30 days, and expand district by district based on feedback. An important equity note, all new hardware would allow prepaid debit card functionality. While we are working on a Clipper card integration, prepaid debit cards could also be used right off the bat, which are available and reloadable at dozens of retail locations. This preserves access for residents who don't have credit cards or smartphones. And just to note, our public survey showed 70% of the 670 respondents support this approach. This map shows the 27 block faces we're proposing to bring into the GoBerkeley program. All locations showed occupancy within or above the program's target range of 65 to 85% on one or both sides of the street. You can see the blocks cluster into a few distinct areas. North Berkeley commercial corridors around Hopkins and Fifth Street, the West Berkeley Industrial District along 8th, 9th, Potter, and Hines, and several blocks along San Pablo, Novia, Addison, and Telegraph in the central and southern parts of the city. Some blocks are significantly over target, even over 100% occupancy. So there are functionally no open spaces, and the block is generating congestion rather than managing it. Introducing meters at these locations is not about raising revenue in isolation. It's about making these corridors function the way the rest of the meter network already does, with consistent turnover and at least one or two spaces reliably available at any given time. Every time someone pays a Berkeley parking meter by credit card, the city pays the processing fee. That costs about $456,000 per year. We're proposing to pass that cost through as a transparent customer-paid service charge of $0.35 per transaction. This is consistent with the convenience fee model already used in the city of Berkeley by Park Mobile, which is our mobile payment parking provider. The charge would be displayed on the screen before the credit card transaction is confirmed, so drivers can choose to cancel if they prefer. After transitioning, the city would still owe a reduced annual service fee of about $50,000 to our vendor, but the net savings to the parking meter fund would be approximately $406,000 per year. 47% of public survey respondents supported this change, and only 33% opposed it. The residential parking permit program is operating at a significant deficit. We spend about $4.1 million per year administering the program, primarily the personnel costs for our 21 parking enforcement officers, supervisors, and administrative staff, and collect only about $2.85 million in permit and citation revenue. That's a $1.3 million annual gap. We're proposing a new graduated fee structure for the FY28 permit year, taking effect May 1, 2027. The key change is that permit fees would scale with the number of vehicles registered at an address. The first permit would go from $85 to $100, the second permit would be $125, and the third $150. Visitor passes and other permit types would also see modest adjustments as shown. The rationale is straightforward. Households storing more vehicles on the public right-of-way are using a disproportionate share of limited curb space. A graduated structure creates a gentle incentive to use off-street parking where it's available, while keeping permits accessible. This change is projected to generate approximately $615,000 in new annual revenue. And I do want to note that this item is responsive to a council referral. A parking fines tell a similar story. For most violation types, the last comprehensive update was in 2010, 16 years ago. Since then, cumulative inflation measured by the Consumer Price Index has been about 49%. The result is Berkeley's fines are well below those of neighboring cities. An expired meter citation in Berkeley is currently $43, in Oakland the same violation is $64, in San Francisco it's $108. When the financial penalty for overstaying a meter is low enough that it feels like a competitive parking alternative, compliance suffers and so does availability for the next driver. We're proposing to adjust fines upward in line with cumulative inflation since each fine was last set, meaning increases of between 3% and 49%, depending on when a particular violation was last updated or added to the schedule. An expired meter would go from $43 to $64, street sweeping violations from $49 to $73. These levels would still keep Berkeley meaningfully below San Francisco. And here's the full picture. The recommendations before you tonight are projected to generate $7.1 million in new annual revenue with $2.3 million in new costs and $500,000 in cost savings for a net annual increase of about $5 million. Without these measures, the combined parking fund balance is projected to fall to negative $1 million by the end of FY27. With them, the combined balance is still projected to be negative, but the trajectory of the balance would change in FY28, building up a balance instead of depleting it. The key point is that this package is self-reinforcing. Operational changes increase curb access in busy commercial districts, generates revenue that funds better service.
Segment 6
Okay, Council Member Bartlett. And then Council Member Baccabee, you're next. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you. Could we pull the chart back up that the Vice Mayor was referencing? I'm sure it's about a number or two on here. Is that the chart in the report? Yeah, with the $7 million ultimate earnings. In your presentation. Oh, in the presentation. It's too late for me to end, I think. Yeah, that one. Page 11, yes. Here we go. So, I'm wondering if.. I'm curious, the rate of noncompliance, is this factored in into revenues? So, number of tickets issued, the anticipated issuing, is there some sort of a formula that time has shown are likely to be issued? We do not account for an increase in compliance due to the changing fine amounts. So, this is just purely the number of citations issued times the increase in the rates. Is there any data at all around anticipated noncompliance? Because I can imagine, you know, moving a whole new day and two new hours each day in highly-demand areas, there'll be some tickets. Yeah. I would put it that there'll be a shift in noncompliance from current hours to the later hours, right? I mean, there's a noncompliance that happens as you get to the end of the regulations already, and those times are going to shift with this. Yeah. Okay. But no hard guestimation as to what that could be, right? No? We haven't quantified that. Okay. And I'm curious about the survey respondents. This 44% was it that support these increases? Who are these respondents? We don't have identifying information of the respondents. I mean, there's 669 respondents that were citywide, presumably, from a community message from the communications department team. Okay. And did you have any specific input from any interest groups like the small business community, the seniors, people like that? Yeah. Nothing specific from the senior community, but we did get specific requests for parking meters on certain blocks from businesses, and those blocks are proposed to have meters. Okay. Thank you. Thanks much. Thank you. Council Member Bocchi. Thanks, Mayor. Go ahead and leave this slide up. I had a couple of questions about this slide as well. Do all of the figures here, so the $5.3 million of net change, does all that revenue accrue to the various parking funds? No. No. So the parking funds will see the extended hours to 8 p.m., Sunday operations, zone expansion, the cost savings from the cashless transition, the transaction charge pass-through, but then the bottom two, RPP fees and parking funds, those accrue to the general fund. Okay. Got it. So question to the City Manager. Remind me, I think, again, putting back into the budget process. Currently, I think we have an assumption in fiscal 26 that we're transferring about a million from the general fund, plus or minus, to the parking fund to keep them solvent. Is my recollection about right there? Yes, it is. Okay. If we were to pass some of these new measures, how would that affect what we're able to do in the budget? Would we be able to dial that? Would that also give us some room in the fiscal 26 and fiscal 27 budget if we were to pass these increases? It wouldn't because we're phasing these in over time, so they wouldn't hit right away. Okay. Okay. I wanted to zero in real quickly on the Sunday operations. So observing sort of all of the line items on the chart, this is the one that gives me the greatest pause because it almost feels like we're squeezing. Basically, we're incurring.. Again, I just want to say I appreciate staff. I know we've had a back and forth on this on the last couple of days, so I just thank you for indulging me in all the questions because I'm really trying to understand where are the biggest bangs for our buck in terms of doing this work. And clearly, the bottom two line items.. Actually, the bottom four line items are the most straight ahead. We're not incurring any additional costs. We're either saving money or we're generating new revenue. I will say of the top three line items, the Sunday operations feels like, well, I'm not really sure if the juice is worth the squeeze. Right? I mean, we've heard a lot of people who have concerns, and I share concerns about it's nice to have a day, a week where we're not worrying about paying for parking. I mean, again, that's not the biggest problem in the world, but it is a nice benefit. It's nice to be able to go downtown or go to other businesses and go to Sol's or do whatever you do on Sundays and not have to worry about paying the meter. I'll also just observe that it's costing us $1.3 million to generate $1.4 million in revenue, which is, again, a very modest return for the infrastructure and the added operational costs relative to extending hours to eight or expanding the zones to places where the parking meter should be expanded. So, do you give any thoughts, kind of back to the team, I mean, any thought about why the cost for the Sunday operations, you know, runs relatively high relative to those other options and why the margin is so small on the Sunday piece? In the chart in the staff report, there's some one-time costs that are listed in here. Yeah. And so, after year one in this projection changes. So, there's currently in this report $363,000 to outfit parking enforcement vehicles with license plate reader technology. And so, that would come off afterwards. And then, right now, we're also loading in quite a bit of the parking enforcement into Sunday. And the reality is item 1A, 1B, and 1C all consume a bit of that additional parking enforcement cost. Got it. Okay. Well, I'll come back to this in deliberations. Because, again, I appreciate the thrust of all this. That's the one I think of all the things on here that I'm the most reticent about. It feels like that's not a clear slam dunk easy win. And so, I want to come back to that in deliberations. But I appreciate all the time and effort in pulling all this together and just getting into a better position where we will be more solvent and the parking funds will be more sustainable for the long term. So, thank you for doing all this work. And that's it. Thank you. Council Member Humbert. Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I want to thank Mr. Schwimmer, Mr. Helmbrecht, and Director Amiri for all your hard work on this. And thank you, Mr. Schwimmer, for your presentation. I also want to talk about Sunday. I really just have questions about the Sunday enforcement. And I appreciated Mr. Helmbrecht's answer that in the first year there may be a $132,000 upside. But in subsequent years it should be more significant than that, right? Is there any estimate of how that might go up? I mean, I suppose it's fairly easy math, right? In terms of what's in the report, we loaded all of the costs of outfitting the enforcement vehicles in this line item. And so, it'll go up by $363,000 at a minimum. So, that's fairly significant. And it's also the case, is it not, that on Sunday, I mean, I have to say people store their cars in areas where meters are not operational. And that can affect turnover in terms of, you know, accessibility for people who are shopping on Sunday. And Sunday is a big shopping day these days. Maybe it wasn't a century ago when all the shops were shut, but it is now. So, I mean, that's the other factor really to consider, and I think you have considered it, is turnover, making parking available and not just allowing people to store their cars and cause shoppers, for example, to have to park blocks and blocks and blocks away. Is that right? That's kind of a leading question, but. Yeah, no, that's exactly right. Yeah, okay. Yeah, those are my questions. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Lunaparra. Thank you. And thank you so much for the presentation. Can you go back to the RPP slide? I'm curious if you have any information on nearby jurisdictions or comparable jurisdictions and their RPP costs, how much they charge for RPP. Yeah, they're comparable. I don't have that information in front of me, but we can get it over to you. Okay. Thank you. Local cities are very comparable, and obviously San Francisco is much higher. Do you know how much San Francisco would be approximately? To be quite honest, I'm trying to recall from memory, but it was quite a bit, like double, if I recall correctly. But again, to Elliot's point, just the surrounding, it's comparable. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Taplin. Thank you very much. I just have one question. I'm wondering what other jurisdictions also have Sunday parking? Yeah. Yeah, we know it's in the presentation. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So Oakland began operating parking meters on Sundays in January. Sacramento, LA, Seattle, Washington, DC, Chicago operate until 8 p.m. or later. And then at Walnut Creek, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Monterey, they all operate on Sundays. Some of them might have different operations for Oakland. I think they started later in the day, so ours is a little bit different as far as operating hours, but the day is consistent. Yeah, thank you. Thank you very much for that. Yeah, so it's not like a completely novel concept. Appreciate it. All right, any other questions? Okay. My one question was actually about, since we are removing the ability for people to use coins.
Segment 7
and DoorDash a lot more. And then charging us for using a card when we have to use a card and we can't use coins anymore. It's just everything with this is just totally wrong. I'm sorry that Public Works has pushed into trying and charged with making parking a profit center for the city, but I just think this is totally the wrong direction and you all need to reconsider here what you're doing and just push this off for another day. So that's all I have to say. Thanks, Kelly. Next is Della Luna. Yes, I would like to follow up that speaker. I like that. Push this off for another day. This one doesn't seem like the right time. Costs are going up for people everywhere. So why just like hammering a couple nails? And a Sunday should be free and people should definitely be able to go to church for free. So the later starting time at Oakland has makes sense. But I'm trying to imagine people in church trying to go out to pay their meter so they don't get a ticket. Also, the fees that the staff showed, it doesn't show the tears of those fees. Like sure, it's $49, but that's for I think 21 days. And then it goes up quite significantly. And so I don't think that you all really got to see the like full impact of all of those fees in their tears. And so if someone couldn't pay a $60 ticket, then it goes to like $128 or $229. It's really astronomical the way it rises. But overall, I wanted to first speak about Sundays, but overall I don't think that this should pass. Sunday is kind of like a more relaxed day where people would go downtown or go hang out and go to shops and kind of meander rather than being on a mission or running errands downtown. And so taking that away, again, I think it would harm the restaurants like another person spoke about. But I do feel like you're putting, you're not, the impact that this would have on the business districts would be negative. So the overall net, I think, is not positive for Berkeley. And just think about Sundays, seeing that really only tying to like $100,000 revenue, it really didn't lift my spirits as in, yay, we got this, that this is like a plan. But also I feel like we have to not only just generate revenue, but make sure we're spending the money appropriately that we do have the funds. So I think there's other ways. It seems like you just want to gouge constituents, like how much you call it revenue, but you're just taking money out of our paychecks just to exist, just to go to the market or just to go downtown. And we have to pay just to exist in the city. And I feel like you should find other ways to generate. Thank you, Della. That's it. That's the last speaker. Okay, thank you very much. Comments from my council colleagues, starting with Council Member Bartlett. Thank you, I'm gonna say like pretty much the exact opposite of all that. But I first wanna, can you clarify how long we're on hook for the parking garage? 2046. 2046, so that's not gonna go away. We're talking about public space being used for car storage. Just because there are not currently fees does not mean that parking is free. The city pays to maintain it. People who don't drive pay to maintain this parking. And for the people saying we should put this off another day, putting things off for other days is how we got here with the deficit in this fund, the deficit in the marina fund, the deficit in the general fund. And this isn't a business. It is a fund that is supported by revenue collected in the associated use of this operation. And it makes no sense to operate a deficit. It makes even less sense to willfully operate a deficit. And I get that it's hard to do new things and people want everything to be free and people don't want to pay for parking and they might get upset. But some of the choices we have to make are difficult and they are necessary. And if we don't make those choices today, the choices we will make tomorrow will be even more difficult. So I will be supporting this and I will make a motion to adopt this African Foundation. I'll second that motion. Thank you, Council. Yeah, Council Member Humbert. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And first I want to associate myself 100% with the comments made by Council Member Taplin. He hit the nail on the head. Consistent with what I said before, I understand that people feel nickel and dime by things like additional metered parking days and longer hours to pay at parking meters. But at the same time, we're talking about using 200 square feet of public space to store a private vehicle. That should carry a cost for the reasons that Council Member Taplin articulated, especially during high demand times. Free Sunday parking is a long outdated holdover from a time when most businesses were closed on Sundays. We have blue laws. People were more likely to be at home or at worship. Sunday is now a very busy day for most commercial districts, so it makes sense to charge for parking. In fact, my experience in downtown and in the commercial districts is folks from the surrounding residential neighborhoods park their cars and store them all day Sunday, and that displaces potential shoppers. Arguably, and I think this is probably correct, if we move those cars around and make parking available, the merchants on Sundays will likely do better. I also want to point out that the answer to the question, my leading question during the question period, that the $100,000 delta for Sunday, the $100,000 essentially, they're not profits, but positive fund inflows, that's only the first year. After that, it's $300,000 plus, so that's very significant. That's not chicken feed. Parking availability and turnover are important for reducing circling, congestion, carbon burning of automobiles, and making it easier for people to quickly find parking and all-day parking that also contributes to double parking for pickups and deliveries. That's another problem. I understand that businesses are concerned that paying for parking may dissuade people from visiting on Sundays, but if we look at Emeryville, which has paid parking in a garage, which is decidedly less convenient than street parking, it seems people are relatively willing to pay for parking, especially if finding a spot is relatively easy, and charging for street parking the way we do it helps ensure spots are available on any given block. Overall, I'm supportive of the Sunday parking component. I also want to address the higher RPP fees. People may balk at higher RPP fees, especially if on a percentage basis we're looking at something like a 50% to 100% increase, but again, we're talking about being able to privately use 200 square feet of our public roadways. Our roadways belong to everyone and could instead be used for green stormwater infrastructure, bike lanes, or just even expanded sidewalks for pedestrians. In what other situations can you essentially get 200 square feet of private storage space for the equivalent of $10 to $13 per month? For perspective, 150 feet of private self-storage space on San Pablo Avenue currently costs $418 a month. Granted, those are enclosed storage spaces, but even if we raise RPP to $150 a year, that would still be something like a 98% discount on what an equivalent amount of private storage space goes for, and many buildings in Berkeley charge hundreds of dollars a month for private parking. Even at these higher rates, RPP remains a really kind of amazing bargain. So for all these reasons, I plan to support this item. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Kassarwani. Thank you very much, Madam Mayor. Thank you for this presentation. You know, this has been a long time coming. I think, Elliot, you were maybe here. Was it 2019? Oh, you were not here. Okay, I apologize. Well, I was here when we were trying to increase these fees earlier in my first term on Council. I believe it was 2019, and we were not able to do so, and I think there are costs associated with that, right? We are underfunding our enforcement, for one. We have areas of our city where your report tells us we have high demand. People are circling. People are unable to get a parking space where they feel that they need to be. Maybe it's close to a business, and so I think we need to properly manage our streets, and I want to remind all of us, I think some of us have already said this, the streets, that's the public right-of-way. That's a public good, and so when we give it away for free, sometimes that's appropriate because the demand isn't there, but what you're proposing here is to charge a fair, reasonable fee to encourage turnover so that we can have more customers come to these businesses and encourage people to move on and have less circling, so I think it's better for the environment. It's better for our management of the public right-of-way, which is a public good, and I'm going to say something that some people may disagree with. You do not own the street space in front of your home. That's not yours. That is the public right-of-way, and you don't own the street space in front of your business. That belongs to everybody who's trying to move around our city, and I know this council has a commitment to enable everyone in our city to move around safely as well, so I think this is a really important thing. It's a long time coming. I also want to talk about RPP. I think I was the one who did that referral to ask for the graduated fee increases for RPP because in my district, we hear stories of people owning multiple, multiple cars, like seven vehicles that they are parking on the public right-of-way, the public good, so if people want to choose to do that, that is their.
Segment 8
Yes, the demand area, so I really would like to roll this out in a gentle way. I also would like for us, and this obviously does not, it can't happen now, but I would like to have a discussion in the future to assess our fine schedule for severity. Double parking and parking along red curbs should be assessed, the fine for that should be assessed at a level that is significantly higher than simply overstaying a meter by a few minutes. And as Director Amiri knows, because he and his team joined us for an inspection of an intersection along with Council Member O'Keefe a few days ago, and we heard from residents that parking on red curbs happens. It happens in my district, it probably happens in every district. Double parking happens frequently and it is not getting enforced. So I actually also support this because the enforcement I think will go up across the board. I would like to make sure that we continue to think about wayfinding and signage. The center street and Alston garages are far short of their capacity, including at peak hours. That needs to change. I think we can change it if we continue to educate the public about their existence. And I know it's challenging to keep the costs below the cost of street parking, looking at our six to seven fund balance, but I think we need to really just take a deeper dive on that. Lastly, I would like to, this is not part of the motion, but I would like to encourage staff to do very targeted engagement with the business community, particularly business associations where these changes are being proposed, as well as the chamber and visit Berkeley across all districts. And then I would love to see if there is a way to schedule a one year review, so probably at the end of FY27, to see how implementation is going and any lessons we can glean from it. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Blackaby. Great, thank you, Madam Mayor, and thanks again to staff for all the work on this proposal. I'll say I support the vast majority of what is here. I think, again, making the parking funds more solvent, we know is critical. Getting ourselves on firmer financial footing is critical. Making sure that we're getting circulation we need in our key commercial corridors, that's all critical. Helping us reduce the amount of cruising around that has an impact on emissions. I will say I'm just not comfortable that I'm comfortable ready to move forward on Sunday. I'll just note that Oakland's proposal on Sunday is 12 to 6, it's not 9 to 8. I'd be supportive of something that is potentially more limited in scope or looking at particular neighborhoods, but not all neighborhoods in terms of the meters. I just think we could say this more. I'm just not convinced that the economic benefit is there relative to everything else that's in here. I mean, if you look at the...I'll also say that extending parking meters from 6 to 8 on days when we're already enforcing the meters until 6 is not as heavy a lift. I mean, that's not as big an expectation change, I think, for people. Adding meters in areas that are new and emerging commercial areas, not a surprise, and we should do that. All of the RPP fees, updating the schedule, parking violations, all these things make complete sense to me. I just think that on Sunday we should apply a scalpel as opposed to a hatchet here and study that more. And frankly, I think we could study this more and I'm just not convinced that the economic benefit is there relative to everything else that's in here. And let everything run and have a much better understanding of how much economic activity, how much revenue that we're generating from all of the other things before we sort of look at, again, what to do with Sunday. So the numbers to me just don't quite add up in the same way that the others do. Maybe if we had more time to sort of understand and dig into the economics a little more, I could support it, but I'm sort of not at that position right now. So I think I'll offer an amendment to the main motion to, again, accept the main motion but strike 1B, which is the Sunday parking for now, and give us more time to study it and deliberate before we decide to move forward with that piece of it. You're offering a friendly amendment? Not a friendly amendment. I'm just making an amendment to the main motion. Yeah, let's see, first of all, if there's a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Can we take the roll on that, please? Close the public hearing. Council Member Kesarwani? Yes. Taplin? Yes. Bartlett? Yes. Tregub? Aye. O'Keefe? Yes. Blackaby? Yes. Munipara? Yes. Humbert? Yes. And Mayor Ishii? Yes. Okay, public hearing is closed. Thank you. A bunch of lights just popped up. So I'm going to go first with Council Member Taplin. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So since I made the motion during the public hearing, should I remake the motion now? I move that we adopt the staff recommendation. And I second that. Thank you. And I did want to, I think, you know, for the Sunday thing, it's going to have one-time costs. So that's like doing it later, wouldn't change that. And part of what we're doing is getting data through the survey or through the engagement to assess further expansion. So I don't see why we wouldn't be able to assess the impact of the Sunday charging, why we would not be able to do that as part of what's already recommended. But it wouldn't make sense to me to delay Sundays just to like have more years of the deficit growing, to then have the same upfront one-time costs, to then have to collect data we could have collected at the onset of adopting it. All right. So. Well, thank you. Council Member Leno Parra. I agree with what Council Member Taplin said and Council Member Kisilwani and others. And I just wanted to point out that I think we're talking about how this is going to affect people driving on Sundays and how this isn't fair for people driving. And that really makes no sense to me, especially because when we're talking about the most economically disadvantaged members of our community, they don't drive. Most of the time they take public transportation, which isn't free on Sundays. So I just wanted to point that out as another reason why I think this is a no brainer. Thanks. Thank you. And so just going back to what you were saying, Council Member Blackaby, so you were proposing an amendment. Do you want to? Amendment to the main motion to, again, accept staff recommendation, accept strike 1B on the Sunday component. So I will not accept that. I'm not offering as a friendly amendment. I'm just saying I want to make an amendment to the main motion that we vote on first and then back to the motion. Council Member Blackaby is making a motion to amend the main motion. I see. Is there a second? Council Member, yeah. So I was like, what is he? Okay, so Council Member Bartlett is seconding. So let's just take a vote on that. Okay, so that's amending the main motion to remove which part of the motion? 1B, 1B, just the 1B, please. Okay, so the motion is to whether or not to amend the main motion to remove 1B from the staff recommendation. Council Member Kisilwani? No. Taplin? No. Bartlett? Yes. Tregub? Abstain. O'Keefe? No. Blackaby? Yes. Munipara? No. Humbert? No. And Mayor Ishii? No. Okay, motion fails. Okay. The main motion is not amended. Okay. Oh, yes, Council Member Munipara? Thank you. Sorry, I forgot to mention that I also think that the RPP costs should be higher, especially in future years. I was looking up Oakland's and it's around 160. Just an idea. And I think San Francisco is about 215 annually. Thank you. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Council Member O'Keefe? Yeah, I just want to piggyback on that. I think that the second and third ones should be way expensive. I think that was smart to change it a little bit, although I think the difference that you're proposing is pretty minimal. But I think that one should be pretty accessible. But yeah, more is a luxury good. And actually, while I have the floor, I just want to make another comment I forgot to make before. I just really wanted to thank staff for identifying Hopkins area for new meters. I was actually planning to ask for that before I realized you had already done it. So I think that is a really important needed improvement for that area. So I just want to say thank you for that. And I'm happy to be supporting that small aspect of this as well. Thank you. Vice Mayor Tregub? Thank you. So I just wanted, I did it before, but I wanted to once again echo my gratitude to staff. This is a very well calibrated, I mean, it's well thought out. Everything is well thought out. We may agree or disagree with the numbers, and these are projections, but I absolutely understand the decisions that were made based on the conclusions you reached. And so with that said, while I am, I'm going to be supporting the main motion, I'm not loath to propose any changes to it right now. As part of what will hopefully be a one year review of the program, I would like for us to look at a more highly graduated fee schedule for RPP, as well as increases to the fine schedule for things I already outlined that to me and I think to most people are a bigger deal than overstaying a parking meter, such as parking on a red.
Segment 9
Thank you everyone for your patience. I want to make an announcement and say that item number 28, I don't believe we'll have time for it this evening because there's a significant presentation involved and I'm sure folks will have a lot of questions. So we will be moving that one to the meeting on the 16th. And we are moving on right now to item number 25, which is the zero waste plan checks and compliance inspections fees. And that was also continued from May 19, 2026. So also apologies to you all and your team for not being able to hear that item at the previous meeting and you having to come back tonight. So thank you very much for being here. Mayor, why don't we make a motion to move item 28 because it's a public hearing. Yeah, just quick. Yes, thank you. I would like to entertain a motion to move item number 28 to the meeting on the 16th. So moved. Second. Thank you very much. Can you take the role on that? Okay. Council Member Kesarwani. Yes. Taplin. Bartlett. Yes. Trago. Aye. O'Keefe. Yes. Blackaby. Yes. Luna Parra. Yes. Humbert. Yes. And Mary Ishii. Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you. All right, I'll pass it over to you. Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. Waheeda Mary again, Interim Director of Public Works. Tonight we're presenting the proposed zero waste fee updates for Council's consideration. These fees are intended to better align cost recovery with the staff time and resources needed to review, inspect and support compliance for zero waste related requirements, including plan reviews, construction and demolition compliance, special events and related programs. I'll have staff introduce themselves and then Leticia will jump into the PowerPoint presentation and we'll be happy to answer any questions from there. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Leticia Jauregui, Solid Waste and Recycling. A little closer. Yeah, thank you. Solid Waste and Recycling Division Manager for Public Works Zero Waste Division. Tonight we are presenting a proposed cost recovery fee for zero waste plan checks and compliance inspection services that are already being performed by staff in support of state mandates and local ordinances. The purpose of this item is to establish a more sustainable funding mechanism for the existing services while continuing to support local businesses and Berkeley's environmental and climate action goals. And hi, I'm Johnny DeLara. I'm the senior field representative for the zero waste division. So I do conduct some of these inspections and plan checks. So I'm here for support. In this brief presentation, we will cover our staff recommendations, the proposed fee revenue table and fiscal impact assessments. Staff recommends adopting a cost recovery fee for existing zero waste compliance activities. These activities include construction and demolition recycling reviews, trash room and space allocation reviews, special event, waste reduction plans, foodware ordinance inspections, and SB 1383 food recovery compliance activities. These are all existing support services currently being provided by staff. The bottom line is that staff currently performs a significant amount of technical review and compliance related work without a dedicated cost recovery mechanism. In 2025 alone, staff estimates spending over 3,000 hours conducting plan checks and inspections with annual costs exceeding approximately 400,000. Current plan checks and compliance inspection costs increasingly impacts a declining zero waste enterprise fund. Without a dedicated cost recovery mechanism, these costs continue to be absorbed within the zero waste enterprise fund, increasing fiscal pressure over time. Staff is recommending a flat $250 fee per activity to support partial cost recovery for these existing services. Our funding gap, the projective deficit without action is $419,000 combined for zero waste plan and inspections. These are specialized one-time technical review services that support construction projects, special events, food recovery programs, and the implementation of local ordinances. These services are separate from direct refuse collection services funded through existing rates. Without a dedicated cost recovery mechanism, these costs will continue to be absorbed within the zero waste enterprise fund, increasing ongoing fiscal pressure on the fund over time. The proposed fee amount is based on an average of approximate two hours of staff time required for review, coordination, inspection, documentation, and follow-up. The objective is to establish a reasonable cost recovery mechanism for specialized services already being performed by staff. This chart details the increase in growth of compliance checks and planned reviews from fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2025. The number of plan checks and inspections is growing steadily over a year, with no fee implementation or cost recovery mechanism in place. Our fiscal impact assessment is an estimated annual revenue of $419,000 per year. The purpose of this recommendation is straightforward, to establish a recovery mechanism for these specialized services. It's based on 2025 activity levels. The proposed fee structure is estimated to generate approximately $419 annually. The proposed fee would support direct cost recovery and help offset operational and staff costs currently absorbed by the Zero Waste Enterprise Fund, while supporting the city's continued implementation of required state unfunded mandated programs. Staff is recommending implementation effective July 1, 2026, with fees incorporated into existing permit review and compliance service processes. I'll turn it over to our interim director. So before we jump into the staff recommendation slide, I do want to go on the record indicating that staff will be adding the following language to Exhibit A of the resolution adopting the Zero Waste Plan Check and Compliance Inspection Schedule. The language that is being added to Exhibit A is as follows. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this fee schedule, fees associated with solar permit applications shall be applied in a manner consistent with Government Code 66015. Where applicable, the Zero Waste Plan Review and Compliance Inspections shall be adjusted, reduced, or waived as necessary to ensure that total permit-related fees do not exceed the maximum amounts permitted by state law. With that said and recorded, we'll move forward to staff recommendations. So tonight, staff has provided feedback, presentation data to support. We're asking Council tonight to support adopting the resolution establishing Zero Waste Plan Check and Compliance Inspection Fees, and also authorize public works to implement fee collections effective July 1, 2026. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all so much. Does anyone have any questions? Yes, Vice Mayor Tregob. Thank you so much. Yeah, I had more, but I'm going to focus on, I think, three questions. One, that just the statement you read, that is a government code section that is a photovoltaic system fee cap. What is the relationship between this cap and zero waste collection fees? So the relationship may be that there might be an overlap. I'll give you an example. If someone pulls a roofing permit and that activity generates waste that needs to be either recycled or disposed, but that roofing permit is tied into a solar permit, then that's where there's an overlap, and we need to make sure that we stay within the cap as we adjoin our fees to this code. Got it. Thank you for clarifying that. The report mentioned that certain inspection responsibilities appear to have shifted to public works due to staffing shortages. Do you anticipate this being a permanent change? Yes. And if these fees are adopted, are there any additional compliance, education, or technical assistance efforts that staff would like to pursue in the future? At this time, there are other compliance inspections, but those are covered under our regular rates, under regular scheduled collection services for our resident community and our business community. These fees are for a small group of general contractors, architects. These are for ancillary services, things that are typically we're not able to recover the cost because they're not covered under the regular scheduled service rates. Thank you very much. Thank you. Other questions from my council colleagues? Council Member Blackbee. Thanks. Real quick, question to the City Manager. Have we ever had to deploy kind of general fund transfers to the Zero Waste Enterprise Fund to kind of make the fund solvent, cover these negative balances? Has that happened in the past? No, it hasn't, Council Member. Without this, is there a chance that as the fund kind of diminishes, we might have to consider that in the future if we didn't pass something like this? Yes, that's one of the things we really want to prevent from happening, is any kind of a general fund transfer, as we're already struggling with the budget and other general fund transfers, so yes. Okay, thank you. That's it. Thank you. Other questions? Is there any public comment on this item? Item number 25, which is the Zero Waste Plan Checks and Compliance Inspection Fees? It's, as I mentioned in the previous comment, we really do have to look at 1343 and starting to enforce it, providing warnings and then fines for noncompliance, and that goes with not only businesses but also apartment buildings. We need revenue right now to save our essential services. We have to do this. Nobody likes paying more money in an uncomfortable time such as we're in right now, but it's just the reality. We have to do these things. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment on this item online? There's one hand raised, caller with a phone number ending in 211. Caller with a phone number ending in 211, this is for item 25, Zero Waste Plan Checks and Compliance Inspection Fees. All right, well, okay. I guess not. We'll continue on. All right. Thank you very much. Are there any comments from my council colleagues, starting with Vice Mayor Treygob? Yeah, I will move the staff recommendation as amended, and I would just, I hope that this increase will bring the fund balance to cost neutral, but it is exactly cost neutral, and so I just wanted to, if expenses continue to outpace revenue, even with this fee collection, I would be interested in this coming back to us at the end of next fiscal year. Thank you. Second. Council Member Treygob's speaking motion. Vice Mayor Treygob's speaking motion. And we need a motion to close the public.
Segment 10
So this slide shows examples of exterior elevated elements. It includes weather-exposed wood and metal decks, walkways, balconies, stairway systems, guardrails, and handrails. Berkeley's inspection requirements are managed under the city's Exterior Elevated Elements Program, or E3 program for short, and these inspections must be performed by licensed or certified professionals. So the appellant's property at 1615 Fairview Street is a four-unit building with existing exterior elevated elements. In 2016, Mr. Merowitz first submitted an E3 exemption declaration form that declared under penalty of perjury that his property did not have exterior elevated elements. Later that same year, he submitted a certification form verifying that his property did in fact have exterior elevated elements. In 2021, the next E3 program cycle, Mr. Merowitz again submitted an exemption declaration form stating that his property did not have exterior elevated elements and that his building had fewer than three dwelling units. In September of 2025, staff issued a notice of violation and a warning of administrative citation. Mr. Merowitz then claimed exemption from inspection requirements and requested a formal determination. In October of 2025, the building official issued a determination stating that the property was not exempt from E3 inspection requirements. Mr. Merowitz then appealed the determination to the Housing Advisory Commission, and on January 15, 2026, the HACC denied Mr. Merowitz's appeal and affirmed the building official's determination. So for the sake of brevity, I have summarized duplicative points from the appeal, and they've been combined in five different issues. So the first issue that was raised by the appellant is the assertion that the Rental Housing Safety Program provides annual inspections for exterior elevated elements and that there are provisions for self-certification and exemptions for vacant and owner-occupied units. Staff's response is that the Rental Housing Safety Program and the E3 Inspection Program are two distinct programs that are mandated under separate legislation. Any exemptions that are applicable to RHSP are not relevant to the E3 Inspection Program, and per state law, E3 inspections cannot be performed by city employees. The Rental Housing Safety Program ordinance requires inspection of rental units, meaning units that are either rented or are available to rent. Therefore, if a unit is owner-occupied, it may qualify for an exemption under the RHSP program. In contrast, state and local laws mandating E3 inspection requirements require that all buildings containing three or more dwelling units with existing exterior elevated elements are to be inspected on a cyclical basis, regardless of whether the building or any of the units are owner-occupied or vacant. The next issue that the appellant raised is that existing provisions and pro- oh, sorry. Yikes. My apologies. The next- I apologize, I'm nervous. The appellant asserts that the building department and planning department were the creators of the balcony collapse, and that the balcony collapse was due to too much weight and too many people. So staff's response is that the balcony at 2020 Kittredge failed due to severe dry rot and water damage. This was determined through multiple investigations by subject matter experts, including city staff, third-party licensed professionals, and independent investigations by the California State Licensing Board. This determination was also confirmed by the district attorney's findings. The design of the balcony that failed was also found to have been compliant with the building code at the time it was constructed. And regardless of the details that led to the tragedy or that precipitated adoption of the legislation that mandates the E3 inspection requirements, the building and safety division is responsible for enforcing local and state codes, and staff have properly applied E3 inspection requirements in the case of 1615 Fairview Street. The appellant has also asserted that the- or has questioned the application of the hardship exemption for low-income property owners who cannot afford the appeal fee and asserts that the building official imposed a $1,000 fee. Staff's response is that the laws governing E3 inspection requirements do not provide an exception for low-income property owners. And to clarify- Thank you. So this would be the fourth issue. My apologies. So the hardship exemption for low-income property owners, the laws that govern the E3 inspection requirements do not provide an exception for low-income property owners. And the $1,000 fee that was actually addressed here was for the HACS appeal fee, and there's not an additional fee that was assessed for this council appeal. And the final issue raised here is the appellant questions the impartiality of staff and prior hearing bodies. Staff's response is that E3 inspection requirements universally apply to all buildings with three or more dwelling units that contain exterior elevated elements. Staff have correctly identified and applied E3 inspection requirements for 1615 Fairview Street. Staff recommends that council deny the appeal and affirm the building official's determination that 1615 Fairview Street is not in compliance with the city's E3 inspection program and to uphold the associated fees consistent with council-adopted policy and state law. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes the staff presentation. Got it. Okay. Thank you. We will let me go look at the script. We will now hear from Mr. Malowitz, the appellant. Oh, first, are there any questions for staff? Okay. I'm going to yield back to the mayor. Sorry. So I actually need to recuse myself. I just realized that this house, I think, is too close to my house. So, and I didn't realize because it's on a different street, but just geographically. So I'm going to give the process over to you, Vice Mayor, and then you will have to lead it. So I'm going to send it to you right now. I think I have it pulled up. You have it? Yes. Okay, great. All right. Thank you. Okay. We will now hear from the appellant. Appellant, you have up to seven minutes to speak. Justice can't be served in seven minutes. I'm just putting that out front. You all are intelligent people. One attorney, as far as I know. So you're not going to have a great grasp of what I'm about to introduce. And I wanted to introduce it first because I may run out of time rather than what I really want to focus on. I'm going to read this, and I don't know. I submitted this to you guys today. So you might not have had an opportunity. So I'm just, it's my oral arguments. So I'm just going to read verbatim. And if you, the one you have in your mailbox, you can keep as a record to refer back to. Would you mind pulling the mic a little closer to you? Thank you. This Tripoli is based on several fronts. I have and continue to call into question actual virtual certainty that every aspect of this appeal by Housing Advisory Commission, building officials, city attorney's office, and subsequently the city mayor are without required fairness and impartiality as required by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The creation of the Tripoli mandate violates the U.S. Constitution. This is true and accurate for not only the local ordinance for Tripoli, but also the California State Bill 721. I introduced this first rather than later to prevent my time allotment of seven minutes from running out. These balcony laws violate the Fourth Amendment against unwarranted searches of a property, especially the property's curtilage. The Fifth Amendment and the property's owner's right to exclude government is violation and protected civil right as well. And the 14th Amendment for complete disregard of due process, including fair and impartial due process by a fair and impartial trier of fact, is also a violation. As such, the Tripoli mandate is illegal and unenforceable on its face. An interesting and illuminating factual reality of lawmaking is that there's no mandated requirement that any proposed law must first assure and guarantee that before being enacted, any such law must not be in conflict with the U.S. Constitution and must not deprive the citizens civil rights. Gee, I wonder why it is that there isn't a legal requirement mandating that? Where is the accountability of our legislators, city staff, and the government when there's no requirement of constitutional affirmation? Interesting, each of these entities have immunity from accountability, be it qualified, municipal, or legislative immunity. But conversely, full and strict accountability is required from the citizens and the taxpayers. There's nothing but hypocrisy in our systems. Then there is the issue of city staff's changing the rules of the appeal as set forth in the HAC appeals in Chapter 19.90. The city changed the rules twice in their relentless effort to gang up strategies. In fact, I recently discovered that in reference to the HAC hearing and its video of that hearing, city staff is allowed to transcribe the video, eliminating anything that city staff wants eliminated as determined by the city, of course. For instance, at the very beginning of my hearing with the HAC, I asked point blank, can you all be fair and impartial as a trier of fact? Not one, not even one of the HAC responded to that immediate question. Isn't that curious? As you might expect, these specific exchanges were eliminated by city staff. Justice, with such unlimited discretion by city staff as legislatively provided by city council, city staff can manipulate the facts and the omission of the facts any way they see fit to win no matter what the truth might be. This is not fair or an impartial, it is injustice. When, if ever, will city council hold city staff strictly accountable as the city holds the citizens voters taxpayers strictly accountable based on the historical track record? Never. They then consult with the city attorney and the building official designates to formulate the HAC decision. That's in my prior documents. So there's a threefold, one dating back to February, one dated back a few weeks ago, and this one. And I included exhibits, etc. So the question is, do you guys want to even question the constitutionality of Tripoli? It violates both the 4th, the 5th, and the 14th amendment.
Segment 11
And your effort to embrace the law, but I would encourage you to take that same passion and embrace the safety of your tenants. Because just as you're my constituent, so are they. I have no tenants. I refuse to be a landlord anymore. Thank you. Show me the building. I'll take it over. There will be no crosstalk. Please continue, Council Member. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So with that being said, again, I understand these are tough things to deal with, but they are necessary. And I encourage you to re-enter the business of providing shelter for people because we need it. Okay, now. Can I speak? No, I'm addressing you. But anyway, so listen, with that, I'm going to move to adopt the staff recommendation because there just is not a basis to deny the findings. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any further comments? Okay. I will make a brief comment because this is an issue near and dear to my heart. The tragic, terrible accident that led to six people losing their lives in the prime of their lives happened in my district. Last year, I had a chance to absorb that tragic event with a delegation from Ireland, including some of the parents. And when I looked in their eyes, I was able to tell them that I will never imagine what they have to go through and are still going through. But one thing that I can promise is that on our watch, we will do everything possible to ensure that there will be no such tragedies ever again. I followed the E3 ordinance closely while I served on the Housing Advisory Commission. And I was grateful for the city's prompt response to that tragedy. And in fact, the city's prompt response and the E3 ordinance became a model for what later became state law. I think the city's police powers and the state's are very clear on this matter. We do have the power to regulate E3. And I will be supporting this motion. If there are no other comments, Clerk, would you please call the roll? Okay. To affirm the decision of the Housing Advisory Commission, deny the appeal, and uphold the associated fees on the motion, Council Member Kesarwani? Yes. Taplin? Aye. Bartlett? Yes. Tregub? Aye. O'Keefe? Yes. Blackaby? Yes. Lunapara? Yes. Humbert? Yes. And Mary Ishii is recused and the motion carries. Thank you very much. We're going to briefly recess for the Mayor to return. Do you need to take a recess? No. Okay. All right. Well, we will continue then. Okay. Thank you very much, Vice Mayor, for handling that. And apologies, folks, for not realizing earlier. All right. So we are moving on, excuse me, to item number 27, discussion about the desired qualifications for the next Director of Police Accountability. So for those of you that don't know, or actually, I feel like everyone here knows, but just so folks know, we have hired WBCP, Inc., which is a recruiter, and they are helping us to recruit for the Director of Police Accountability position. So far, they have had conversations with community members. We actually have a survey that's out. And this is our opportunity as council members to let this recruiter know about the qualifications that we would like to see in our new Director of Police Accountability. So this is a really exciting opportunity. And one thing I did just want to say before, I'm going to pass it over to Lauren, who is on the line. Lauren's been doing a great job. Thank you very much, Lauren. And Lauren, actually, if you could raise your hand as well so that our city clerk can find you. What I'd like to focus this conversation on is like aspirational, what is it that we want, as opposed to what is it that we don't want. I think that that will be a helpful framing for us as we're having this conversation. So I think hopefully, Lauren is.. Okay. And I will let Lauren help us walk through this process. Ah, there she is. I see you, Lauren. Thank you so much for being here. Absolutely. Thank you, Mayor Ishii. And council members, thank you very much for the opportunity to join you. I'm sorry that I'm not able to be there in person. I do look forward to meeting you all in person when I'm there for interviews. But I thank you, Mayor Ishii, for the introduction. I know you've covered a lot of ground this evening. So I'm going to try to keep this concise. But as Mayor Ishii mentioned, I have been working with her and council members Lunaparra and Humbert to begin the recruitment for the Director of Police Accountability. And we're at this critical juncture in the recruitment process where we're taking a lot of feedback. And as the mayor mentioned, we did have a community meeting. We do have a survey running, which is still open for responses. So for anyone who is online or in the building listening, that survey will be open through at least tomorrow. And the information for the survey is posted on the new section of the city's website. So definitely still opportunities to participate and to provide community feedback. But I am excited to hear from you all on the council this evening about what you would like to see in candidates for this role. This is going to inform the ideal candidate profile that I'll use to pre-screen candidates, that the subcommittee will use to screen candidates, that will ultimately help us form interview questions and inform the process in a variety of ways. In your council, in your agenda packet was a few broad questions that I offered up for you to consider. The most central of which is what are the competencies interpersonally and technically you're looking for in candidates? But also what would you identify as challenges and opportunities for a candidate stepping into the role? And what would you identify as the most critical priorities for a new director stepping into this role in the next, I would say, like 12 to 18 months? Those would be things that it's important for me to understand. So Mayor Ishii, I am sure that you have a preferred organized way that you'd like to do this, but I would love to just hear from the council and I'll take avid notes and ask questions and would just love to hear your feedback. Thank you. I appreciate that, Lauren. First, I just want to check in with my council member colleagues to see if you all have any questions about this process or like what we're asking you to do today. Okay, very good. So Lauren, is it actually, is it possible to maybe put the questions up? Yes. I think that might be helpful. And then we can have the council members address those questions. It just will be easier, I think, if everyone can see them. Yes. Okay. Is my screen up? Yes. If you wouldn't mind making it a bit bigger, just doing it. Yeah, a few, a couple more. That's great. That's great. Thank you. Thank you so much. Okay, so council colleagues, if you can just press your buttons and I will have you each go through and answer these questions, I think that will be great. I imagine that as folks are speaking, you might have more ideas, so it's okay if we need to kind of come back around again. All right, I'm going to start us off with Council Member Taplin. Thank you very much. So I think going down the questions here, if my time can start, that would be great. Thank you. Yeah, I think for me, it's really important that the new director work with the commission and the department and the charter officers to implement the regulations. I think having familiarity with California sworn officer personnel and record access laws, as well as Berkeley local law enforcement policies is important. Having objectivity, I think a challenge sometimes might be when there is a complaint or potentially a policy that is not being complied with, sometimes there might be a tendency to assume an outcome, whether desired or undesired. And then when that occurs, that presents a barrier to when the results of an investigation or a course of action is otherwise from what one might assume might be the outcome. But we're focusing on what we do want and what we don't want. So someone who will be able to be objective and keep an open mind along throughout each step of the process there. And then my last one response to the final question. For me, having a collaborative approach to working within the city organization and alongside the companion components of the city, those being the PD and the charter offices. So like work in tandem instead of working against or just really leaning into the ability to leverage the close working relationships we have both inside the city and with the community. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Thank you. Okay, moving on to Council Member Humbert. Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. And since I serve on the ad hoc selection committee and had the opportunity to share thoughts at the recent community meeting, I'm going to be mainly listening to others. I appreciate Council Member Taplin's comments and I'll be listening to my other colleagues with great interest. I wanted to say thank you to Lauren and her organization for their work on the public outreach efforts and the recruitment materials. They're really good. And thank you to the mayor for placing this item on the agenda so that we could do this publicly as a full body. I know we're all very interested in finding a strong candidate who has the management skills, public safety and criminal justice expertise and overall right and collaborative attitude for our community. And I'm grateful for this opportunity to hear more from all of you. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on to Council Member O'Keefe. That was sooner than I expected. I'm not going to answer all four questions. And I think I'm expecting to broadly agree with a lot of comments people will make. So I'm just going to make two comments that I think other people.
Segment 12
many stakeholders to manage. I mentioned before the council, the department, BPA, the public, city staff, city manager, HR, all those things. So there you go. That's it. Thank you. Thank you so much for your very thoughtful answers to the questions. And yeah, I do want to encourage folks to say what you need to say because this is our opportunity to talk about it. And I want to make sure that the subcommittee and also Lauren, that we really have a good sense of what everyone wants to see. So don't feel rushed. Okay, go ahead. Council Member Bartlett. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And thank you for doing the hard work here, Mrs. Gerson Green, finding this person and then the committee as well. Thank you. So Berkeley, of course, you may or may not know this, but Berkeley is the home of police accountability. We're the first ever. And so we have a responsibility to do it right and to be a place of leadership for the country. So I mean, so going through your list here, I'm merging with my original notes. The priorities immediately. So we're restoring public trust in the office. Very important. Professionalize the sort of processes that were there. Repair relationships that have been ruptured over the last few years. And of course, bring further transparency and more diligent reporting. I'll just leave it at that. The biggest challenges and opportunities. So again, the challenge that trust in the office has been strained. Trust between the office and other parts of the city has been strained. Trust between the office and us have been strained. And trust between the community at large with all of us has been strained around this topic. So again, getting to that. Another challenge that this town is, of course, very active, very sophisticated politically. And expectations are very high. Another challenge is that this role is very, very complex. That sits at the intersection of law, labor laws, labor relations, politics, public safety, race, homelessness, mental health, and civil rights. All that in one role. And another one opportunity, let's get opportunities now. Again, this is a chance for someone to be a leader. This role in the right hands is a game changer for their lives. They can really do something big from this position. And opportunity to really deploy new methods of data, data gathering, new technologies. I think my colleague mentioned that. And opportunity to really take us to the next level and embrace the future of modern policing. So yeah, the competencies you need, you definitely need experience in civilian oversight. It's too hard to jump into this thing. You need investigative competence. So these are investigations. You know how to run an investigation. You need to understand all the police practices, the laws around policing, the laws around labor. And really those are the two strong ones. And also constitutional laws as well. And the nuances around constitutional protections as well. And there are sometimes limitations. You understand policy and systems. So municipal systems, you have to understand that. Data skills, again, and public reporting elements and communication powers. So you can communicate effectively the data you're gathering and the work you're doing and the changes that you are promoting and implementing. You need to work, learn to work with politicians. I mean, I'm not including myself, but these eight people and others, you have to work with them. And you need, I'll go with interpersonal. What's the next one? Interpersonal competencies, where are we here? Yes, yes, yes. So here, this is the most important one here. Because you need to, this person needs to operate in ambiguous or unstable environments with limited and often conflicting guidance and hostility. They have to be able to really be centered in that maelstrom and stay the course for this role. Very difficult. And they need to be diplomatic with their independence, with their mission directive as well. They need to be able to earn credibility across the divergent populations and divergent elements. Low ego leadership, you have to be able to work with a team. Even though you are the person, you still have a team. And the city itself is your team. The police are your team. We're your team. The city manager's your team. The city attorney's your team. This person has to really understand how to work with a team and quarterback it. And crisis communication, these scandals come up. Incredibly violent things happen. Heartbreaking things happen. They have to be able to communicate a crisis effectively to the community. And of course, this is the most important one. The only cultural competence and affluency in racial equity because that is the core of police oversight in America. Thank you. Thank you so much, Council Member. Thank you. Oh, Vice Mayor Tregub. Okay, thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm going to start with challenges and opportunities. And I think that acronym VUCA is fitting. That stands for volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity. And I think we at times, and especially someone in that role at times has to navigate all of these attributes. So that is both a challenge and an opportunity. There is a challenge and opportunity to navigate a highly dynamic landscape of emergent and existing strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with surveillance technologies and policies, as well as ever-changing regulations at the state level, such as a recent change in reporting requirements that Berkeley then had to look at how our own requirements fit within that framework. Another challenge and opportunity is that this would be a new director within a relatively new department working with a mostly new PAB. And then finally, it is a tight budget year for all of us and ODPA is not unique in that.. having to navigate that challenge. So there will be a need for this role to someone in that role to understand and set priorities. Speaking of priorities, to me, some of the critical priorities are to finalize regulations governing the PAB and ODPA. Working with the PAB to evaluate now what will be a contracting process for items related to the safety technology ordinance, as well as other tools and reporting requirements and cadences that are or may be under review in the future by the council. Of course, I already mentioned that this is a challenge, an opportunity, and a priority. They would need to work closely with the PAB, much of whom will be new. And a priority for me is for their ability to work collaboratively with various stakeholders, including but not limited to PAB, BPD, city manager, charter officers, mayor, and the council, as well as their respective reports. So that brings me to desired qualifications. So I come from an independent oversight role. That is something I did in the regulatory space, in the federal government. And likewise, I see this role as in part a role that dispenses independent oversight. And that means it's very important for whoever is in that role to be impartial, to get to the truth. And I think we know what that is not. So that is not playing gotcha or reflexively assuming the worst without getting data. But it's also not someone who goes along merely to get along. It is vital that someone in an independent oversight role maintains respect for everyone's roles, even when there is a professional difference of opinion. It is also someone who should have strong knowledge and understanding of all relevant regulations. Someone who seeks to listen to all perspectives. And yes, maintains a cultural competency as has been said. Develops a deep understanding of the issues and acts based on that understanding. An understanding of how different stakeholders operate and interact would be a plus. In addition to that, as mentioned, with the budget and other constraints and resources, they have to be a good program and project manager and should be able to set priorities. And what was done here, ideally they would have experience working in a jurisdiction with significant challenges that underwent meaningful improvement under the leadership. And finally, and this is probably the most important, is as has been stated by others, they need to have sound communication skills and they need to be strong in communicating with the public, both the entire public as well as broad swaths of the community that may disagree on certain things, as well as internally within their own department and cross-cutting to the city. That is all. Thank you so much. Thank you very much, Vice Mayor. We are moving on to Council Member Kesarwani. Thank you so much, Madam Mayor, and thank you for initiating this conversation with the full council. And thank you to the mayor and Council Member Humbert and Council Member Lunapata for being part of that, or being the group that is making more of these decisions for us, because this is such an important role that has been authorized by the voters of Berkeley to create this Office of, Department of Police Accountability. And so I'll just quickly run through these questions because I think everything I wanted to say has already been covered, but I just do want to share it from my perspective. So in terms of the first 12 to 18 months, I think it will be important to rebuild trust and visibility that this office has a new permanent director. And I think one good way to do that is to conduct listening sessions with the community and to make sure that the director does outreach to the diverse range of community members who interact with our police department. I also think that it would be useful to strengthen public reporting so that the public can track patterns and outcomes and the work that's going on in this office and better understand the role that it plays. Okay, so then let me look at the biggest challenges and areas of opportunity. And so I think there are many members of our community who are very engaged, and so I think that can be an opportunity. And I talked about doing listening sessions. I think it will also be important, and I thought a lot about this when I first got elected in my first term, is thinking about how to outreach to people who are very busy and are not likely to go to you. They're not going to come to you,.
Segment 13
Speaking of, Lauren, I'm going to pass it back to you. And if there's anything else you want to say, and if you could also just walk us through kind of what the next steps are so that folks know what to look forward to going forward. Absolutely. Thank you, Mary Ishii. I have appreciated hearing from all of you. This is very helpful. And I do want to echo what the mayor said, that it's very encouraging to see that there's so much alignment between what you all in the council are looking for and what your community members have said they're looking for. That's encouraging for me, both going out there and looking for candidates. And that's also encouraging to candidates who are interested in the role, who can get a clear sense of what they might be looking at stepping into a role like this. So that is very encouraging. So I'm going to stop sharing my screen so that I can see the other things that I have pulled up for you. I do want to walk you through kind of where we are headed next. So as I mentioned, we have been spending time doing a lot of community engagement early on in the process. And at this stage, we have scheduled interviews for an initial round of virtual interviews. That'll be the candidates' first opportunity, top candidates to interview on July 17th. That will be the subcommittee will meet prior to that and put forward a group of candidates to those interviews. The makeup of the participation in those interviews is still being finalized, but will involve community members as well as the PAB. And finalist candidates selected by the subcommittee to move forward from those interviews will be put forward to a closed session interview with all of you at the end of July. We are currently finalizing that date, and I believe that we are close. So stay tuned for that date. But that's kind of where we are. And from there, I will be working through the mayor's office to finalize processes with your select candidate. Hopefully the outcome of the interview with the full council is that you'll arrive at a candidate you'd like to make an offer to, and I will assist in that process and work through the mayor's office and your city attorney, etc. So that's where we are. Currently, the recruitment has recently been opened. So we are taking applications. It will remain open until at least June 24th. It's a national search, as you might have guessed, and we do a pretty robust outreach campaign. Currently, we have 44 applicants for the role, and I would say there are some very interesting folks in there. I definitely think that there are some strong contenders in the mix. And so I am encouraged and optimistic about the candidate pool so far. And that is where we are at the moment. I would love to know if any of you have questions about the process. Any other questions from my council colleagues? I am not seeing any questions. OK, and then I did want folks to know that Lauren is also basically doing the same process with the PAB, so they will also be able to give their feedback on what they want to see in this director of police accountability. And then there were a few other things just to give you all updates on this topic generally. I know we've been talking a lot about building trust, and that's absolutely something that's very important. In the past, we had also talked about making sure that we have a full PAB. I think that we only have two vacancies right now, and I think those of us who have vacancies, actually, our folks are already in the process, but they need to go through background checks and paperwork, etc. And so those should hopefully be coming on soon. And so I just wanted to let folks know about that because that is really important, Lauren, for the person to know that they will have a full PAB to work with because before we had many vacancies. And then I have been meeting basically weekly, every week or one and a half weeks or so with our interim director of police accountability, so just so folks are aware of that and been working with her very closely on the budget process and checking in to see if she needs anything administratively. And then the PAB regulations was also brought up, so I did just want to mention before I forget that that is also moving through. I think that there's just one issue that's remaining, and I know it's very challenging because there are so many folks in those meetings to get internal alignment, but we are moving forward with that as well. So just to give you all some updates. And that's also important, Lauren, because those PAB regulations, I think having those settled before the new person comes in or very soon after will make their job easier and they'll have more clarity in the work that they'll be doing and how to do it. So I just wanted to share that with everyone. Okay, I think that that is it for this item. So thank you so much, Lauren. Thank you for being here so late in the evening, and we will be in touch with you soon. All right. Thank you so much, Mayor, and thank you to the council. It's been great meeting you all. And like I said, I look forward to meeting you all in person when I'm done there for interviews. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, so we did move item 28 to the meeting on the 16th. But usually what I do is if there's comments on the CIP item that we removed, I just want to see if anyone has any public comment on that. Anyone online? Oh, sorry. There's one commenter online. Kathy Fogel. I just realized we also didn't take public comment on the item previously. Yeah, so this is for public comment director, please, accountability. We should take that first. Okay, Kathy Fogel. I wanted to speak to the CIP. We'll come back to you, Kathy. I'm sorry about that. No worries. I don't see any hands raised for the director. Okay, so we'll go back to Kathy then for comment on CIP. Am I? Yep, go ahead. Oh, you can hear me. Okay, great. Hi, my name is Kathy Fogel and I live on McGee Avenue. McGee Avenue between Cedar and Rose Street is a failed street. Four years ago, the street has had a paving condition index of 11. Now it's probably a seven. The street is dangerous. It's rutted. There's dirt and gravel everywhere. Bike riders can't use it. My neighbor's car's dash cam switches to emergency mode when she drives here. The road is so bumpy and uneven her car thinks she's in an accident. Street sweeping doesn't clean the street. It just raises up gravel and dust. 54 neighbors and I submitted a letter and photos of McGee Avenue for the intended agenda item. It's in your supplemental agenda. We'll resubmit it for the next meeting. McGee Avenue is currently in staff's recommended 2027 to 32 five-year paving plan using Measure FF funds and funding for these streets is included in the capital improvement plan. Please do not remove McGee Avenue from the final five-year paving plan. Measure FF and CIP plans. McGee Avenue desperately needs paving. McGee Avenue is included by staff in the five-year plan because of need. Some streets need to be prioritized simply because of need. McGee Avenue is one of those streets. Please help us and ensure that it can be paved. Thank you very much. Thank you, Kathy. Anyone else want to comment on item 28, which is the CIP, the capital improvement program? We won't be hearing that item this evening, but if folks are on still, I want to give them an opportunity to comment. Okay. I think that's it then. Is there any other public comment for items not listed on the agenda? Yes. Carol Morosovic, as the commissions are beginning to go hybrid, my understanding is they will not be posted, but the staff secretary can receive requests for the recording. Really, if there's any way that the website can manage it, it's more transparent to post it. People may want to listen to meetings because they're otherwise engaged at that time. Once you have a controversial issue, do you really want to take up that much staff time with the number of requests that can go to a staff secretary asking for the recording? It just seems as if it would be much more efficient to just post those recordings so that people can go back and listen to meetings on issues that they're interested in. Thank you. Carol, thank you. We talked about this at the Land Use Committee meeting, remember? That's actually not correct information. The city clerk's office said- Sorry, Carol. I don't have a back and forth, but is there anything you wanted to add to that? The meetings will be posted. Yeah, okay. Is there any other public comment for items not listed on the agenda? There's two hands raised. First is Kelvin Ward for non-agenda public comment. Yes, thank you. My name is Kelvin Ward. I'm a community organizer with Live Free California. I wanted to just show my support for continued funding for the Berkeley's Community Violence Intervention Program. When we talk about public safety, I realize, I think a lot of us realize that we have to invest in what's actually working. This program has helped to save lives and rep cycles of violence and create pathways to healing and stability for individuals and families most impacted by gun violence. The results speak for themselves. We've seen significant reductions in violence and homicides in the Berkeley area, and so I respectfully urge the Berkeley City Council to continue funding this proven strategy and demonstrate that community-based solutions remain a priority. Public safety is strongest when communities and government work together to save lives. Thank you. Thank you, Kelvin. Caller with a phone number ending in 211. As far as the parking problem is concerned, using bus number 60 and 65 for anybody living in Kensington, like I do, for Berkeley Health. It takes 10 minutes to go anyplace, safe and.