Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
approximately $8.1 million in community agency contracts as part of the RFP process.
Those contracts began in FY 2020 and will end at the end of FY 2023. Most (85%, more than $7 million) of this funding is from local sources, primarily General Fund, including more than $1.4 million dollars in Measure E funds (See Table 1).
Table 1: Summary of Funding
# FY 2023 Funding Source Amount
1 HUD: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)
$1,068,938
2 State: Community Services Block Grants (CSBG) $160,000 3 General Fund (GF) including Measure P $5,249,517
4 Local Measure E $1,569,911
5 Other, Including Mental Health Services Act and Childcare Mitigation fee
$33,275
Total $8,081,641
Note: General Funds received pursuant to Measures P and U1, Sugar Sweetened Beverage funds, Childcare Mitigation fee and Mental Health Services Act funds are provided in similar contracts to community agencies but have not been included in the RFP process in the past. However, since the RFP contracts were awarded in July of 2019, some of these funding sources have been used to fund the activities of the contracts awarded as part of the RFP process.
Adopting this resolution will keep community agency funding at the current level for another year, with no additional budget impacts.
CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The RFP process for community agency funding is an essential tool to ensure that City funds are allocated to agencies that address local priorities, demonstrate their service outcomes, and have the capacity to effectively manage the requirements of City funding, particularly federal funds. The complete funding allocation cycle (including RFP development, RFP release, application review by select Commissions and Council approval) lasts nine months, and is an extensive and thoughtful staff and commission review of the proposals and the organizational capacity of the agencies requesting the funds.
Undertaking a new funding allocation cycle this year poses notable challenges for both community partners and the City. These challenges are related to community agency capacity, skewed community agency outcome data due to COVID-19 impacts on services, significant City staffing shortages, and new commission configurations.
Community Agency Capacity: Agencies would benefit from an additional year of funding to allow them to implement ongoing service adjustments and prepare for future funding proposals as they emerge from the pandemic.
Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
The City’s non-profit community partners have deeply felt the impacts of COVID-19 on their operations. Our partners have worked diligently during the last two years, through the COVID-19 pandemic, to meet service measures and program outcomes in the midst of very challenging and constantly changing work environments. The experience varies by agency and type of program, with some programs expanding their services and others shrinking in response to both increased need and/or increased constraints resulting from COVID-19. Programs have had to re-define how they provide services while also facing staffing shortages, supply chain issues, entering into new funder relationships, and other challenges.
As COVID-19 restrictions are lifting, programs are again needing to re-invent, re- evaluate and implement new and ever-changing protocols to address changing needs in changing conditions; all with fewer staff members due to workforce staffing shortages.
Since the community agencies are facing the same labor shortages and hiring challenges as the City, their administrative capacity to respond to an RFP is also impacted.
We reached out to community agencies to get their feedback on the recommendation through an online survey and, more informally, as part of our daily discussions with them. While we received few responses to the online survey, they were all in support of the recommendation, as was the feedback we received through our daily discussions.
Skewed Community Agency Outcome Data: For many of the funded agencies, the service outcome and performance measure data from the last two years during COVID- 19 are well outside the historical normal ranges, due to rapidly shifting conditions.
Consequently, most agencies have fallen short of their goals established prior to COVID-19. This makes it challenging for the City to accurately assess the performance of community agencies.
City Staffing Shortages: The HHCS divisions that lead the RFP process (Housing & Community Services and the Office of the Director) are currently experiencing significant staffing shortages. Specifically, HCS has a nearly 25% staffing vacancy rate.
This includes both the Community Services Specialist III (CSSIII) that manages the RFP process and the Community Services Specialist II (CSSII) that manages funding for youth-serving organizations under Vision 2020. Additionally, the HCS Manager and key staff continue to support COVID-impacted homeless services agencies, careful stewardship of millions of dollars in federal COVID relief funds, and complex affordable housing projects and new housing projects such as People’s Park and BART housing developments.
Commissions: Four commissions in three departments have been heavily involved in the funding application review and recommendation process in the past. Currently, only three are slated to participate in the next RFP cycle:
Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
1) the Housing Advisory Commission (HAC) in HHCS,
2) the Human Welfare and Community Action Commission (HWCAC) in HHCS, 3) the Homeless Services Panel of Experts (HSPE) in the City Manager’s Office.
The City has yet to determine the fourth commission which would evaluate the Vision 2020 awards for youth-serving programs. The commission that was responsible for evaluating the RFP process for these contracts previously, the Children Youth and Recreation Commission (CYRC), has since dissolved. These newly formed and existing commissions have begun to meet regularly again, after their extended suspension during COVID-19, and are working on priorities. This includes moving forward policies and programs that were temporarily stalled.
In the typical RFP process, the commissions (and staff supporting the commissions) thoroughly review all applications and make funding recommendations. This time- intensive process includes multiple subcommittee meetings that require staffing support due to the complex subject matter, and a minimum of two full commission meetings for each participating commission. Allowing the commissions one additional year to settle into restructuring and new priorities will be beneficial to future application evaluation.
HCS employees presented this recommendation at commission meetings in July and August of this year. Below is a summary of their recommendations:
Table 3: Commission Actions and Vote
Name of
Commission
and Date of
Meeting
Action and Vote
Homeless
Services Panel
of Experts
(HSPE) –
07/06/2022
Request that the City post the 2019 funding proposals for those homeless service providers whose funding was approved with additional information on the following:
• Current project descriptions,
• Current funding level,
• Current hours of operation and location,
• Current staffing level,
• Current program services provided during COVID, and
• Most recent contract monitor evaluation for each provider.
Following this information provided, HSPE also requests COVID safe site visits.
VOTE: M/S/C (Marasovic/Feller) Ayes: Kealoha-Blake, De la Guardia, Bookstein, Feller, Meany, Marasovic, Jones. Noes:
None. Abstain: None. Absent: None
Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
Housing
Advisory
Commission
(HAC) –
07/07/2022
Recommend to Council that all existing community agency contracts under the Community Agency RFP process be extended for one year at the current baseline one-year funding amount, and that the four-year Community Agency RFP process be postponed for one fiscal year with a consideration that Council provide financial Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) for the one year extension to all participating agencies.
VOTE: M/S/C (Potter/Mendonca) Ayes: Lee-Egan, Mendonca, Potter, Rodriguez, and Sanidad, and Noes: None. Abstain: None.
Absent: Calavita (excused), Fain (excused), Johnson
(unexcused), and Simon-Weisberg (unexcused).
Human Welfare
and Community
Action
Commission
(HWCAC)
No action – Discussion only. Commission members were not in favor of the recommendation based on their discussion, but did not take a vote. They expressed a concern with the lack of funding increase to account for rising costs for well performing agencies and disappointment that some agencies they viewed as
underperforming not having to go through the RFP process this year to determine if they should still receive funding from the City.
Further, they had concerns about new or previously unfunded agencies not having an opportunity to apply for funding for another year, particularly those agencies that meet a high priority yet underserved need.
Misalignment with the City’s Two-Year Budget Process: As it stands, the RFP for community funding cycle is currently set to end (FY23) in the middle of the City’s two- year budget (FY 23/24). This creates complications for the City’s budget development and projections since the four-year contract terms will span three budget cycles rather than two. The postponement will realign these cycles.
BACKGROUND
The Housing and Community Services (HCS) Division of the Health, Housing and Community Services Department (HHCS) administers local, state, and federal funding for services to low-to-moderate income Berkeley residents through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process. Funds in the RFP support a wide range of services provided by non-profit community agencies that vary in size and capacity. The last RFP was released in FY 2019 for a four-year contract (FY 2020 – FY 2023).
The process requires that various members of HCS coordinate with HHCS Office of the Director (2020 Vision) and City Manager’s Office. It involves staff across all these divisions working with four commissions: 1) the Housing Advisory Commission (HAC) in HHCS, 2) the Human Welfare and Community Action Commission (HWCAC) in HHCS, and 3) the Homeless Services Panel of Experts (HSPE) to develop funding recommendations to the City Council in June.
Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
While each commission has their own approach to reviewing applications and making funding recommendations, on average they met bi-weekly for a three-month period during the last RFP process, and there is no reason to believe this cycle would be any different. Each Commission can elect to require presentations from proposers and conduct site visits. Commission members often request additional information to inform their recommendations. City staff support the commission work by scheduling and attending the meetings and site visits, taking notes, writing minutes, following up with community agencies to request information, preparing additional analyses, researching alternatives, and mediating other issues as they arise. This is a demonstrably robust, labor-intensive, and holistic process, and one that solicits diverse feedback and analysis in order to ensure that the selected agencies are prepared to meet the needs of the community.
In response to the FY 2019 RFP, HCS received an unprecedented number of applications requesting over $20 million in support (far exceeding the available funding).
There were 119 applications from 63 agencies, and new programs accounted for 27 percent of the submissions. In the end, 75 applications were recommended for the available $8.3 million.1
At the end of the last RFP process, the City and commissions had a solid recommendation to Council that was grounded in evaluation of past performance and City priorities, and aligned funding recommendations with County-wide homeless initiatives alongside a complete overhaul of both homeless and 2020 Vision service measures and outcomes. Council adopted the City Manager recommendations in part because it was apparent how much excellent work went into ensuring the right programs were funded for the right amount of money. Adding one more year to this contract continues alignment with the priorities and budgets that have already been adopted, and ensures stability for the community agencies that are still reeling from the impacts of COVID-19.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Upon release of the RFP for CDBG, ESG, and HOME funding in FY 2019, applicants were encouraged to propose projects that meet various City-wide goals, such as the Climate Action Plan. Projects funded with CDBG, ESG, and HOME are required to follow state and local regulations, including those related to green building and energy.
CDBG funding for community facility projects places a priority on projects that promote energy efficiency and improve accessibility. Single family rehabilitation, including energy efficiency, was a funding priority in the FY 2019 RFP. With this recommendation the City will continue funding both City-administered and community agency-administrated 1 Available funds, not including, CDBG funds to cover COB staff and over $1 million for the Public Facility Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA).
Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
programs. Each program funded by HUD funds also undergoes an Environmental Review to understand and mitigate possible environmental impacts.
RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Staff’s recommendation effectively mitigates the current situation and its effects in the following ways:
Community Agency Capacity: By extending contracts for one year, community agencies will have an opportunity to adjust, stabilize, and perform at the expected levels of service with lessened impact from COVID-19 restrictions on service delivery.
Skewed Community Agency Outcome Data: Best practice is to have accurate data to guide future funding decisions. By postponing the RFP process, staff and commission members would have the benefit of at least a year of relatively standard performance data on current contracts, allowing better analysis of program performance.
City Staffing Shortages: Administering the RFP process is not feasible without sufficient staff to lead it. Administering the process with the current staffing levels would impact the administration of other high priority programs and projects.
Commissions: Extending the RFP one more year will allow the commissions to settle into the new routines, configurations and priorities, as well as allow newer commissioners to learn more about funded programs and the funding process.
Misalignment with the City’s Two-Year Budget Process: Aligning the RFP for community funding with the City’s budget process aids in seamless budget development and projections. Extending the contracts by one year, allows the new RFP cycle to start in FY25, with the start of the City next two-year budget (FY25/26).
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The HAC recommended adding Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) to the extended contracts. The HWCAC also expressed concerns about rising costs to community agencies. Staff appreciates this request given the already low wages in the nonprofit sector and the instability and difficulty posed to our valuable nonprofit partners. Council could consider adding COLAs to these contracts for one year as part of the Fiscal Year 2023 budget process.
Extending Community Agency Contracts for One Year ACTION CALENDAR and Postponing the Community Agency RFP Process Until FY 2024 September 20, 2022
CONTACT PERSON
Joshua Oehler, Community Development Project Coordinator, HHCS, (510) 981-5408 Attachments:
1: Resolution
2: List of Agencies, Programs and Their Current Funding Levels for Contracts Awarded starting in FY2020 as Part of the RFP Process
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.
EXTEND COMMUNITY AGENCY CONTRACTS FOR ONE YEAR, THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2024, AT EXISTING LEVELS AND POSTPONE THE COMMUNITY AGENCY
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR ONE YEAR, CONDUCTING THE RFP PROCESS IN FISCAL YEAR 2024 AND STARTING THE CONTRACTS IN FISCAL YEAR 2025
WHEREAS, the Housing and Community Services Division (HCS) in the Health, Housing and Community Services (HHCS) Department administers a combined Request for Proposals (RFP) for Community Agency Funding every four years, with the next RFP release scheduled to occur in the fall of FY 2023 for funding starting in FY 2024; and WHEREAS, funding sources include Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Community Services Block Grant (CSBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program City of Berkeley Measure E, City of Berkeley Measure P, Mental Health Services Act and City General Funds; and
WHEREAS, the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have considerably impacted community agencies, including current staffing levels, resulting in reduced community agency capacity to respond to a complex RFP at pre-pandemic levels; and WHEREAS, City staffing shortages and the ongoing COVID-related emergency services and funding pose significant challenges in coordinating an RFP review with the four commissions managed by City staff (the Housing Advisory Commission, the Human Welfare and Community Action Commission, the Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Commission, and the Homeless Commission); and
WHEREAS, in the last RFP process the City Manager and commissions’ recommendation to Council included a thorough evaluation of past performance and City priority alignment; and
WHEREAS, Council adopted the City Manager’s community agency funding recommendations from the last RFP; and
WHEREAS, extending the community agency contracts by one-year responds to community request, exhibits support for partner agencies, and aids in budget development and projections by aligning the community agency funding on the City’s FY 2023/2024 budget cycle; and
WHEREAS, adding one more year to the current community agency contracts will continue alignment with the priorities and budgets that have already been adopted, and ensure stability for the community agencies that are still strongly experiencing the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to extend all existing community agency contracts under the community agency Request for Proposal (RFP) process for one year (through FY 2024), at current baseline one-year funding, and postpone the four-year Community Agency RFP process for one fiscal year, until FY 2024. A signed copy of said documents, agreements and any amendments will be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
Attachment 2: List of Agencies, Programs and Their Current Funding Levels for Contracts Awarded starting in FY2020 as Part of the RFP Process
Internal
Agency - Program FY 2023
Adopted CDBG CSBG ESG GF Measure
P
GF
Measure
U1
GF Other
GF Mayor's
Reimagining
Funds
Other
Funds
Bay Area Hispano Institute for Advancement -
Child Development Program $82,143 $82,143
Bananas Inc.:
Child Care Subsidies $283,110 $269,835 $13,275
Play & Learn Playgroups $10,527 $10,527
QRIS Services $95,000 $95,000
Ephesians Children's Center - Childcare
Program $45,507 $45,507
Healthy Black Families, Inc. - Sisters
Together Empowering Peers (STEP)
$43,808 $43,808
Nia House Learning Center $39,999 $39,999
Childcare Total $600,094 $586,819 $13,275
Bay Area Outreach and Recreation Program -
Recreational Services for the Disabled $43,592 $43,592
Bonita House - Creative Wellness Center $15,324 $15,324 Center for Independent Living - Residential
Access Program $159,660 $159,660
Easy Does It $1,569,911 $1,569,911
Through the Looking Glass $27,206 $27,206
Disability Programs Total $1,815,693 $159,660 $86,122 $1,569,911 Bread Project $57,850 $57,850
Inter-City Services $101,351 $101,351
Multicultural Institute Lifeskills Program $68,136 $68,136 Rising Sun – Green Energy Training Services $67,828 $67,828 Employment Training Total $295,165 $295,165
Lifelong Medical Care:
Access for Uninsured (BPC, WBFP,
Uninsured, Acupuncture Detox $189,855 $160,000 $29,855
Geriatric Care/Hypertension $114,543 $114,543
Berkeley Free Clinic - Free Women and
Transgender Health Care Service $15,858 $15,858
Health Total $320,256 $160,000 $160,256
Alameda County Homeless Action Center:
SSI Advocacy $129,539 $109,539 $20,000
Rapid Rehousing for Homeless
Elders Project $68,220 $68,220
Daytime Drop-In 35,721$ 35,721$
Representative Payee Services 32,016$ 32,016$
Bay Area Community Services:
North County HRC $1,081,785 $248,419 $0 $833,366
STAIR Pathways $205,357 $205,357
Berkeley Food & Housing Project:
Case Management Tied to
Permanent Housing $100,190 $100,190
Men's Shelter $170,502 $170,502
Women's Shelter $119,963 $119,963
Bonita House - Case Management Tied to
Permanent Housing $24,480 $24,480
Building Opportunities for Self Sufficiency:
BOSS House Navigation Team $86,831 $86,831
Representative Payee Services $52,440 $52,440
Ursula Sherman Village Families
Program $51,383 $51,383
Ursula Sherman Village Singles
Shelter $104,662 $104,662
Dorothy Day - Berkeley Emergency Storm
Shelter $30,101 $30,101
Larkin Street - Turning Point Program $407,643 $407,643 Case Management Tied to
Permanent Housing $163,644 $163,644
Supportive Housing Program UA
Homes $55,164 $55,164
Options Recovery Services - Detox Services
& Day Treatment - Transitional Housing and
Case Management
$50,000 $50,000
The Suitcase Clinic $9,828 $9,828
Toolworks, Inc. Supportive Housing $47,665 $47,665
Bridget Transitional House Case
Management $118,728 $118,728
Daytime Drop-In Services $48,153 $48,153
Homeless Case Management -
Housing Retention $100,190 $100,190
Homeless Services Total $3,294,205 $418,921 $205,357 $2,649,927 $20,000 Bay Area Community Land Trust $5,200 $5,200
CHDO Programs
Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley -
Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program $250,000 $250,000
Housing Development & Rehabilitation Total $255,200 $250,000 $5,200 East Bay Community Law Center - Consumer
Justice Clinic/Housing Advocacy $33,644 $33,644
Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity $35,000 $35,000
Eviction Defense Center - Housing Retention $250,000 $250,000 Family Violence Law Center - Domestic
Violence & Homelessness Prevention Project $61,842 $61,842 Legal/Advocacy Total $380,486 $35,000 $250,000 $95,486
Berkeley Community Gardening
Collaborative $11,895 $11,895
McGee Avenue Baptist Church $17,844 $17,844
SEEDS Community Resolution Center $22,553 $22,553
Other Total $52,292 $52,292
Attachment 2 - List of Agencies, Programs and Their Current Funding Levels for Contracts Awarded starting in FY20 as Part of the RFP Process
Childcare
Disability Programs
Employment Training
Health
Homeless Services
Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients:
Lifelong Medical Care:
Women's Daytime Drop-In Center:
Housing Development & Rehabilitation
Refer to HTF/CHDO
Legal/Advocacy
Other
Recreation
NOTE: Funding sources for these amounts may differ from funding sources used in the original award amount
Internal
Agency - Program FY 2023
Adopted CDBG CSBG ESG GF Measure
P
GF
Measure
U1
GF Other
GF Mayor's
Reimagining
Funds
Other
Funds
Child Ephesians Children's Center - Greg Brown
Park Supervision $18,573 $18,573
Recreation Total $18,573 $18,573
J-Sei $9,110 $9,110
Seniors Total $9,110 $9,110
Bay Area Community Resources - School
Based Behavioral Health Services $94,964 $94,964
Bay Area Hispano Institute for Advancement -
Out of School Time Programs $21,447 $21,447
Berkeley High School Bridge Program $79,000 $79,000
Afterschool Program $30,000 $30,000
Counseling $30,000 $30,000
Biotech Partners – Biotech Academy at
Berkeley High $91,750 $91,750
Ephesians School-Age Program $39,840 $39,840
Lifelong Medical Care - Rosa Parks
Collaborative $44,804 $44,804
Multicultural Institute Youth Mentoring $33,603 $33,603 Pacific Center for Human Growth - Safer
Schools Project $23,245 $23,245
RISE Program $216,039 $216,039
Stiles Hall $90,000 $90,000
Through The Looking Glass - Parenting
Education and Kindegarten Readiness $25,000 $25,000
BUILD Literacy/Cal Corp $95,360 $95,360
Bridging Berkeley $34,640 $34,640
Y- Scholars Program $40,000 $40,000
School Readiness Program $50,875 $50,875
Youth Total $1,040,567 $1,040,567
TOTAL COMMUNITY AGENCY $8,081,641 $863,581 $160,000 $205,357 $2,899,927 $0 $2,349,590 $0 $1,603,186 YMCA of the East Bay - Y-Scholars Program
Seniors
Youth
Berkeley Youth Alternatives:
UC Berkeley
NOTE: Funding sources for these amounts may differ from funding sources used in the original award amount
Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager
ACTION CALENDAR
September 20, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Peter Radu, Assistant to the City Manager Subject: Audit Status Report Response: Code Enforcement Resources Significantly Constrained and Improvements Needed in Case Management and Oversight
INTRODUCTION
On June 26th, 2018, the City Auditor submitted a Code Enforcement Unit (CEU) audit report1, with recommendations to improve operational efficiencies and implement a resource analysis process. The purpose of this report is to update City Council on the status of implementing the audit report’s recommendations. This is the fourth status report regarding this audit.2
CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The audit report contains twelve recommendations. During the previous update presented to Council on February 25, 2020, five of the recommendations were implemented, five were partially implemented, and two not implemented. As of this report, there are two updates: two recommendations that had been partially implemented are now fully implemented, and one recommendation that had not been implemented is now partially implemented. Very shortly after the last staff report on implementation progress, the COVID-19 pandemic led the declaration of a local emergency, which had the effect of dramatically re-prioritizing staff resources and time.
As a result of this (as well as ongoing staffing challenges and staff turnover), no additional audit recommendations have updates at this time. The attachment provides a detailed table of audit report recommendations, corrective action plans, and implementation progress updates.
The next status report to Council is expected to be presented in March of 2023. 1 Audit: Code Enforcement Resources Significantly Constrained and Improvements Needed in Case Management and Oversight: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022- 01/Code%20Enforcement%20Resources%20Significantly%20Constrained_Fiscal%20Year%202018.pdf 2 For the most recent status report to Council, please see:
https://records.cityofberkeley.info/PublicAccess/api/Document/Acyyy0z%C3%89f6BGxygYOKiIwnT5xY% C3%81vvTsWjQcJOn8rLKhGzqxHKZqhnd6zucp3%C3%81MkrR3HB1Rs4ykdL%C3%815PMYmmf2iA%3 D/
Audit Status Report Response: Code Enforcement Resources ACTION CALENDAR Significantly Constrained and Improvements Needed in September 20, 2022 Case Management and Oversight
BACKGROUND
The Neighborhood Services Code Enforcement Unit’s goal is to provide a clean and safe environment for all Berkeley residents, workers, and visitors. The CEU is responsible for the enforcement of administrative violations of the Berkeley Municipal Code and some provisions of California State codes related to building, zoning, and housing. The City Manager’s Office oversees the CEU, which now consists of three full- time staff: one Code Enforcement Supervisor and two Code Enforcement Officer IIs. As of this writing, one of the two Code Enforcement Officer II positions is vacant and hiring is underway.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.
POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The City Manager’s Office will continue to work with the Code Enforcement Unit to address the recommendations. This includes exploring third-party services for outsourcing administrative functions of the CEU (such as citations), which would create efficiencies and free up staff time to focus on field inspections, follow up with property owners, etc.
CONTACT PERSON
Jeff Conner, Neighborhood Services Code Enforcement Supervisor, 510-981-2492.
Attachments:
1: Audit Findings, Recommendations, and Management Response Summary Table
Finding
Recommendation
Number Recommendation Issue Date Closed Date Department Last Period: Status This Period: Status This Period: Update Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.1
Implement a resource analysis process by which proposed legislation is discussed with City management to evaluate the impact on current City resources and determine the feasibility of making the intended impact. The analysis should take place before the policy is presented to Council for adoption and include considerations of:
• Staff time and other City resource needs, including the fiscal impact of those resource needs
• Opportunity cost, i.e., consideration of other activities that will be deprioritized in order to meet new demands
• Feasibility impact to determine how best to rollout out new legislation 6/26/2018 6/30/2022 Mayor and
Council Partly Implemented Implemented
Council continues to utilize the
standing policy committees to
consider the impact of select
proposed legislation on City
resources; City staff regularly
attend the committee meetings
and advise Council on the city
staff time and opportunity cost
implications of proposed policies.
To the extent this process has
now become a regular feature of
Council policy development, we
consider the recommendation
fully implemented at this time.
Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.2
Require that the Agenda Committee ensure ordinances have undergone a resource analysis as described in Recommendation 1.1 when necessary and, if not, are returned to the appropriate City Council member for further assessment before being passed into local law. 6/26/2018 1/29/2019 Mayor and
Council Implemented
Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.3
Conduct a staffing analysis to determine the appropriate staffing level needed for the Code Enforcement Unit to effectively enforce City codes. In conducting the analysis, include an assessment of the workload impact created by the codes for which the CEU is solely responsible as well as those created by the codes for which CEU shares responsibility with other enforcement units. 6/26/2018 City Manager Not Started Not Started Due to continued significant staff
turnover and the reprioritization
of city resources and efforts
during the COVID-19 pandemic,
this work has not been
completed. Ongoing vacancies in
the unit have prevented
commencement of this work.
Staff plan to revisit the
recommendation after vacant
existing positions are backfilled.
Audit Title: Code Enforcement Resources Significantly Constrained and Improvements Needed in Case Management and Oversight Attachment 1 - Page 1 of 4
Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.4
Use the staffing analysis performed in response to Recommendation 1.3 to:
• Quantify the full burden cost of additional staff
• Determine if sufficient budgetary funding is available for additional staff • Request additional staffing from Council during the annual appropriations process 6/26/2018 City Manager Not Started Partly Implemented Even absent the completion of
the analysis recommended in
Recommendation 1.3, staff
recognize the shortcomings of
current staffing levels and the
effects that this has had on
NSCEU response times. NSCEU’s
goal for this metric is 10-day
average to acquire cases created.
As of June 2022, our YTD average
days to acquire cases is 29 days.
These averages are without being
fully staffed (two Code Officers in
the Unit) in May and June; prior
to these last two months when
we were fully staffed with two
Code Officers, the average was as
low as 15-day average. With this
in mind, the City Manager has
recommended to the Council, for
inclusion in the FY23-24 Biennial
Budget, one additional FTE Code
Enforcement Officer I position,
which will help the supervisor and
existing Enforcement Officers
reduce response times, increase
their presence in the community,
and implement Council policy
Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.5
If budgetary constraints prevent additional staffing or if Council does not approve the budget needed to fund additional staffing, report to Council the restrictions placed on the Code Enforcement Unit’s ability to effectively enforce City codes. Include information explaining the hindrance this will cause for any new ordinances the City Council may want to pass in the future. Provide this information regularly, for example, annually as part of the budget process, to keep Council informed of the CEU’s capacity restrictions. See also Recommendation 1.7. 6/26/2018 6/30/2022 City Manager Partly Implemented Implemented We are marking this as
implemented based on the
6/27/2022 status update and
based on the inclusion of 1 Code
Enforcement Officer in the
2023/24 budget book (pg. 399) to
'reduce response time to
complaints.'
Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.6
Assess Berkeley municipal codes to identify the codes for which the CEU is solely responsible and those for which the CEU has a shared role with other work units. Use the results of the assessment to:
• Create process workflows showing shared work unit responsibilities • Create written guidance describing work unit responsibilities 6/26/2018 1/1/2018 City Manager Implemented Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.7
Implement code enforcement software that:
• Identifies case assignment to CEU officers and other work units • Prioritizes cases, in particular high-risk cases posing health and safety risks • Captures pertinent case dates, e.g., opened, notice of violation, citation issuance, and closed
• Tracks enforcement actions taken within the CEU and other work units • Quantifies citations issued and collected
• Allows for readily identifying repeat offenders
• Includes performance measurement tools, e.g., turnaround times within defined specifications (see Recommendation 2.2)
• Allows for uploading information from mobile technologies (see Recommendation 1.8)
• Includes reporting tool to showcase workload trends and capacity restrictions (i.e., backlogs) 6/26/2018 City Manager Partly Implemented Partly Implemented The vendor selection process for
Planning Department software,
originally initiated in July 2019,
was put on pause by the COVID-
19 pandemic’s significant impacts
on City finances and priorities. If
and as that process restarts,
NSCEU staff will continue to be
included in the software selection
process.
Attachment 1 - Page 2 of 4
Code Enforcement Unit
resources are insufficient to
meet demand. 1.8
Implement mobile computers and printers to allow Code Enforcement Officers to complete more work in the field, thus improving their time spent in the community and reducing time in the office. Mobile computers should have the capacity to interface with the code enforcement case management software implemented in response to Recommendation 1.7. 6/26/2018 City Manager Partly Implemented Process modifications and
increased oversight needed to
ensure equity, efficiency, and
effectiveness 2.1
Develop and issue written procedures for code enforcement operations that:
• Reflect current practices and management expectations. • Describe the tiered prioritization system giving attention to cases based on risk levels of high, moderate, and standard. Require adherence to a uniform technology policy, which includes:
o Assigning unique numbers to cases.
o Recording all pertinent case data timely, e.g., within two business days of receipt.
o Using a single, centralized system to record, manage, and monitor case information.
o Using case file management standards so that pertinent data are captured uniformly.
• Inform staff that preferential treatment should not be given to complaints made or referred by City Council members, Council staff, and City management.
Those complaints should be prioritized based on established objectives and channeled through the appropriate supervisor.
• Describe processes for issuing citations in a consistent and equitable manner. • Include beat assignments once feasible to do so, i.e., after the CEU addresses the backlog and receives adequate software tools. 6/26/2018 6/26/2019 City Manager Implemented Process modifications and
increased oversight needed to
ensure equity, efficiency, and
effectiveness 2.2
Implement performance metrics and goals to:
• Assess the effectiveness of code enforcement operations and goal achievement
• Identify constraints preventing goal attainability.
• Submit regular reports, e.g., biannually, to City management on performance.
Include a metric to provide at least some proactive code enforcement activities.
Develop this metric after implementing the process and system improvement recommendations made in this report. 6/26/2018 City Manager Partly Implemented Partly Implemented NSCEU has resumed use of
performance measures. The most
recent annual performance
measures were reported to the
Council in the FY23-24 Budget
Book, and staff used the
performance measures
(specifically, the discrepancy
between the Unit’s goal response
time of 10 days to acquire new
cases, against the CY21 measure
of 53 days), in part to justify the
City Manager’s recommendation
that the Council include one
additional FTE Code Enforcement
Officer I position in the Unit as
part of the FY23-24 Biennial
Budget adoption.
Process modifications and
increased oversight needed to
ensure equity, efficiency, and
effectiveness 2.3
Assess the feasibility of using complaint thresholds and self certifying techniques for standard priority violations. For example, wait to receive at least two complaints about a standard level violation before performing an investigation, and allow a code violator to self-report on a standard level violation to remove the need for reinspection. If feasible, implement the techniques to give code enforcement officers more time on field inspections of high risk cases. 6/26/2018 6/26/2018 City Manager Implemented Attachment 1 - Page 3 of 4
Process modifications and
increased oversight needed to
ensure equity, efficiency, and
effectiveness 2.4
Develop procedures for monitoring staffs’ work and addressing weaknesses that may prevent goal achievement, such as conflicts of interest. For example:
• Review Form 700s to identify property owned by CEU personnel before assigning cases to officers.
• Randomly select case records to look for:
o Indicators that case action did not progress as required or expected suggesting favoritism or kickbacks.
o Properties with closed cases that continue to receive complaints for the same issue. This could indicate a repeat offender as well as a failure to take appropriate actions against a code violator.
The Assistant to the City Manager for Neighborhood Services should perform this oversight of the Code Enforcement Unit Supervisor, and the Code Enforcement Supervisor should perform this oversight of Code Enforcement Officers and the Assistant Planner. 6/26/2018 6/26/2018 City Manager Implemented Attachment 1 - Page 4 of 4
Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager
INFORMATION CALENDAR
September 20, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Louis, Interim Chief of Police
Subject: Update on the Implementation of Fair and Impartial Policing Task Force Recommendations
INTRODUCTION
On February 23rd, 2021 during a City Council Special Meeting, Council referred the recommendations from the Mayor’s Fair and Impartial Policing (FIP) Task Force to the Berkeley Police Department for implementation. Quarterly updates were requested by Council and the last quarterly update was provided on June 14, 2022.
CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
This report provides a quarterly update on the implementation of the Task Force recommendations. Implementation of the FIP Task Force recommendations remains a priority of the Berkeley Police Department. The Professional Standards Division is responsible for managing the project of implementing the recommendations.
Implementation of the recommendations has necessitated the amendment of departmental policies and establishment of new protocols. As part of the process, members of BPD have met on several occasions with Council and Mayor representatives, Police Review Commission and now Police Accountability Board members, FIP Task Force members, and the Police Accountability Board Subcommittee on FIP recommendation implementation. During these meetings, the substance and progress on the implementation of the recommendations were discussed and BPD has been provided feedback and background on the various intentions with each respective recommendation.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
The following outlines the specific Task Force recommendations and the respective progress:
Implement a New Evidence-Based Traffic Enforcement Model Task Force Recommendations:
Focusing the basis for traffic stops on safety
Implementation:
Officers have been provided data regarding primary collision factors and have been directed to enforce those violations wherever they are observed. In addition to focusing on enforcement of primary collision factor violations, sworn personnel are also expected to make investigative stops related to criminal intelligence and information brought forth by the community or our investigations. BPD has implemented and conducted departmental training on a three-prong approach that focuses on primary collision factors, community member reports of dangerous driving or safety issues and community caretaking. Community caretaking considers safety violations that aren’t always noted as the primary collision factor but can be a significant contributing factor in serious collisions.
Status:
Recommendation implementation complete and evaluation and transparency efforts are ongoing. Training for all sworn personnel has concluded. The Traffic Division and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration continuously collect and provide the Berkeley Police Department with data on primary collision factors and statistics on violations that impact public safety. This data provides officers with current information on what to educate the community on and what violations to focus enforcement towards. The department will continue to review and evaluate data on traffic offenses that affect community safety. This will drive the primary focus on ongoing enforcement and education efforts. Information related to this recommendation will also be shared in the near future with the public via BPD’s Transparency Hub. Additionally, the focus of traffic enforcement will be formalized as a departmental directive via relevant policy updates.
Task Force Recommendation:
Use a clear, evidence-based definition for stops of criminal suspects Implementation:
The Police Department is establishing a precision based policing model that considers data and public safety. This model aims to reduce the number of stops that studies have shown had minimal impact on public safety.
Data driven-tools that enable close to real-time dashboard tracking of calls for service demands have been provided to the Community Services Bureau and Patrol Watch Commanders to help guide officers in their enforcement focus.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
During this reporting period, the Department implemented a system that employs a feedback loop with information flowing both ways. The system provides the tracking of calls for service with the goal of call analysis for patrol deployment strategies and also allows officers in the field to communicate their observations to the Community Service Bureau. This feedback loop provides information back to the Community Services Bureau and creates an accountability measure so strategies can be evaluated.
Status:
Recommendation implementation complete and ongoing efforts include the development of data-driven tools to enhance a precision-based policing model and approach to enforcement stops. The goal is to have data-driven approaches to violence prevention programs and real time crime and call analysis for patrol deployment strategies. Ensuring that we implement approaches that identify and work to reduce racial disparities will be a cornerstone to our evidence-based approaches. The Berkeley Police Department will continue to only use race and ethnicity as determining factors in stops only when paired with clear, evidence- based criteria. The Transparency Hub streamlines the collection and dissemination of police data. This system allows for exploration of different evidence-based approaches.
Task Force Recommendation:
Reaffirming and clarifying that the Berkeley Police Department will only use race and ethnicity as determining factors in stops only when paired with clear, evidence-based criteria.
Implementation:
Penal code 13519.4 is existing California law that prohibits racial profiling. BPD Policy 401 (Fair and Impartial Policing) also prohibits racial profiling. Section 401.2 explicitly states, “Officers shall not consider race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation/identity or socio-economic status in establishing either reasonable suspicion or probable cause, or when carrying out other law enforcement activities…”
The above policies were reviewed in light of the task force recommendations and found to affirm and clarify police officer responsibilities in stops.
Status:
Recommendation implementation complete and ongoing efforts include: BPD will continue to conduct ongoing training in topics such as implicit bias, racial profiling, and procedural justice concepts. BPD will hold all members to Departmental Policies, especially those strictly and clearly prohibiting racial profiling. Further, stops will be information and evidence based. The BPD Data Analyst Team will continue to develop tools to focus internal efforts using
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
evidence and information and share data publicly about enforcement and related results.
Implement Procedural Justice Reforms
Task Force Recommendation:
Refer amendments to existing BPD policy and the creation of an Early Intervention System (EIS) related to traffic, bike and pedestrian stops.
Implementation:
The current Early Warning System was originally issued in 2004 and revised in 2008. The system mandates the monitoring of officer’s behavior and performance to include, but not limited to attendance, complaints, use of force incidents, and other factors. The Early Warning System serves as a program that identifies and address behavior or training issues before they become a disciplinary matter. Amendments have been made to the Department’s Early Warning System policy (Policy 1041) to include the monitoring of stop data for individual officers.
Status:
Implementation complete via issuance of updated policy reflecting recommendations. Pursuant to the FIP recommendation and after meeting with the FIP task Force stakeholders, language was added to the current Early Warning System policy to include data around traffic, bicycle, and pedestrian stops as a category that supervisors will consider for early intervention if merited.
Ongoing efforts include implementing new systems for the monitoring of officer’s individual stop data by their respective supervisors. The Audits and Inspections Sergeant will also conduct separate and random quarterly audits of officer’s stop data, complaints, uses of force incidents and other factors and report the findings to the Chief of Police. The first of these audits is slated to occur this Fall and the results will be provided to the Police Accountability Board.
Task Force Recommendation:
Adopt a policy to require written consent for all vehicle and residence searches and update the consent search form in alignment with best practice and community feedback.
Implementation:
A revised written consent form has been created and amendments have been made to our existing search and seizure policy to require written consent for all consent searches. The Department implemented a redesigned Consent Search Form incorporating the collaborative feedback from multiple discussions with the Police Accountability Board.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
Status:
Implementation completed via issuance of updated form reflecting recommendations.
Task Force Recommendation:
Limit warrantless searches of individuals on supervised release status such as Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS), probation, or parole.
Implementation:
On February 10, 2021, updates were completed on Policy 311. Sections 311.5 and 311.6 were modified to reflect the above limitations to warrantless searches.
The above policies were reviewed and modified in line with the task force recommendations and departmental goals to build trust and collaborate with the community to address crime and safety concerns.
Status:
Recommendation implemented. The update to Policy 311 limits the searches conducted on individuals on supervised release status. On April 18, 2022, the Public Safety Committee made a recommendation for a policy change to this recommendation. On July 26th, 2022 the City Council approved Policy 311 and on August 2nd, 2022 the policy was updated and released. The Department has trained on these updates and will continue to assess and review the impacts of these searches in consideration and support of the tenets of FIP.
Task Force Recommendation:
Address Profiling by Proxy (PAB Policy Development, Dispatcher Training).
Implementation:
The Communications Center Operation Manual has been amended to address handling cases involving profiling by proxy. All dispatchers have reviewed the amended manual and are instructed to be cognizant and screen for profiling by proxy calls.
Status:
Recommendation implemented. Berkeley Police Department will continue to educate and train dispatchers on how to identify and address biased based reporting. Officers and supervisors are also expected to screen profiling by proxy calls. The Department as a whole will continue to seek out and train on anti-bias, implicit bias, and profiling by proxy topics to strengthen our ability to identify and address biased based reporting.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
Task Force Recommendation:
Fire racist police officers identified through social media and other media screens.
Implementation:
The following existing policies dictate procedures for investigating employees in this area; these policies adhere to due process and Government Section 3300:
Policy 1029 (Employee Speech, Expression and Social Networking) provides accountability to employee personal social media posts. Section 1029.4(b) states “Speech or expression that, while not made pursuant to an official duty, is significantly link to, or related to, the Berkeley Police Department and tends to compromise or damage the mission, function, or reputation of professionalism of the Berkeley police Department or its employee.
PR 232 (Controversial Discussion), PR 235 (Acts –Statements-By employees), PR 238 (Organizational Membership), and PR 250 (enforcement of Law, Impartiality) are also policies that provide accountability for any racist behaviors.
The above policies were reviewed in light of the task force recommendations and found to provide necessary authority to investigate allegations of racism.
Departmental policy clearly identifies discrimination based upon a person’s race as misconduct, and requires reporting and prompt investigating of any allegation of racism. Any employee who becomes aware of or observes any discrimination on the basis of a protected class is required to notify a supervisor by the end of their shift or within 24 hours if they are off duty.
Status:
Recommendation implemented, however the Berkeley Police Department is committed to continuing to explore additional lawful methods to identify and address potentially racist behaviors or actions by our members. If at any time the police department becomes aware of any issues related to these concerns, the matter would be thoroughly investigated and employees will be held accountable.
Task Force Recommendation:
Require regular analysis of BPD stop, search, and use of force data; Implementation:
The Open Data Portal (ODP) is a public facing website that gives the public access to police data and is accessible through the City’s website. This allows for open and independent analysis and review to foster police accountability and transparency.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
The Department will not only collect and report on stop, search and use of force data, but will regularly analyze the data via the Data Analyst Team. That analysis will at a minimum help direct policy, training, and resource allocation.
Status:
Implementation of recommendation complete and the Department will continue ongoing evaluation and data sharing. BPD is committed to transparency and is continuously exploring different ways to provide the public with access to more police data. The Data and Policy Analysis Team developed a Transparency Hub that will facilitate independent review and analysis of police data. This hub was launched after several community and internal stakeholder groups had an opportunity to view and collaborate on design. The Transparency Hub hosts BPD's Open Data Portal along with tools to help the public visualize and analyze the department's data, including interactive dashboards summarizing stop and search data, calls for service, and use of force data. The Transparency Hub updates in near-real time and gives the public access to datasets reaching further back in time than had been available. In the next phase of implementation there will be a 'Crime Mapper' page on the Transparency Hub that will include additional data on cases.
Task Force Recommendations:
Make resources on police-civilian encounters more publicly available such as through RAHEEM.org;
For any individual detained, BPD officers shall provide a business card with information on the commendation and complaint process with the Police Accountability Board and the Berkeley Police Department, Internal Affairs Bureau.
Implementation:
BPD Officers provide business cards to all detained individuals with information, a QR code and links to the BPD website which provide community members with information on making a commendation or complaint about an interaction with BPD. In addition to the information on how to make a complaint, a link is provided to the ACLU webpage containing information on police-civilian encounters.
Status:
Recommendation implemented. All business cards will continue to be printed with the above information. These resources ensure police accountability as well as provide ways the community can comment on the service BPD has provided.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
Refer the following recommendations summarized below to the Reimagine Public Safety process
Task Force Recommendations:
Create a formalized feedback system to gauge community response to ongoing reforms and ensure this constructive input system is institutionalized with the Police Review Commission or its successor and includes a basic report card and quarterly neighborhood check-ins; Conduct a baseline community survey
Implementation:
BPD actively supported and participated in the work of the Reimagine Public Safety Task Force by providing data and information, answering questions, providing hands-on experience and discussing opportunities, impacts and effects of recommendations. Several community surveys were conducted by consultants as part of the overall Reimagine Public Safety process.
Status:
Initial implementation complete. To support feedback systems, the Berkeley Police Department will be seeking ongoing community input and feedback around reform efforts via the Transparency Hub.
Acknowledge and reaffirm the following recommendations summarized below that are already underway
Task Force Recommendation:
BPD released stop, arrest, calls for service and use of force data from 2012 to present to the Working Group;
Implementation:
The police department released the requested historical data in December of 2020. BPD stop, arrest, and calls for service data are regularly updated in the Open Data Portal and will be updated in near real time on the Transparency Hub.
Status:
Recommendation implemented.
Task Force Recommendation:
Fund and implement a specialized care unit for mental health crises; Implementation:
The City has contracted with a consulting firm, RDA Consulting, to conduct a feasibility study for a specialized care unit. The study has concluded; refer to below supporting materials for link to the final report from RDA Consulting.
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
Status:
Implementation in progress and being managed by the Health, Housing and Community Services (HHCS) Department. While the work to create a Specialized Care Unit continues, three community-based contracts managed by HHCS have been initiated to provide interim services.
Task Force Recommendation:
Conduct a Capacity Study of police calls and responses and use of officer time outside of case work.
Implementation:
The City’s Auditor’s report was released which analyzed Computer Aided Dispatch data. Recommendations from this analysis were provided to the Police Department and findings were referred to the Reimagine Public Safety Task Force.
Status:
Implementation in progress. An assessment of overall staffing levels as well as patrol beat specific analysis has been referred to the budget process via the Council’s direction on Reimagining Public Safety. Internally the Data Analysts Team has been directed to continue their work to refine the way and type of data that is collected, and analyze call response time to support the likely upcoming consultant work.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.
POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The Police Department will continue to work toward the full implementation of the Task Force recommendations.
FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
Staff time and additional training time to be determined at a later date.
CONTACT PERSON
Jennifer Louis, Interim Chief of Police, (510) 981-5700
Progress of the Implementation of FIP Recommendations INFORMATION CALENDAR September 20, 2022
Supporting Materials:
1: Berkeley Police Policy and Training Materials
https://berkeleyca.gov/safety-health/police/policy-training-materials 2: California Legislative Information
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=13519.
4.&nodeTreePath=7.5.1.2&lawCode=PEN
3. Reimagine Task Force and National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (NICJR) Survey
https://berkeley-rps.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Berkeley-Community- Engagement-Report-v7.pdf
4. RDA Consulting Final Report on Specialize Care Unit
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Clerk/Level_3_-_Commissions/Berkeley- MH-SCU_Final-Recommendations_FINAL.pdf
Communications
All communications submitted to the City Council are
public record. Communications are not published directly to the City’s website. Copies of individual communications are available for viewing at the City Clerk Department and through Records Online.
City Clerk Department
2180 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 981-6900
Records Online
https://records.cityofberkeley.info/
To search for communications associated with a particular City Council meeting using Records Online:
1. Select Search Type = “Public – Communication Query (Keywords)”
2. From Date: Enter the date of the Council meeting
3. To Date: Enter the date of the Council meeting (this may match the From Date field)
4. Click the “Search” button
5. Communication packets matching the entered criteria will be returned
6. Click the desired file in the Results column to view the document as a PDF