Berkeley City Council
June 27, 2023

Internal
City of Berkeley
Community Workforce Agreement

SIGNATURES
City of Berkeley
By:________________________________________
Title:

Date:___________________
Alameda County Building & Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO By:_______________________________________ Date:___________________ Signatory Unions
Asbestos Workers, Local 16 Boilermakers, Local 549
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen, Local 3 Cement Masons, Local 300 By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Electrical Workers, Local 595 Elevator Constructors, Local 8 By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Hod Carriers, Local 166 Iron Workers, Local 378
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Laborers, Local 67 Laborers, Local 304
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Operating Engineers, Local 3 Plasterers, Local 66
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Roofers, Local 81 Sheet Metal Workers, Local 104
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Sign Display, Local 510 Sprinkler Fitters, Local 483
By: _________________________ By: _________________________

Internal
City of Berkeley
Community Workforce Agreement

Teamsters, Local 853 United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices Fitting Industry, Underground Utility &
Landscape, Local 355
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ United Association of Steamfitters, Ironworkers City and the RDA Council of
Pipefitters, Plumbers, & Gas California
Fitters, Local 342
By: _________________________ By:__________________________ Council No. 16 Northern California
International Union of Laborers
Painters & Allied Trades (On behalf
of Painters, Local 3; Carpet & Linoleum
Layers, Local 12; Glass Workers, Local
169; Auto& Marine Painters, Local 1176)
By: _________________________ By: _________________________ Northern California Carpenters
Regional Council (on behalf of Carpenters,
Local 713; Carpenters, Local 2236; Lathers,
Local 68L; Millwrights, Local 102; Pile
Drivers, Local 34)
By: _________________________

Internal
City of Berkeley
Community Workforce Agreement

AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND
The undersigned, as a Contractor or Subcontractor ("Contractor") on a City Project (“Project”), for and in consideration of the award to it of a contract to perform work on said Project, and in further consideration of the mutual promises made in the Project’s Community Workforce Agreement ("Agreement"), a copy of which was received and is acknowledged, hereby:

1. Accepts and agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Agreement, together with any and all amendments and supplements now existing or which are later made to said Agreement.

2. Certifies that it has no commitments or agreements which would preclude its full and complete compliance with the terms and conditions of said Agreement;

3. Agrees to secure from any Contractor (as defined in said Agreement) which is or becomes a subcontractor (of any tier) to it, and from any successors, a duly executed Agreement to be bound in form identical to this document.

4. Contractor agrees that it shall be bound by all applicable trust agreements and plans for the provision of such fringe benefits as accrue to the direct benefit of the construction persons, including Health and Welfare, Pension, Training, Vacation, and/or other direct benefits provided pursuant to the appropriate craft agreement contained in Schedule "A" of Agreement.

Date: _______________
Company Name: ____________________________________________ Name of Prime Contractor or Higher Level Subcontractor:
__________________________________________________________ Name of Project: _______________________
Signature: ______________________________________
Print Name: ______________________________________
Title: ______________________________________
Contractor’s License #: _______________________
Motor Carrier Permit (CA) #: _______________________

Disaster and Fire Safety Commission
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

CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Disaster and Fire Safety Commission
Submitted by: Weldon Bradstreet, Chairperson, Disaster and Fire Safety Commission Subject: Request That City Council Strongly Recommend That HUD-Owned Harriet Tubman Terrace Apartments Install Solar Battery Back-up Battery Capability To Meet Medical Needs Of Their Residents During Loss Of Electrical Power And Consider Same Action For Other HUD Properties In Berkeley

RECOMMENDATION
The Disaster and Fire Safety Commission (DFSC) is requesting that Berkeley City Council strongly recommend that The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) owned Harriet Tubman Terrace Apartments install solar battery back-up battery capability to meet the medical needs of their residents during loss of electrical power and consider the same action for other HUD properties in Berkeley.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
No fiscal impacts to the City of Berkeley.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
It has been brought to the DFSC’s attention that during recent electrical power shutdowns residents in the Harriet Tubman Terrace Apartments were without electrical power for around 10 hours. Since this is a facility for the elderly and disabled this is a problem for those that need electricity for refrigeration of prescriptions and operation of some medical equipment. This facility is owned and operated by HUD. Since the building is currently undergoing a planned renovation it seems reasonable that such a requirement for the installation of a battery backup to meet the medical requirements of their residents be considered at this particular time. While there are other HUD owned properties in Berkeley, it is also a reasonable requirement that the Council consider such a requirement for them as well, however, that should be left for the Council to consider when that should be done.

Request That City Council Strongly Recommend That HUD-Owned Harriet Tubman Terrace Apartments Install Solar Battery Back-up Battery Capability To Meet Medical Needs Of Their Residents During Loss Of Electrical Power And Consider Same Action For Other HUD Properties In Berkeley June 27, 2023

BACKGROUND
The Harriet Tubman Terrace Apartments, located at 2870 Adeline Street, is a 90-unit affordable housing community that was built in 1990. It is owned by HUD which selects a management system to operate it. It provides housing for adults 62 years or older and for adults with disabilities and as I understand, the facility is historically and currently at full occupancy.

The building is now undergoing a planned renovation. That renovation has proven to be controversial. We are not proposing that the Commission engage in the issues around renovation since that would not be within our purview. However, the renovation does provide an opportunity to address one issue that is within our purview, i.e. the health and safety of residents when electric power shut-offs occur. As we all know and expect, is that the loss of electrical power is likely to happen again in the future for periods of time that are not predictable. We believe that the issue of ensuring access to medical care during these times is within the purview of the Commission to address. However, it should be clear that this one issue is the only focus of this request for action being made by the Commission.

There is a reasonable solution in requiring the installation of a battery driven back up system which will generate enough electricity to maintain a central location within the facility to meet the essential medical needs of the residents.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Such a back-up should be powered by a solar panel rather than by a natural gas generator. Gas powered generators are noisy and result in complaints from neighbor properties and residents themselves. Solar powered back-ups are quiet.

Environmentally friendly and cost less to operate.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The existence of such a back-up not only would benefit the physical health of individual residents it would lessen the anxiety and panic over the loss of medical care for extended periods of time. Furthermore, as a sign of caring for the needs of everyone, it would contribute to an overall positive sense of being cared for by everyone living in the facility.

Vote: 5 Ayes: W. Bradstreet, T. Gordon, S. Dean, G. Murphy, H. Raines: 0 Noes; 2

Absent: J. Bedolla, A. Stein; 0 Abstain

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

Request That City Council Strongly Recommend That HUD-Owned Harriet Tubman Terrace Apartments Install Solar Battery Back-up Battery Capability To Meet Medical Needs Of Their Residents During Loss Of Electrical Power And Consider Same Action For Other HUD Properties In Berkeley June 27, 2023

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager takes no position on the recommendation in this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Keith May, Secretary, Disaster and Fire Safety Commission, 510-981-5508

Peace and Justice Commission
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

CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Peace and Justice Commission
Submitted by: Grace Morizawa, Chair, Peace and Justice Commission Subject:

Establishment of a Sister City Relationship with Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution establishing a sister city relationship with the municipality of Las Vegas in the Santa Bárbara department of Honduras.

SUMMARY
The Peace and Justice Commission is tasked with recommending the establishments of new Sister Cities. Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras has approached Berkeley with the request of becoming a Sister City. Certain criteria must be met to become a Sister City, which Las Vegas, Honduras meets.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Pursuant to Resolution 56,069-N.S., the City of Berkeley has an established criterion for the establishment of a Sister City relationship. Below is a list of what the proposal must require:

A) A description of the proposed sister city, township, or community; and B) A list of similarities between Berkeley and the proposed sister community; C) An explanation of why this particular sister city should be selected by showing how it fits the below listed criteria.

There are seven criteria points that must be met:
1) The Sister City relationship should benefit the human rights, health, safety, culture, and education of the citizens of Berkeley; and

Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras Sister City CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023

2) New opportunities for exchange programs, cultural enrichment or curriculum enhancement should result from the relationship; and
3) From these new opportunities, there should accrue direct benefits to the students of the Berkeley Unified School District; and
4) It should be demonstrated that a sufficient number of Berkeley residents are committed to pursuing this relationship, and that such a group is also capable of representing Berkeley’s interest in such a relationship; and 5) It should be demonstrated that a sufficient number of residents in the proposed Sister City are committed to, and capable of, sustaining the relationship; and 6) There should be no direct nor indirect costs to the City of Berkeley; and 7) The Sister City relationship should increase the harmony in Berkeley and be in the best interests of the City.

At its regular meeting May 1, 2023, the Peace and Justice Commission adopted the following recommendation proposing the establishment of a sister city relationship with Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras.

M/S/C: Lippman, Jaqulin.

Ayes: Bohn, Jacqulin, Lippman, Morizawa.

Noes: None.

Abstain: Maran.

Absent: Lee, Gussmann.

BACKGROUND
Berkeley currently has 15 active Sister City relationships throughout the world, including two with Native American tribes. There are no Sister Cities in Honduras. The first establishment of a Sister City was in 1967 with Sakai, Japan, and latest took place in 2018, with Gonju, Republic of Korea.

The municipality of Las Vegas has sent two delegations to the City of Berkeley over the past several months to talk about setting up a Sister City relationship. The SHARE Foundation has also been in communication with the Mayor’s offices in both Berkeley and Las Vegas, Honduras on the creation of such a relationship.

Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras Sister City CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023

A. List of criteria
1) The Sister City relationship should benefit the human rights, health, safety, culture, and education of the citizens of Berkeley
There currently is no Sister City located in Honduras. Establishing one would provide new opportunities to experience the Honduran culture and share ideas that can mutually benefit our cities on a variety of fronts.
2) New opportunities for exchange programs, cultural enrichment or curriculum enhancement should result from the relationship
The proposal would proposal calls for mutual visits of delegations, with residents of Las Vegas, Honduras in Berkeley for our festivals, cultural events and community gardens with our community learning about the efforts to bring back cultural activities lost to Las Vegas under the previous government, and the campaign “Vamos a la Milpa,” developing family and community gardens to provide food independence. There are also several student exchange programs which are described below. 3) From these new opportunities, there should accrue direct benefits to the students of the Berkeley Unified School District
Discussions have already begun with Berkeley elementary schools and Berkeley High for teacher and student delegations to share the rich music program in the Berkeley schools and a vision of the mayor of Las Vegas, “Guitars and Violins for Las Vegas,'' which has become a national campaign with the partnership of SHARE Foundation to bring music to all of the schools in Honduras. Las Vegas will send their students to Berkeley to see BUSD’s rich educational opportunities and music program first hand. 4) It should be demonstrated that a sufficient number of Berkeley residents are committed to pursuing this relationship, and that such a group is also capable of representing Berkeley’s interest in such a relationship There have been many Berkeley residents, churches, and organizations who have been working with the population of Honduras over the past decade, in the shadows of the oppression and corruption of the previous national government, and will continue traveling to Honduras to work with the current government for the betterment of the Honduran people. The president-elect invited SHARE to her inauguration because she wanted the world to see that the relationship is only stronger now. 5) It should be demonstrated that a sufficient number of residents in the proposed Sister City are committed to, and capable of, sustaining the relationship

Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras Sister City CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023

There have been twelve SHARE delegations to Honduras in the past four years, including many individuals and organizations representing Berkeley. SHARE Foundation has participated in a radio program on Radio Progreso (Honduran national non-profit radio), speaking to the Honduran people every Monday for three years. 6) There should be no direct nor indirect costs to the City of Berkeley The SHARE Foundation and partnering organizations take responsibility for fundraising for any expenses related to this agreement. SHARE has raised significant funds over the years to support the work in Honduras.
7) The Sister City relationship should increase the harmony in Berkeley and be in the best interests of the City
Berkeley has a large Central American community that includes Hondurans who have come to love our city, and our Berkeley residents who have made the journey have fallen in love with Honduras and have developed deep friendships with individuals and organizations that will only get stronger with this agreement.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No environmental effects.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Establishing a new Sister City, the first in five years, would continue Berkeley’s legacy of being an international city.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager takes no position on the content and recommendations of the Commission’s Report.

CONTACT PERSON
Okeya Vance-Dozier, Peace and Justice Commission Secretary, City Manager’s Office 510-529-5376
Attachments:
1: Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

ESTABLISHING A SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE MUNICIPALITY OF LAS VEGAS IN THE SANTA BÁRBARA DEPARTMENT OF HONDURAS
WHEREAS, the Peace and Justice Commission advises the City Council on all matters relating to the City of Berkeley's role in issues of peace and social justice, and initiates and develops cultural and educational foreign exchange (Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.68.070); and
WHEREAS, the Peace and Justice Commission has been charged by the Berkeley City Council with reviewing proposals for new Sister City relationships; and WHEREAS, the SHARE Foundation presented a proposal for a Sister City relationship with the municipality of Las Vegas in the Santa Bárbara department of Honduras;1 and WHEREAS, the Peace and Justice Commission has concluded that the proposal meets the City’s criteria for establishing a Sister City, namely:

1. The Sister City relationship should benefit the human rights, health, safety, culture and education of the citizens of Berkeley; and

2. New opportunities for exchange programs, cultural enrichment, or curriculum enhancement should result from the relationship; and

3. From these new opportunities there should accrue direct benefits to the students of the Berkeley Unified School District; and

4. It should be demonstrated that a sufficient number of Berkeley residents are committed to pursuing this relationship, and that such a group is also capable of representing Berkeley’s interest in such a relationship; and

5. It should be demonstrated that a sufficient number of residents in the proposed Sister City are committed to, and capable of, sustaining the relationship; and

6. There should be no direct or indirect costs to the City of Berkeley; and 1 The city of Berkeley has maintained a long relationship with Central America during the war years, including establishing a formal sister relationship with San Antonio Los Ranchos in El Salvador, and declaring Berkeley as a Sanctuary City for Central American refugees.

The city of Berkeley is the home of the original five sanctuary congregations that helped launch the national sanctuary movement, the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, which continues to serve thousands of Central American refugees annually, and the SHARE Foundation, which has maintained sister- relationships across the region for more than 40 years

Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras Sister City CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023

7. The Sister City relationship should increase the harmony in Berkeley and be in the best interest of the City; and
WHEREAS, Mayor Victor Hugo Tejada of the municipality of Las Vegas has expressed to the Berkeley City Council his municipality’s desire for a Sister City relationship with Berkeley in a regular Council meeting on April 25, 2023.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley hereby approves the establishment of a Sister City relationship with the Municipality of Las Vegas in the Santa Bárbara department of Honduras.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley asks the Peace and Justice Commission to coordinate with the SHARE Foundation to create the sister city committee and to look for ways to strengthen solidarity and friendship activities with the city of Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara, Honduras.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley directs the city clerk to forward a copy of this resolution to Mayor Victor Hugo Tejado of Las Vegas, Santa Bárbara in Honduras; U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken; and to Berkeley’s congressional representatives.

Office of the Mayor
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
Subject: Contract No. 32000196 Amendment: Szabo & Associates for Communications Consulting Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend Contract No. 32000196 with Szabo & Associates for communications consulting services for the Mayor’s Office, increasing the contract amount by $78,000 for a new total not to exceed $303,500, and extending the contract term to June 30, 2024.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
This amendment will add $78,000 to extend the Mayor’s Office’s existing contract for communications consulting services. The term of the contract will be extended by one year to June 30, 2024. Funds for this contract amendment are available from the Mayor’s Office budget.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Under Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 7.18.010A, “expenditures…which exceed the amount of $50,000 shall require Council approval”, as adopted under Ordinance No. 7,566 and mandated under Article XI, Section 67.5 of the City Charter.

Contract No. 32000196 was entered into on March 16, 2020, originally at $35,000.

Since then, amendments have been made to extend the term of the contract. A new extension was approved by Council in July 2021, which was required as the increase in the cumulative amount of the contract went beyond the $50,000 threshold, thus requiring Council approval.

In 2021 during the first contract extension, as a courtesy, bargaining unit members of SEIU CSU/PTRLA were advised by City of Berkeley Human Resources Department of this contract extension and offered the opportunity to meet. The services provided under this contract are not of the kind, nature or type of work presently performed by the bargaining unit members.

BACKGROUND
Under Article VI, Section 21 of the City Charter, the Mayor is the ceremonial head of the City. As such, the Mayor serves as a spokesperson for the City, and should provide consistent information to residents and businesses on the operations and policies of the

Contract Amendment: Szabo & Associates CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023

City. Providing open and transparent lines of communication is a cornerstone of democracy and good governance. Relaying critical information, such as communications during the ongoing local state of emergency in response to COVID-19, PG&E Power Safety Shutoff events, other critical events, and City policies and programs, are important to the health, safety and operation of the City.

Services provided by Szabo & Associates include development of press releases and media advisories on issues of importance to the Berkeley community, maintaining social media accounts, press coordination, graphic design, and other support services relating to the communications from the Mayor’s Office.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no environmental impacts associated with the recommendations in this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Attachments:
1: Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

CONTRACT: SZABO & ASSOCIATES FOR COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE MAYOR’S OFFICE
WHEREAS, as the ceremonial head of the city under the City Charter, the Mayor must serve as a city spokesperson and provide consistent information to residents and businesses on the operations and policies of the City; and WHEREAS, Szabo & Associates is a communications consulting firm whose services include development of press releases and media advisories on issues of importance to the Berkeley community, maintaining social media accounts, press coordination, and other support services relating to the communications; and WHEREAS, providing open and transparent lines of communication is a cornerstone of democracy and good governance. Relaying critical information, such as communications during the ongoing local state of emergency in response to COVID-19, PG&E Power Safety Shutoff events, other critical events, and City policies and programs, are important to the health, safety and operation of the City; and WHEREAS, under Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 7.18.010A, “expenditures…which exceed the amount of $50,000 shall require Council approval”, as adopted under Ordinance No. 7,566 and mandated under Article XI, Section 67.5 of the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, Contract No. 32000196 was entered into on March 16, 2020, originally at $35,000, with additional amendments having been made, and requires Council approval by passing the $50,000 threshold; and
WHEREAS, in July 2021, Council approved Resolution No. 69,985-N.S. to increase the contract by $78,000 and extending the contract to June 30, 2022; and WHEREAS, in July 2022, Council approved Resolution No. 70,451-N.S. to increase the contract by $78,000 and extending the contract to June 30, 2023; and WHEREAS, funding for this amendment to extend the contract by one year is available in the Mayor’s Office budget.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to execute an amendment to Contract No. 32000196 with Szabo & Associates for communications consulting services for the Mayor’s Office, increasing the contract amount by $78,000 for a new total not to exceed $303,500, and extending the contract term to June 30, 2024.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 1 CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett (Author), Mayor Jesse Arreguin, Councilmember Kate Harrison, and Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Co-Sponsors)
Subject: Berkeley Food Utility and Access Resilience Measure (FARM)

RECOMMENDATION

1. Refer to the City Manager the task of protecting the City’s food supply from natural disasters and economic disruptions by promoting the efforts of community-based organizations to design and implement an integrated local food production and distribution system for the City of Berkeley.

2. Refer to the City Manager and the Office of Economic Development resources to research and return to the Council potential economic incentives for non-profits, agricultural producers, and small businesses to partner with the City of Berkeley to support the implementation of FARM.

3. Adopt a resolution to support the goals of the FARM initiative and the development of hyperlocal urban food production with community-based organizations.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On May 8, 2023, the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity, & Community Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Bartlett/Taplin) to send the item to Council with a positive recommendation. Vote: All Ayes.

BACKGROUND & CURRENT SITUATION
To support food resilience for the residents, the City of Berkeley should adopt a “hyper-local” in place of a “local” approach to food production and distribution. Food labeled as “local” receives its definition from a provision of the Farm Act from 2008. Under that law, a food item is deemed local when “the total distance that the product is transported is less than 400 miles from the origin or the product.”1 Hence, under this definition, fruits and vegetables sourced from Southern California are still considered “local” to the City of Berkeley. Given the recent floods that have destroyed many homes, lands, and crops, there is an urgent need to develop a program for stronger food resilience in California.2
The FARM initiative, on the other hand, supports the development of hyper-local urban 1 Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (June 18, 2008) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-110publ246/pdf/PLAW-110publ246.pdf 2 Staff, RICH RODRIGUEZ |. KMPH. “‘It’s Just a Mess’: California Farmers Growing Concerned over Lingering Flood Waters.” KRCR, 27 Mar. 2023, https://krcrtv.com/news/videos/its-just-a-mess-california-farmers-growing-concerned-over-lingering-flood-waters-pistachio- trees-kings-county-farm-breckenridge-corcoran-tule-river-deer-creek-cal-fire.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 2 food production to support community resilience in Berkeley. Hyper-local produce is food grown right in a community’s backyard and available for purchase and consumption at local markets and restaurants. The benefit of being a hyper-local food supplier is that produce can be harvested and delivered on the same day. This results in food being fresh longer than produce delivered from long distances and lessening the risk of supply chain disruption. For example, Gotham Greens in New York City produces hyper-local commercial food via urban rooftop gardens. Opportunities for hyper-local and building “Agri-hoods” (urban neighborhoods focused on local food production) continue to grow. This includes communities integrating food production into neighborhood design, with hyper-local methods of urban agriculture including SPIN Farming, (small plot intensive) vertical farming, and rooftop growing. According to Curtis Stone, SPIN farming expert and author of “The Urban Farmer” and, urban farmers can earn $75,000 on 15,000 Square Feet and can grow between 6,000 to 7,000 pounds of food on 1/10th of an acre. The City of Berkeley is 17 square miles or approximately 11,000 acres.3 One scenario envisions using distributed local production and SPIN farming to cultivate 5% of Berkeley’s total acreage. Assuming a yield of 7,000 pounds of produce per 1/10th of an acre, the scenario would provide 38 million pounds of fresh produce a year. While not enough to fully support the entire city, it is a significant step forward to food resilience, particularly for the 20,000 low-income individuals in the community.

By March of 2023, the emergency allotment for low-income individuals and households enrolled in the Federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) will end.4 This change comes at a time of historic inflation, with food prices increasing by 10%. According to Cal Policy Research, 10% of students in the UC System access SNAP Benefits, which helps students make ends meet while attending university.5 The FARM Initiative sets the framework to not only increase the production and supply of fresh produce in Berkeley, but also to facilitate group buying power for SNAP participants in Berkeley, to help lower the cost, support local growers, and help the community eat healthier.

Berkeley is home to the local foods revolution, yet thousands of Berkeley residents are food insecure. Natural disasters and economic downturns exacerbate this insecurity, and climate change increases the likelihood and severity of food supply interruption.

Berkeley has the framework for food resiliency through its successful farmers’ markets; service providers who have been providing meals to homeless individuals since the early 1970s; community groups like Consider the Homeless and Food Not Bombs, which distribute food to homeless populations; and the Berkeley Food Network (BFN). Founded in 2016 in collaboration 3 Maki, Olivia, How Urban Farmers Can Earn $75,000 on 15,000 Square Feet (February 29, 2016) https://civileats.com/2016/02/29/how-urban-farmers-curtis-stone-earns-75000-on-15000-square-feet/ 4 "MoCorvey, J., and Rob Wile. ""With Foods Stamp Cuts just Days Away, Millions of Americans Brace for Tougher Times Int He Grocery Aisle" Feb 26, 2023 https://www.nbcrightnow.com/national/with-food-stamp-cuts-just-days-away-millions-of-americans-brace-for- tougher-times-in/article_3e070c3e-b616-11ed-a950-0f3c90f9985b.html 5 California Community College and University of California student participation in CalFresh food benefits (February 23, 2022) https://www.capolicylab.org/california-community-college-and-university-of-california-student-participation-in-calfresh-food- benefits/

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 3 with community organizations, BFN promotes access to nutritional food by using “innovative, community-centered solutions to build a more sustainable, resilient, and equitable food system.”6
The City should preemptively safeguard its residents from a food supply chain interruption through a Food Utility and Access Resilience Measure (FARM). The FARM initiative achieves food resilience by (1) developing hyper-local food production sources; (2) connecting these sources to each other and local community hubs, including food banks, grocery stores, restaurants, and schools; and (3) powering hyper-local food production sources using renewable energy with battery backup storage that can operate despite disruptions to the main power grid. These efforts will be assisted by the requirements under SB 1383, which requires restaurants and grocery stores to compost leftover food. These businesses would benefit from having a lower-cost method of disposing of still-fresh but excess food.

1. Community resilience
Government planners are faced with an emergent set of existential threats to populations and infrastructure. Many threats stem from the rapid advancement of climate change, with the increasing frequency of extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, droughts, and fires. In addition to climate disasters, disaster preparedness must brace for pandemics, electrical failure, targeted violence, cyber-attacks, water and energy infrastructure failure, sea level rise, supply chain breakdown, and food insecurity. These threats arise from various sources and therefore require a systems-level approach that addresses all the possible points of failure in an urban food supply chain.

Accordingly, policymakers are embracing new emergency preparedness and disaster mitigation models centered on equity and resilience at the community level (community resilience). Community resilience refers to the ability of a community to withstand and recover from disruptions, such as natural disasters, economic downturns, or health crises. Community resilience leverages local community networks; local knowledge; local communication channels; local resources; and local bodies of governance and leadership.

2. Food resilience
One component of community resilience is food resilience, which refers to the ways in which a community can ensure its members have access to healthy and nutritious food, even during times of crisis. This can involve a variety of strategies, such as growing food locally, supporting local agriculture, building community gardens, developing food storage and preservation facilities, and forming relationships with local food producers. By building a resilient local food system, communities can reduce their 6 Berkeley Food Network, About BFN, (last accessed Jan. 5, 2023), https://berkeleyfoodnetwork.org/who-we-are/about/.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 4 reliance on remote sources of food and ensure that they are able to continue providing sustenance for residents, even during challenging times.

FARM’s development of a local, resilient food system empowers the City of Berkeley to achieve one of its key Climate Action Plan goals. Adopted in 2009, the Climate Action Plan calls for the “majority of food consumed in Berkeley” to be produced locally.7 By creating a network of local food production, FARM lays the foundation for local, higher-yield production of nutritious food that the City can scale up to meet its goal. This environmental objective is intertwined with resilience. Lowering the distance between the location of production and consumption improves the ability to supply food to the people of Berkeley despite disruptions to transportation.

The State of California and the U.S. Federal Government are increasingly incorporating food resilience in disaster planning and view food security as foundational to any resilience effort. For example, California’s budget for the fiscal year 2022-23 allocates $477 million toward agricultural resilience measures, including climate-friendly agriculture, soil health, water efficiency, and wildfire prevention.8 Additionally, California’s Strategic Growth Council (SGC) has called for local-level resilience through its Community Resilience Centers (CRC) program. The CRC program will “fund new construction and upgrades of neighborhood-level resilience centers to provide shelter and resources during climate and other emergencies . . ..”9 At the federal level, President Joe Biden signed National Security Memorandum- 16 (NSM-16) in November 2022 “to strengthen the security and resilience of United States food and agriculture.” NSM-16 provides a process for identifying and assessing threats to food security, strengthens relationships with the private sector, and promotes systems that respond to disruptions in the food sector.10

3. Food is a fundamental human right.

It has been often said, “There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy.” And Vladimir Lenin said, “Every society is three meals away from chaos.” Like air and water, food is essential for survival and the only commodity that cannot be postponed. When social, economic, or ecological barriers block access to nutritious 7 City of Berkeley, Berkeley Climate Action Plan, (June 2, 2009), https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/adopted- plans/berkeley-climate-action-plan.
8 Arohi Sharma, FY22 California Budget Invests in Agricultural Resilience, NRDC (Sep. 21, 2022), https://www.nrdc.org/experts/arohi- sharma/fy22-california-budget-invests-food-farm-resilience. 9 Cal. Strategic Growth Council, SGC Launches Development of Community Resilience Centers (CRC) Program, (July 5, 2022), https://sgc.ca.gov/news/2022/07-05.html.
10 See National Security Memorandum on Strengthening the Security and Resilience of United States Food and Agriculture, (Nov. 10, 2022), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/11/10/national-security-memorandum-on-on- strengthening-the-security-and-resilience-of-united-states-food-and-agriculture/.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 5 food, people suffer. Food-insecure individuals have higher rates of mental health issues, and hungry children attain lower academic achievement than their peers.11 The United Nations recognizes the fundamental right to food for all. At its core, this right is the right to “all nutritional elements” necessary to live a “healthy and active life” and to the means to access these elements.12 The access portion of this right focuses on physical and economic access.13
The U.S. federal government has failed to legally recognize such a right, but some states have made progress. In 2021, the State of Maine recognized the right to food in its constitution.14 The amendment declares that “all individuals have the right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing for their own nourishment, sustenance, bodily health, and well-being.”15 This amendment follows Maine’s 2017 Food Sovereignty Act, which built a food sovereignty foundation by permitting municipal governments to regulate local food systems with the guarantee of state recognition.16

4. Food insecurity rates are rising in the Bay Area.

Food insecurity is a growing crisis throughout the U.S.. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines food insecurity as “a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food.”17 The USDA found that in 2020, almost 14 million households (10.5% of the population) did not have enough food to meet their needs. In California alone, more than 4 million people were reported to be food insecure in May 2022,18 and in the Bay Area, food insecurity is increasing. In 2018, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that 11.5% of Bay Area residents, 870,000 people, were food insecure.19 The economic and public health impacts of COVID-19 exacerbated food insecurity. A 2021 study by San Jose State University found that Bay Area food 11 Arohi Pathak, Ryan Richards & Marc Jarsulic, The United States Can End Hunger and Food Insecurity for Millions of People, Center for American Progress Action Fund (Aug. 11, 2022), https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-united-states-can-end-hunger-and- food-insecurity-for-millions-of-people/.
12 Off. of the High Comm’r for Hum. Rts., The Right to Adequate Food, Fact Sheet No. 34 (Apr. 2010), https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/FactSheet34en.pdf. 13 Id.
14 Tess Brennan, Maine Becomes the First US State to Recognize the Right to Food in a Constitutional Amendment, Universal Rts. Grp.

Geneva (Jan. 19, 2022), https://www.universal-rights.org/blog/maine-becomes-the-first-us-state-to-recognise-the-right-to-food-in- a-constitutional-amendment/.
15 Id.
16 See id.
17 USDA, Definitions of Food Security, https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/definitions-of- food-security/.
18 Toni Koraza, California to Face a Devastating Crisis, NewsBreak (May 5, 2022), https://original.newsbreak.com/@toni-koraza- 561162/2590989189701-california-to-face-a-devastating-crisis. 19 Tara Duggan, How Families Slip Through, San Francisco Chronicle (Nov. 18, 2018), https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/article/The- hidden-hungryA-Bay-Area-paradox-13379274.php.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 6 insecurity rates spiked from 20% to 33% from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to March 2021.20
In Berkeley and Albany pre-pandemic, an estimated 24,000 individuals were food insecure.21 The demand for food aid in Berkeley increased sharply during the pandemic, forcing the Berkeley Food Network (BFN) to triple its operations in the first half of 2020.22
Although many households are still bearing the economic impacts of COVID-19, the USDA is cutting SNAP benefits (CalFresh) to pre-pandemic levels after the February 2023 issuance.23 This deduction comes at a time of record-high food inflation; the U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that prices for food at home increased by 13.5% in the 12 months ending in August 2022.24 This spike is “the largest 12-month percentage increase since the period ending in March 1979.”25
The growing demand for food aid in Berkeley, coupled with recent reductions in government food benefits, highlights the fragility of the degree of food accessibility at any given time. If there is a disruption in the food supply chain, households that are already food insecure will face even greater barriers to food access. Further, the COVID- 19 pandemic demonstrated that disruption would drastically increase the number of households that are food insecure. Without a safety net to insulate our community from these devastating supply chain shocks, a large proportion of households would find themselves in a struggle to survive.

5. Natural disasters, climate change, and foreign conflicts further threaten food access.

Climate change, natural disasters, and increasing global conflict jeopardize the world’s food security. The market for food spans internationally, so disruptions in one region send ripple effects, in the form of food scarcity or price shocks, throughout the rest of the food supply chain. The supply chain is fragile; it only takes a disruption in one of the chain’s many links for consumers to lose access to healthy food.26 Recognizing the supply chain's vulnerability, the USDA built a Food System Transformation framework to 20 Giselle Pignotti et al., Food Insecurity and Food Access during COVID-19 in the San Francisco Bay Area, San Jose State Univ. (Mar. 2021). 21 Berkeley Food Network, Programs, (last accessed Dec. 20, 2022), https://berkeleyfoodnetwork.org/what-we-do/programs/. 22 Berkeley Food Network, Major Hunger-Relief Investment Will Help Alleviate Growing Food Insecurity in Berkeley, (May 19, 2020), https://berkeleyfoodnetwork.org/major-hunger-relief-investment-will-help-alleviate-growing-food-insecurity-in-berkeley/. 23 USDA, Changes to SNAP Benefit Amounts - 2023, (updated on Feb. 17, 2023), https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/changes-2023-benefit- amounts.
24 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Prices for Food at Home Up 13.5 Percent for Year Ended August 2022, The Economics Daily (Sep. 15, 2022), https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2022/prices-for-food-at-home-up-13-5-percent-for-year-ended-august-2022.htm. 25 Id.
26 Mario Lubetkin, 2021 Revealed the Fragility of Food Systems, ReliefWeb (Dec. 16, 2021), https://reliefweb.int/report/world/2021- revealed-fragility-food-systems.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 7 create a more resilient food network.27 Climate change reduces food availability and is exacerbated by transporting food long distances that could be grown locally.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted “all segments of food supply chains,” including farming, food processing, transportation, and final demand.28 At the farming level, labor-intensive farms – those producing crops like fruits and vegetables – suffered from production shortages when their sick workers were unable to work.29 Labor shortages also inhibited food processing facilities, with many reporting high rates of worker absences during the pandemic.30 Necessary pandemic measures severely impacted the transportation of fruits and vegetables. Fruits and vegetables are perishable foods with a “high value-to-weight ratio,” so they are transported on passenger planes. Declines in passenger air travel thus caused bottlenecks in fruit and vegetable transportation.31 The last step in the supply chain is getting food to consumers. When consumers lost their jobs due to the initial economic downturn in 2020, they lost economic access to food, endangering those without social safety nets.

Like the COVID-19 pandemic, other natural disasters threaten global food security by disrupting agriculture production, food availability, and food accessibility. A survey on natural disasters between 2003 and 2013 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations “showed 25% of disaster-related losses are in agriculture sectors . . ..”32 The impact of a natural disaster depends on the type of natural disaster that occurs. For example, researchers report that droughts in China cut wheat yields by 5.8% over 30 years.33
These dangers hit close to home. A report by leading conservation research group NatureServe found that California, Texas, and the southeastern United States are where the highest percentages of plants, animals, and ecosystems are at risk.34 Droughts are a growing danger in California that reduces usable farmland. In 2022, California’s irrigated farmland shrank by 752,000 acres (nearly 10%) compared with 27 USDA, USDA Announces Framework for Shoring Up the Food Supply Chain and Transforming the Food System to Be Fairer, More Competitive, More Resilient, (June 1, 2022), https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/06/01/usda-announces-framework- shoring-food-supply-chain-and-transforming.
28 OECD, Food Supply Chains and COVID-19: Impacts and Policy Lessons, (June 2, 2020), https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy- responses/food-supply-chains-and-covid-19-impacts-and-policy-lessons-71b57aea/. 29 Id.
30 Id.
31 Id.
32 James Ducker, Investigating the Impact of Disasters on Food and Agriculture, AZO Life Sciences (last updated Nov. 26, 2021), https://www.azolifesciences.com/article/Investigating-the-Impact-of-Disasters-on-Food-and-Agriculture.aspx. 33 Shi et al., Crop Yield and Production Responses to Climate Disasters in China, 750 Science of the Total Environment (2021). 34 Brad Brooks, Huge Chunk of Plants, Animals in U.S. at Risk of Extinction - Report, Yahoo!News (Feb. 6, 2023), https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-huge-chunk-plants-animals-090952175.html.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 8 2019, the year before the drought.35 The amount of fallowed farmland in 2022 surpassed the peak during California’s last drought, which lasted from 2012 to 2016.36 While droughts are long-term natural disasters with creeping effects, wildfires can impact the supply chain immediately. During the 2020 California wildfires, the intense smoke made it unsafe for farm workers and livestock to be outdoors.37 Without workers, farms had to plow under many crops, meaning these crops never reached consumers. Additionally, the wildfires destroyed vital land where farmers grew food; the fires destroyed the existing crops and contaminated the soil, jeopardizing future harvests.38
War can also disrupt the food supply chain. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, one of the world's biggest wheat and corn producers, caused many countries to skyrocket food prices.39 The invasion halted Ukrainian exports and damaged Ukraine’s rail infrastructure. As a result, large quantities of grain were trapped in Ukraine, preventing the entire 2022 harvest from having adequate storage space.40 This supply shock affected countries throughout the world, including India, Egypt, and South Korea.

Further, Russia was one of the top exporters of fertilizers before the invasion. Stricter controls on Russian exports caused the price of fertilizer to spike worldwide, leading farmers to reduce their planned harvests.41

6. Food Citizenship
“Food citizenship” describes the rights and responsibilities that individuals have in relation to the food they eat and produce. Food citizenship can include making informed choices about food purchases and consumption, supporting sustainable and ethical food systems, and advocating for food policies that prioritize the health and well- being of individuals and the environment. Food citizenship can also involve taking action to address issues such as food waste, hunger, and access to healthy food in underserved communities. Essentially, being a food citizen means actively engaging in the food system and working toward creating a more sustainable and equitable food system for all.

Food citizenship can play an important role in promoting community resilience by supporting local food systems and promoting food security. When communities have 35 Ian James, ‘It’s a Disaster.’ Drought Dramatically Shrinking California Farmland, Costing $1.7 Billion, Los Angeles Times (Nov. 23, 2022), https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2022-11-23/drought-cost-california-agriculture-1-7-billion-this-year. 36 Id.
37 Phil Lempert, California Wildfires: The Enormous Effect on Our Food Supply, Retail Dietitians Bus. Alliance (Dec. 9, 2020), https://www.retaildietitians.com/articles/california-wildfires-the-enormous-effect-on-our-food-supply/. 38 Id.
39 Rob Garver, Global Food Prices Rise with Ukraine-Russia Agreement in Doubt, VOA News (Oct. 31, 2022), https://www.voanews.com/a/global-food-prices-rise-with-ukraine-russia-agreement-in-doubt-/6813606.html. 40 Dea Bankova, Prasanta Kumar Dutta & Michael Ovaska, The War in Ukraine is Fuelling a Global Food Crisis, Reuters (May 30, 2022), https://graphics.reuters.com/UKRAINE-CRISIS/FOOD/zjvqkgomjvx/. 41 Id.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 9 access to healthy and sustainable food sources, they are better able to withstand and recover from disruptions, such as natural disasters or economic downturns.

If a community is able to grow or produce its own food, it is less dependent on outside sources and can continue to provide for itself in the event of a supply chain disruption. Additionally, supporting local food systems can help to boost the local economy and create jobs, which can increase the overall resilience of the community.

Further, food citizenship can promote food justice and equity within a community, ensuring that all members have access to healthy and affordable food. This can reduce food insecurity and prevent vulnerable populations from being disproportionately affected by disruptions to the food system.

7. A food resilience system could insure Berkeley against disruptions in the food supply chain.

Building a food resilience system before a supply chain disruption protects food- insecure households and prevents more households from becoming food insecure. Food resilience is the ability to withstand and recover from disruptions to food access in a way that ensures a sufficient supply of acceptable and accessible food for all.42

8. FARM as a Community Food Utility: Overview43
The mission of FARM is to foster a resilient food system that can withstand supply chain shocks and ensure all people in the community have access to adequate amounts of wholesome, nutritious foods produced by ecologically sound and socially responsible means. FARM would be a chartered public utility based on the concept of food citizenship, similar to the existing utilities for energy and water systems. FARM would have three major components: a) Community Layer, b) Food Production Layer, and c) Energy Resilience.
a. Community Layer
Growing food locally promotes physical access to food in times of crisis. To ensure that enough food is locally grown, it is critical to connect community gardens, backyard gardens, and other urban farms into a production network with delivery centers.
i. Community Gardens and Backyard Gardens
The FARM should create a network of community gardens and backyard gardens in order to support community resilience by providing local food sources, fostering social connections, and promoting environmental sustainability.
42 Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, Food System Resilience, https://clf.jhsph.edu/projects/food-system-resilience. 43 Ikerd, J. (n.d.). Enough Good Food For All; A Community Food Utility. Communityfoodutility. Retrieved January 4, 2023, from https://sites.google.com/site/communityfoodutility?pli=1

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 10 Community gardens and backyard gardens can provide communities with a local source of fresh, healthy, and affordable produce. This can help to increase food security and reduce dependency on outside sources, making communities more resilient in the face of disruptions to the food supply chain. One backyard garden can provide food for up to six families.

Community gardens can also provide a space for community members to come together and engage in productive, healthy activities. This can help to build social connections and a sense of community, which are important for promoting resilience in the face of challenges.

Furthermore, community gardens and backyard gardens help to promote environmental sustainability and resilience by providing a space for growing food using sustainable and environmentally-friendly practices.

This can help to reduce the community's overall ecological footprint and make it more resilient in the face of environmental challenges. ii. Synchronizing Local Food Production with Food Banks, Restaurants, Schools, and Grocery Stores
Yields from local food production can be distributed to local food banks, restaurants, schools, and grocery stores. This omnichannel production and distribution model has two key benefits. First, it ensures that locally produced food is not wasted. Second, it provides a source of feedback for FARM because restaurants, schools, and grocery stores can provide guidance to FARM for improvements in usability, quantity, and quality.

iii. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
The community layer should incorporate a SNAP group-buying mechanism whereby SNAP recipients can deposit assistance funds into a FARM account. In return, the FARM would ensure that each recipient received enough good food to meet their basic needs, regardless of the amount of their individual SNAP payment. Some non-profit organizations are currently operating in this manner.44
b. Production Layer
Additionally, FARM would partner with urban agriculture companies and nonprofits with experience and expertise in producing high crop yields with accelerated harvest velocity in urban settings. The yields from these producers could supplement yields from existing community gardens while minimizing seasonal fluctuations and other disruptions in the supply chain. 44 See e.g., Community Resilience Centers, CA.gov (last accessed Nov. 30, 2022), https://sgc.ca.gov/programs/community-resilience- centers/.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 11 To increase local food production, the City would offer certain economic incentives to urban agriculture companies to co-locate within the City of Berkeley. In exchange for these incentives, companies would agree to give the City Most Favored Nation (“MFN”) status, with the right of first refusal and right of first offer on the companies’ food items in the event of a local food supply chain disruption event (food shock). As discussed below, the FARM board will institute policies that define a food shock that triggers the MFN agreement. For example, the board may define a food shock to include a week-long interruption of certain food staples at two grocery stores.

Recent innovations continue to mitigate the historical limitations of urban agriculture: land, labor, and potential yield. A study on urban farms in New York City found that the crops in urban farms produced higher yields than their conventional farm counterparts, thus making up for the spatial limitations that urban farms may face.45 Additionally, peri-urban farming, which produces substantial amounts of food on a relatively small amount of land on the fringes of a city, has emerged as a space-efficient form of urban agriculture.46 Gotham Greens addresses the yield limit issue by growing crops inside greenhouses with hydroponic technology. Gotham Greens’ greenhouses are located near cities, allowing for proximity to communities while avoiding real estate constraints.47 Closer to home, Upside Foods has opened a production facility to produce high- quality laboratory-grown meat at scale.48
i. Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA)
CEA is an indoor food production method that uses stacked shelves, modular rack systems, or tower gardens to increase crop yields using less surface area significantly.49 Technologies such as ultra-efficient LED lighting, automated environmental control systems, and dehumidification recapture loops can dramatically reduce resource consumption, including consumption of energy, water, and nutrients. Photographs of such technologies are included in Attachment 1.

Exceptional yields and multiple harvests per year make indoor farming economically viable and sustainable over time. These two factors are 45 Mara Gittleman et al., Using Citizen Science to Quantify Community Garden Crop Yields, 5 Cities and the Environment (2012), https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1095&context=cate. 46 Ina Optiz et al., Contributing to Food Security in Urban Areas: Differences Between Urban Agriculture and Peri-Urban Agriculture in the Global North, 33 Agriculture and Human Values (2016), https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-015-9610-2. 47 Gotham Greens, Our Story, https://www.gothamgreens.com/our-story/. 48 Katie Spalding, World’s Most Advanced Lab-Grown Meat Facility Opens in California, IFL Science (Nov. 8, 2021), https://www.iflscience.com/worlds-most-advanced-labgrown-meat-facility-opens-in-california-61548. 49 Sarah Federman, Vertical Farming for the Future, USDA (Oct. 25, 2021), https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2018/08/14/vertical- farming-future; see e.g., Gardyn, How It Works, (last accessed Mar. 3, 2023), https://mygardyn.com/how-it-works/.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 12 possible because indoor farming creates an environment for resource- efficient methods such as aeroponics50 (i.e., spraying nutrient-rich mist on root zones that are suspended in the air) and aquaponics.

Aquaponics is a sustainable farming method that combines traditional aquaculture (raising fish) with hydroponics (growing plants in water without soil). In an aquaponic system, fish produce waste that is converted into plant nutrients. The plants, in turn, help to purify the water for the fish. This closed-loop system can be highly efficient, as it reduces the need for external inputs such as synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, and it allows for year-round production in a controlled environment. Aquaponics can be used to grow various vegetables, herbs, and other plants, as well as raise fish such as tilapia, trout, and bass. It can be a great option for urban farming, as it requires less space and water than traditional farming methods.

Compared to traditional farming techniques, aeroponics and aquaponics dramatically increase yields and quality while reducing water consumption by as much as 90%.51
ii. Repurposing Empty Commercial Space
Indoor farms can be developed in underutilized warehouses, shuttered big boxes retail locations such as the vacant CVS on Shattuck and Bancroft, and the vacant Walgreens on Ashby and San Pablo, or under freeway overpasses such as Gilman and I-80. To create dual-purpose land use throughout the city, advanced greenhouses could be elevated above existing ground-level parking lots at locations such as Whole Foods in North Berkeley.
c. Energy Resilience
The food production network should integrate renewable energy systems that can remain resilient in the event of a disruption to the energy grid. Such a system could employ local micro-grids with solar and storage to provide power to local food production facilities. Additionally, a renewable energy system could help limit environmental impact and reduce long-term costs.52 50 See e.g., Rouses Markets, Rouses Markets Creates Sustainable Aeroponic Rooftop Garden Above Downtown New Orleans Store, Cision (May 17, 2012), https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/rouses-markets-creates-sustainable-aeroponic-rooftop-garden- above-downtown-new-orleans-store-151890995.html; Rouses Roots on the Rooftop, Tower Farms (last accessed Mar. 3, 2023), https://www.towerfarms.com/us/en/possibilities/rooftop-farming/rouses-rooftop-farm. 51 Michelle Keller, Aeroponics - What Is It & Why Is It Important?, Living Greens Farm (Aug. 4, 2020), https://www.livinggreensfarm.com/blog/what-is-aeroponics. 52 US Department of Agriculture, Rural Energy for America Program Renewable Energy Systems & Energy Efficiency Improvement Guaranteed Loans & Grants, https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/energy-programs/rural-energy-america-program- renewable-energy-systems-energy-efficiency-improvement-guaranteed-loans.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 13 This renewable energy system would combine various methods of production to maximize redundancies and extend grid independence of the food resilience program in the event of a major energy crisis. Existing technologies such as rooftop solar arrays and onsite battery storage systems can be combined with emerging technologies such as urban wind turbines,53 transparent solar panels that allow crops below to absorb energy,54 and biofuel co-generators55 for use when other means of production are not available. These emerging technologies should be considered and planned for when developing the energy independence component of FARM, placing Berkeley at the forefront of sustainability in urban farming.

9. FARM: Organization
The FARM will be a self-organized, self-funded non-profit serving the City of Berkeley. FARM will have a self-appointed Board of Directors, approved by the City Council, with duties and administrative powers also approved by the Council.

As the work of the FARM supplements sustainability, disaster preparedness, and community health work currently done by City workers. No current work performed by represented City employees will be contracted out through this community-based non- profit organization or other entity.

The FARM could be organized as a “vertical cooperative.”56 A cooperative is a user-owned and controlled entity from which benefits are distributed equitably.57 As a vertical cooperative, the FARM would operate on all levels of the vertical food system — linking producers, processors, distributors, retailers, and consumers. The system as a whole must be sustainable if the FARM continues to provide food security for the community. All recipients and participants in the vertical system would be members of the FARM cooperative.

10. FARM: Governance
The FARM will begin with a volunteer, skills-based governing board, named the Food Security Council, with the City acting as a facilitator. Once the FARM has achieved grant funding, the Food Security Council members will be compensated. The Food Security Council should consist of community members, grant writers, SNAP recipients, food producers, an organized labor representative, and experts in resilience, logistics, 53 IBIS Power, Easily Upgrade Your Building to Renewable Energy, (last accessed Dec. 20, 2022), https://ibispower.eu/powernest/. 54 Anthony Cuthbertson, Record-Breaking Transparent Solar Panels Pave Way for Electricity-Generating Windows, Independent (Oct. 28, 2022), https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/solar-panel-world-record-window-b2211057.html. 55 Diego Perrone et al., Energy and Economic Investigation of a Biodiesel-Fired Engine for Micro-Scale Cogeneration, 14 Energies (2021), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348594263_Energy_and_Economic_Investigation_of_a_Biodiesel- Fired_Engine_for_Micro-Scale_Cogeneration.
56 John Ikerd, The Economic Pamphleteer: Reflections on Cooperation, Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development (2013), https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2013.032.001. 57 USDA, Understanding Cooperatives: Cooperative Business Principles, (Revised Apr. 2011), https://www.rd.usda.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CIR_45-2.pdf.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 14 renewable energy, agriculture technology, and public health. All members would be appointed by the nonprofit. The Food Security Council will have six core responsibilities:

1. Form the FARM as a non-profit organization;

2. Apply for grant funding;

3. Seek external partnerships;

4. Manage the FARM’s efforts to develop and maintain food production and distribution processes;

5. Determine the caloric needs of residents based on empirical evidence to set food production goals for the FARM; and

6. Define food shock events (e.g., how many days without staples constitute a food shock).

11. FARM: Potential Funding Sources
Funding sources include fees for administering government food assistance programs and grants from California, the USDA, and the Department of Energy (DOE) are available.
a. Federal and State Food Insecurity Related Grants and Programs Grant or
Program
Amount Source/
Sponsor
Eligible Projects
Local Foods,
Local Places
- USDA and
EPA
Developing the local food economy.

Examples: community gardens, kitchens,
farmer's markets, and other food-related
enterprises that can create new businesses
and revitalize main streets, improve access
to fresh, local food, and protect the
environment.

Community
Food Projects
Competitive
Grants
Program
(CFPCGP)
$25K-35K in
planning; Up to
$125K per year
for up to four
years
USDA Planning toward the improvement of
community food security in accordance with
the goals of CFPCGP.

The GusNIP -
Nutrition
Incentive
Program
- USDA Projects intended to increase the purchase
of fruits and vegetables by providing
incentives at the point of purchase among
income-eligible consumers participating in
the USDA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP)

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 15 Farm to School
Grant
Up to $500K USDA Linking local producers with schools and other organizations participating in child
nutrition programs working to purchase and
include locally grown fruits, vegetables,
grains, meat, dairy, and seafood in program
meals.

Conservation
Innovation
Grants
- USDA Projects supporting the development of
farming technology to efficiently increase
agricultural production through the
conservation of natural resources, such as
water and soil.

The Farmers
Market
Promotion
Program
(FMPP)
- Projects that develop, coordinate, and
expand direct producer-to-consumer
markets to help increase access to and
availability of locally and regionally produced
agricultural products by developing,
coordinating, expanding, and providing
outreach, training, and technical assistance
to domestic farmers markets, roadside
stands, community-supported agriculture
programs, agritourism activities, online sales
or other direct producer-to-consumer
(including direct producer-to-retail, direct
producer-to-restaurant, and direct producer-
to-institutional marketing) market
opportunities.

Local Food
Promotion
Program
$25,000 to
$100,000 (for
Planning
projects) and
$100,000 to
$500,000 (for
Implementation
and Farm to
Institution
projects)
USDA Grants for Planning projects help food
businesses to develop and test services.

Grants for Implementation projects fund the
creation of food businesses like community
kitchens. Grants for Farm to Institution
projects support institutional food services
like schools with linkage to farms.

Food and
Agriculture
Service
Learning
- USDA For private organizations or non-profits to
increase the capacity for food, garden, and
nutrition education within host organizations
or entities, such as school cafeterias and

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 16 Program classrooms while fostering higher levels of
community engagement between farms and
school systems by bringing together
stakeholders from distinct parts of the food
system.
b. Federal and State Resilience Grants and Programs
Grant or
Program
Amount Source/
Sponsor
Eligible Projects
CA Community
Resilience
Centers
(anticipated
release in
spring 2023)
- California
Strategic
Growth
Council
New construction and upgrades of
neighborhood-level resilience centers to
provide shelter and resources during
climate and other emergencies. The
program will also fund year-round
services and ongoing programming that
build overall community resilience.

Building
Resilient
Infrastructure
and
Communities
(BRIC) Grant
- FEMA Hazard mitigation projects, reducing the
risks they face from disasters and natural
hazards.

Hazard
Mitigation
Grant Program
(HMGP)
- FEMA/ OEM Developing hazard mitigation plans and
rebuilding in a way that reduces, or
mitigates, future disaster losses in local
communities.

Regional
Resilience
Planning and
Implementation
Grant Program
- Governor’s
Office of
Planning and
Research
Advancing resilience and responding to
their greatest climate risks through three
major activities: capacity building,
planning (including identifying climate
resilience priorities), and project
implementation.

CA
Transformative
Climate
Communities
- California
Strategic
Growth
Council
Development and infrastructure projects
that achieve major environmental, health,
and economic benefits in California’s most
disadvantaged communities.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 17 c. Federal and State Renewable Energy Grants and Programs Grant or
Program
Amount Source/
Sponsor
Eligible Projects
Energy
Efficiency and
Conservation
Block Grant
(EECBG)
Program
$500,000,000 Department
of Energy
Development and implementation of an
energy efficiency and conservation
strategy; establishment of financial
incentive programs for energy efficiency
improvements.

CA
Transformative
Climate
Communities
- California
Strategic
Growth
Council
Development and infrastructure projects
that achieve major environmental, health,
and economic benefits in California’s most
disadvantaged communities.

CA Distributed
Electricity
Backup Assets
Program
- California Construction of cleaner and more efficient distributed energy assets that would serve
as on-call emergency supply or load
reduction for the state's electrical grid
during extreme events.

CA Climate
Catalyst
Revolving Loan
Fund
- California
Infrastructure
and Economic
Development
Bank
Projects that promote climate-smart
technologies and practices across the
agricultural value chain
Projects may include (but are not limited
to):
● On-farm and food processing
renewable energy, including
electricity, fuels, and bioenergy
● Energy, water, and materials
efficiency
● Methane reduction projects that
use best practice approaches
consistent with state policy goals
● Energy storage or microgrids
● Equipment replacements
Renewable
Energy For
Agricultural
Program (REAP)
- California
Energy
Commission
Installation of renewable energy
technologies serving agricultural
operations to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 18 12. Berkeley is well positioned for a food resilience program.

The City of Berkeley has already taken steps that facilitate a food resilience program. In 2018, the City updated its Urban Agriculture Ordinance, lowering barriers to urban farming in Berkeley.58 The update reduced the permit costs for larger-scale farming projects to $1,000.00 and removed requirements that restricted farming to select city-owned properties.59

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
A food resilience program that involves urban agriculture is expected to reduce pollution from food transportation. Urban agriculture shortens the supply chain, truncating the journey from farm to table.

REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS, PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND LAWS
Adopted in 2009, Berkeley’s Climate Action Plan outlines a vision for a more sustainable city.

One key goal in the Plan is for the “majority of food consumed in Berkeley” to be produced locally.60 FARM advances this goal by bringing food production and individuals closer together.

On July 24, 2022, the City of Berkeley adopted an ordinance that updated the municipal code on urban agriculture as follows61:

Purpose (23.318.010)
The purpose of the Urban Agriculture related regulations contained in this chapter is to provide the following community benefits:

A. Support the local economy and increase access to fresh local produce.

B. Strengthen the health and social fabric of communities by encouraging and supporting community gardens.

C. Accomplish the Berkeley Climate Action Plan goal of supporting efforts to build more complete and sustainable local food production and distribution systems Applicability (23.318.020)
These regulations supersede definitions of incidental or ancillary uses.

Urban Agriculture Uses and Levels of Discretion (23.318.030) A. Zoning Certificate. When all of the thresholds in Section 23.318.040 (Thresholds) are met, the use is considered Low-Impact Urban Agriculture (LIUA) and is allowed by right with a Zoning Certificate.

B. Administrative Use Permit. When one or more of the thresholds in Section 23.318.040 (Thresholds) are not met, the use is considered High-Impact Urban Agriculture (HIUA) requires an AUP. (Ord. 7787-NS § 2 (Exh. A), 2021)
58 Stuart Luman, Berkeley’s New Urban Agriculture Ordinance Encourages Residents to Grow Their Own Food, Berkeleyside (Aug. 27, 2018), https://www.berkeleyside.org/2018/08/27/berkeley-urban-agriculture-law. 59 Id.
60 City of Berkeley, Berkeley Climate Action Plan, (June 2, 2009), https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/adopted- plans/berkeley-climate-action-plan.
61 Berkeley Municipal Code 23.318.050.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 19 Thresholds (23.318.040)
The levels of discretion for urban agriculture are based on the following thresholds:

A. Maximum parcel size of 7,500 square feet.

B. Maximum lot coverage of 20 percent for accessory structures and buildings.

C. Maximum group classes and workshops of 20 participants per class conducted no more than three times per week.

D. Hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., including but not limited to activities related to gardening and planting of horticultural crops, group classes, and sales.

E. Use of organic pesticides. (Ord. 7787-NS § 2 (Exh. A), 2021) Operation Standards (23.318.050)
● Performance Standards. The growing, production, or sale of urban agricultural products may not involve hazardous materials or processes or create offensive or objectionable noise, vibration, odors, heat, dirt, or electrical disturbance perceptible by a person beyond the lot line of the subject lot.
● Sales and Donations.
○ Sales and/or donations of urban agricultural products grown and produced on- site are permitted.
○ If selling or donating urban agricultural products to the public, the urban agriculture use shall comply with all applicable food safety laws, including the California Health and Safety Code.
● Garbage and Compost.
○ Garbage and compost receptacles must be screened from the street and adjacent properties by utilizing landscaping, fencing, or storage structures and all garbage shall be removed from the site weekly.
○ Compost piles and containers must be set back at least 10 feet from residential buildings when an urban agriculture use abuts a residential use. ● Farm Equipment. Use of mechanized farm equipment is not permitted in Residential Districts and when the urban agriculture use abuts a residential use, with the following exceptions:
○ Heavy equipment may be used initially to prepare the land for agriculture use. ○ Landscaping equipment designed for household use is permitted. ○ Equipment when not in use must be enclosed or otherwise screened from sight. (Ord. 7787-NS § 2 (Exh. A), 2021)

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Fiscal impacts include staff time for analysis.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Food insecurity rates in the Bay Area are worrying. Food shortages, natural disasters, and global conflicts further threaten the availability and economic accessibility of healthy food. The increasingly intense impacts of climate change create heightened cause for concern. Therefore, to create a food safety net in the City of Berkeley, it is necessary to implement FARM.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 20 While FARM is not intended to replace conventional food retailing, it should produce enough food to supplement the normal food supply during times of distress. Reaching this quantity requires a coordinated effort and collaboration with experts in the field of urban agriculture, including small businesses and nonprofit organizations. Therefore, the Office of Economic Development should research incentives for these entities to partner with the City of Berkeley to design and implement a food utility pilot.

OUTCOMES AND EVALUATION
This food resilience initiative is expected to address food insecurity for the City’s population and maintain that security in the event of environmental and economic shocks.

Contributors
Leanne Gluck, Project Director, Agriculture Innovation
John Ikerd, Professor Emeritus of Agricultural Economics Ben Cadranel, Development Officer
Ian Richards, Agricultural Technology Consultant

CONTACT PERSON
Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett [email protected]
James Chang
[email protected]
Nina (Wenxin) Li
510-981-7131

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. XXXXX

2. The Lorin Business Association Letter of Support

3. Alameda County Democratic Central Committee Letter of Support

4. United Food & Commercial Workers 5 (UFCW 5) Letter of Support

5. Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County, AFL-CIO Letter of Support

6. IBEW Local Union 595 Letter of Support

7. NECA Letter of Support

8. SEIU 1021 Letter of Support

9. Vertical Crop Consultants Letter of Support

10. UC Berkeley Berkeley Food Institute Letter of Support

11. Future Table Letter of Support

12. Dig Deep Farm (DSAL) Letter of Support

13. DoorDash Letter of Support

14. Photographs of Urban Farming Installations

15. FARM PowerPoint Presentation May 2023

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 21 Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. ##,#### N.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF THE GOALS OF THE FOOD ACCESS AND

RESILIENCE MEASURE (FARM) INITIATIVE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF HYPERLOCAL URBAN FOOD

PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION WITH COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley and the Bay Area are experiencing increasing impacts of climate change, natural disasters, global conflicts, inflation, and food shortages; posing significant threat to the availability and economic accessibility of healthy foods; and WHEREAS, the Berkeley Food Access and Resilience Measure (FARM) initiative calls for a self-funded community based organization, connecting producers, processors, distributors, retailers, and consumers to ensure food security in the community; and
WHEREAS, the FARM initiative will be governed by a Food Security Council; and WHEREAS, the FARM initiative will be financed through a combination of government grants and private philanthropy; and
WHEREAS, the FARM initiative aligns with the goals of the Federal Government and State of California’s food and energy resilience policies and grants; and
WHEREAS, The City of Berkeley's Climate Action Plan and Urban Agriculture Ordinance seeks to reduce pollution from the transportation of food by incentivizing urban farming and supporting local food production;
WHEREAS, the development and implementation of FARM will require collaboration with community- based organizations, SNAP recipients, organized labor, small businesses, and non-profit organizations; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley hereby supports the goals of the Food Access and Resilience Measure (FARM) and the development of hyperlocal urban food production by providing incentives and funding opportunities for community based organizations; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley will partner with community-based organizations implementing the goals of the FARM initiative.

THEREFORE, IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley encourages the community, small businesses, labor organizations, and non-profits, to support the FARM initiative and participate in collaborative efforts to achieve food security and resilience within the City of Berkeley.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 22 Attachment 2

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 23 Attachment 3

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 24 Attachment 4

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 25 Attachment 5

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 26 Attachment 6

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 27 Attachment 7

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 28 Attachment 8

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 29 Attachment 9

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 30

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 31 Attachment 10

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 32

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 33 Attachment 11
Attachment 12

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 34

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 35

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 36 Attachment 13

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 37 Attachment 14

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 38 Attachment 15

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 39

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 40

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 41

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 42

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 43

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 44

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 45

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 46

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 47

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett
Subject: Street Pavement Painting: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to General Fund and Grant of Such Funds

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the expenditure of funds, including $1000.00 from Vice Mayor Bartlett, to Healthy Black Families, Inc. for the Ellis Street art renovation. The funds will be relinquished to the City’s General Fund from the discretionary council office budget of Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett and the discretionary council office budgets of any other City Councilmembers who would like to contribute.

BACKGROUND
As part of the Juneteenth celebration, the Ellis Street Neighbors, Healthy Black Families, and various community groups hope to renovate a public street pavement mural. Recently, the streetwalk art has been painted over by staff from Public Works, and its removal has caused concern among community members.1 Because of its position on the east side of Malcolm X Elementary School, streetwalk art has become an important touchstone for educators to re- incorporate community art and continue the conversations about reparations into their curriculum.

Currently, reparations are actively being discussed at the local level by Berkeley Unified School District and the state level by our governor.

Several community members designed this artwork, including the famous local artists O’Brien Thiele and Edythe Boone2.

It is also a call to action to address the history of racial discrimination in South Berkeley and throughout our country. The mural has been shared and celebrated in the local press across the East Bay since it was completed in 2020. In the future, the art hopes to convey and celebrate the resilience of Black Americans, who have endured generations of oppression in the ongoing journey toward equal justice, equal dignity, equal rights, and equal opportunity in America. 1 Markovich, A. (2023, May 23). Why the South Berkeley “reparations now” mural was painted over. Berkeleyside. https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/05/17/berkeley-reparations-now-mural-painted-over 2 Taylor, T. (2022, August 4). Berkeley neighbors start work on street mural calling for “reparations now!” Berkeleyside. https://www.berkeleyside.org/2020/07/23/berkeley-neighbors-start-work-on-street-mural-calling-for-reparations-now

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] Other street murals, such as the “Ohlone Territory” and “Black Lives Matter” painted on Milvia Street and Martin Luther King Jr Way, respectively, have been created to serve as a visual reminder and message for the community.3 These projects have previously been approved and supported by the City of Berkeley.

Photo courtesy of Berkeleyside. Credit to Ximena Natera4 Photo courtesy of Berkeleyside. Credit to UC Berkeley Art and Design5 It is also a call to action to address the history of racial discrimination in South Berkeley and throughout our country. The mural has been shared and celebrated in the local press across the East Bay since it was completed in 2020. In the future, the art hopes to convey and celebrate the resilience of Black Americans, who have endured generations of oppression in the ongoing journey toward equal justice, equal dignity, equal rights, and equal opportunity in America.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No negative impact.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
No General Fund impact; $1000.00 is available from the discretionary council office budget of Vice- Mayor Ben Bartlett.

CONTACT PERSON
Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett [email protected] James Chang [email protected]
Nina (Wenxin) Li 510-981-7131

ATTACHMENTS
3 Hahn, Sophie. “Black Lives Matter and Ohlone Recognition.” 9, June, 2020 ,https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GGNRruOKGrxlWQ3xprQSa5wj60_WQoh6/view 4 Markovich, A. (2023, May 23). Why the South Berkeley “reparations now” mural was painted over. Berkeleyside. https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/05/17/berkeley-reparations-now-mural-painted-over 5 Markovich, Ally. “Berkeley School District Explores Giving Cash Payments to Students with Enslaved Ancestors.” Berkeleyside, 24 Mar. 2023, https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/03/24/busd-reparations-program-berkeley-unified-school-district.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

1. Resolution No. XXXXX
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF SURPLUS FUNDS FROM THE OFFICE EXPENSE ACCOUNTS OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR A DONATION TO HEALTHY BLACK FAMILIES, INC. TO RENOVATE THE STREET PAVEMENT ART ON ELLIS STREET.

WHEREAS, Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett has surplus funds in his office expenditure account; and
WHEREAS, Healthy Black Families supports health equity, birth equity, and healthy food and beverages by supporting the Black community within the City of Berkeley; and WHEREAS, Healthy Black Families will receive funds in the amount of $1000.00 from Councilmember Ben Bartlett’s office expenditure account for the purposes of restoring the public mural on Ellis Street; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of such services would allow for a street pavement preservation municipal public purpose of celebrating the power and resilience of Black Americans, who have endured generations of oppression in the ongoing journey toward equal justice, equal dignity, equal rights, and equal opportunity in America.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that funds relinquished by the Mayor and Councilmembers from their office budgets, of an amount to be determined by each Councilmember, shall be granted to Healthy Black Families.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett (Author), Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Co-Sponsor) Subject: Reparations Now Community Art Mural Restoration and Preservation

RECOMMENDATION
Direct the City Manager to authorize, preserve, protect, and authorize the Reparations Now mural on Ellis Street (next to Malcolm X Elementary School) to continue the legacy of educational spaces for all community members to view it in the City of Berkeley.

BACKGROUND
Recently, the public mural on Ellis Street was painted over by staff from Public Works.1 As a matter of urgency, Berkeley community members urgently wish to restore the colorful and impactful mural to the street pavement. As this space is alongside the Malcolm X Elementary School, community members, and parents have expressed the importance of restoring the mural to celebrate Juneteenth and continue the pursuit of reparations in Berkeley.

Other street murals, such as the “Ohlone Territory” and “Black Lives Matter” painted on Milvia Street and Martin Luther King Jr Way, respectively, have been created to serve as a visual reminder and message for the community.2 These projects have previously been approved and supported by the City of Berkeley.

It should be noted that on a local level, reparations are being discussed within the Berkeley Unified School District and at the state level with the Governor of California. This art is a call to action to address the history of racial discrimination in South Berkeley and throughout our country and is seen as an opportunity to educate everyone in the community (no matter how young) about the importance of reparations. The mural will serve as a visual representation of the community's resilience and determination to address racial discrimination and promote inclusivity.
1 Markovich, Ally. “Why the South Berkeley ‘Reparations Now’ Mural Was Painted Over.” Berkeleyside, 17 May 2023, https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/05/17/berkeley-reparations-now-mural-painted-over. 2 Hahn, Sophie. “Black Lives Matter and Ohlone Recognition.” 9, June, 2020 ,https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GGNRruOKGrxlWQ3xprQSa5wj60_WQoh6/view

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] Through this collaborative effort, the community hopes to recreate a vibrant and thought- provoking mural that beautifies the neighborhood and catalyzes dialogue and action toward a more just and inclusive society.

Photo courtesy of Berkeleyside. Credit to Todd Matthews3 Photo courtesy of Berkeleyside. Credit to Ximena Natera4

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No negative impact.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
No General Fund impact
CONTACT PERSON:

Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett [email protected] James Chang [email protected]
Nina (Wenxin) Li 510-981-7130
Dafne Cruz Rodriguez 510-981-7131
3 Markovich, Ally. “Berkeley School District Explores Giving Cash Payments to Students with Enslaved Ancestors.” Berkeleyside, 24 Mar. 2023, https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/03/24/busd-reparations-program-berkeley-unified-school-district. 4Markovich, Ally. “Why the South Berkeley ‘Reparations Now’ Mural Was Painted Over.” Berkeleyside, 17 May 2023, https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/05/17/berkeley-reparations-now-mural-painted-over.

Susan Wengraf
Councilmember District 6
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7160 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7166 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Wengraf and Councilmember Hahn
Subject: Support for AB-660 Food Labeling (Assemblymember Irwin)

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution in support of AB-660 Food Labeling: quality dates, safety dates, and sell by dates (Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin), and send copies to Assembly Members Irwin and Wicks and Senator Skinner.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.

BACKGROUND
AB-660 aims to mandate specific terminology around date labels on food packaging in California. Specifically, AB-660 would require the phrases “Best if used by” or “Best if used by or frozen by” to indicate quality, or “Use by” or “Use if frozen by” to indicate safety. Brands would no longer be able to use consumer-facing “Sell by” dates, which are references for stores and confuse consumers.

According to study results published in the Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 84 percent of consumers toss food once the date on the package has passed, regardless of what the terminology means. About 64 percent of consumers knew the general meaning of the “Best if used by” and 44.8 percent understood “Use by labels”.

Banning “Sell by” dates will help minimize food waste. Adopting uniform food labeling across the state will help prevent residents from throwing out good food and help them know when foods become a health concern. Consistent labeling will allow for effective consumer education.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
AB-660 addresses food waste, keeps organics out of landfills and cuts methane generation that contributes to climate change.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Wengraf Council District 6 510-981-7160
Attachments: 1: Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

SUPPORT FOR AB-660 FOOD LABELING (ASM. IRWIN)
WHEREAS, consumers struggle to know if their food is still safe to eat with current food labels; and
WHEREAS, studies show that 20% of avoidable food waste is caused by consumer confusion over expiration dates; and
WHEREAS, wasted, decomposing food produces methane gas, a substance over 80 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

WHEREAS, AB-660 would require packaged food sold in California to be labeled with clear and consistent expiration dates; and
WHEREAS, streamlining food labeling dates would reduce food waste, financial loses to consumers, and methane emissions.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that it supports AB-660.

Office of the City Manager

ACTION CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Liam Garland, Director, Public Works
Subject: Public Hearing on Zero Waste Five-Year Rate Schedule

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing, complete the majority protest process required by Proposition 218, and upon the conclusion of the public hearing, if there is no majority protest, adopt a Resolution setting FY 2024-2028 rates for residential and commercial refuse, compost, and recycling collection.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
If there is no majority protest and City Council adopts these rates, the Zero Waste fund remains positive for the next five fiscal years, although the fund balance declines from $24.5 million to $3.3 million.

Figure 1 Zero Waste Fund Balances
If there is a majority protest and/or the City Council does not adopt the proposed rates, a negative fund balance (dotted blue line) is projected before the end of FY 2024 – 2025.

June 27, 2023
The proposed rate schedule enable customers’ rate increases for the period of the rate schedule to be reduced, replaces the division’s computerized management system, properly funds the Zero Waste Division’s vehicle maintenance and replacement, sustains the Clean Cities Unit (street sweeping, illegal dumping, and other cleanups), remedies the damage of ZWD’s vehicles on the City’s pavement, completes the pre- construction phase of the Transfer Station Replacement, and gains the City’s compliance on local and state laws (including SB 1383).

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Work sessions on a five-year Zero Waste rate schedule occurred on September 17, 2019, December 7, 2021, and February 28, 2023. On April 25, 2023, City Council adopted a resolution initiating the Proposition 218 procedures for a proposed five-year rate schedule, set a public hearing for June 27, 2023, and directed staff to add Zero Waste customers to the City’s Very Low Income Refund program. Additional direction was provided and is incorporated in the resolution recommended for adoption tonight if it is determined that there is no majority protest. Per City Council direction on April 25, 2023, staff initiated the Proposition 218 protest proceeding and public notices were mailed to property owners on May 12, 2023.

BACKGROUND
The activities of the Zero Waste Division are funded by the Zero Waste Fund, an enterprise fund in which sufficient revenue must be generated to cover ZWD costs. City staff have worked with HF&H Consultants to review and analyze costs associated with the City’s collection and recycling programs, other programs such as Clean Cities (street sweeping, illegal dumping, and other cleanups), and services that make progress toward the City’s Zero Waste goal. Proposition 218 allows the City to collect its costs of providing Zero Waste service through a tiered rate structure. Such rates can cover all costs necessary to deliver the service, including operational, maintenance, financial, and capital expenditures.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The proposed rate schedules ensure sustainable and stable funding of the Zero Waste Fund to support City Strategic Plan Goals to provide state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities; be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment; and be a customer focused organization that provides excellent, timely, easily-accessible service and information to the community.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Continuing with existing rates is projected to lead to a negative fund balance before the end of FY 2024/2025.

June 27, 2023

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Staff considered a no action alternative, but that would result in a negative Zero Waste Fund balance within the five-year period of the rate schedule and impede progress toward the City’s Zero Waste goal. City Council could delay the rate adjustment, leaving the rates flat for a fourth consecutive fiscal year. This would require the use of more fund balance to cover operations until a new rate schedule was approved, and may require future rate adjustments be larger than the ones in the proposed five-year rate schedule.

CONTACT PERSON
Liam Garland, Public Works Director, 981-6100
Leticia Jauregui, Acting Solid Waste & Recycling Manager, Public Works, 981-6359 Attachments:
1: Resolution
2: Public Hearing Notice

RESOLUTION NO. XX,XXX-N.S.

SETTING RATES FOR RESIDENTIAL AND

COMMERCIAL REFUSE COLLECTION
WHEREAS, the City is required by law, and in the interest of public health and resource conservation, to provide comprehensive waste management services to the public; and WHEREAS, the Zero Waste (previously called the Refuse) Fund is an enterprise fund for solid waste management (refuse, recycling and organic) programs and services, and must generate revenue to meet its expenses; and
WHEREAS, the Fire Fuel Surcharge authorized by Resolution 66,600 is not revised by this resolution and shall remain unchanged; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2023, the City Council set a public hearing on June 27, 2023, to determine whether a majority protests exists and, if not, consider adopting the five-year rate schedule for residential and commercial refuse, recycling, and organic collection rates; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2023, the City Council also requested that the City Manager return to Council in two years, after the Strategic Plan is completed, to review the rates; referred to the City Manager the four alternatives from the staff report (opt out of service, bi-weekly collection, eliminate 96 gallon bin, and/or surcharge for 64- and 96-gallon bins); and referred to the City Manager analysis of possible solutions for subsidizing smaller bin sizes; and
WHEREAS, the City mailed written protest forms to all record owners of identified parcels whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll in compliance with the required Proposition 218 majority protest process to increase residential and commercial refuse, recycling, and organics collection rates; and WHEREAS, the notice mailed established that all written ballots must be submitted before the noticed public hearing is closed by a vote of the Council. The City Clerk shall not accept or consider any ballot that is received after the public hearing is closed even if postmarked prior to that time. The City Clerk, or deputy, shall begin tabulating written protests immediately following the close of the public hearing. If, at the conclusion of the public hearing, cursory review of the protests received demonstrates that the number of protests is manifestly less than one-half of the ballots mailed, then the City Clerk may advise the City Council of the absence of a majority protest without tabulating the protests.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. Pursuant to Section 12.32.050 of the Berkeley Municipal Code, refuse, recycling and organic (previously termed garbage only) collection service is provided by the City, and all owners of premises and places in the City in or from which refuse, recyclables and organic materials are created, accumulated or produced shall use or cause to be used, and pay the fees charged for the City's collection service; and the City Council adopts the service provisions, charges, and fees set forth below.

Section 2. General Provisions .
(a) Regular residential, single, and multi-family dwelling units of 4 or less, refuse

collections shall be made only once each week.
(b) Whenever collection services are discontinued or cancelled prior to the end of the period for which the collection fees have been paid, a refund shall be made of that portion of the fees for the period subsequent to the discontinuance or cancellation of such service; provided, however, that no refund of less than one month's fee shall be made. Requests for such refunds shall be processed administratively under such rules and regulations therefore as shall be prescribed by the City Manager. Refunds may be granted as herein authorized only upon the written approval of the City Manager, Solid Waste & Recycling Manager or her/his designee.
(c) For purposes of this resolution, the term "commercial" includes multi- family dwellings of 5 or more dwelling units.

Section 3. Regularly Scheduled Cart Service: Citywide refuse collected and removed in carts or bins, the provisions, rates, and charges, for FY 2024, shall be as follows.

Rates for FY 2025 through FY 2028 can be found in Attachment 1. (a) For residential units, the base refuse service also includes recycling and organics service (recycling and organics carts are 64-gallon (split body) and 64-gallon carts, respectively). The monthly residential solid waste management integrated rates for these City provided residential (4 dwelling units or less) carts shall-be:

Number of Collections per WeekSolid
Waste
Containe
r Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $23.78 $49.81 $74.67 $104.33 $136.33 $170.72 $199.15 20 Gallon $33.30 $69.82 $104.79 $146.38 $191.24 $239.52 $279.42 32 Gallon $49.66 $104.25 $156.32 $218.37 $285.37 $357.26 $416.85 45 Gallon $66.63 $139.87 $209.79 $293.06 $383.01 $479.53 $559.47 64 Gallon $75.60 $158.74 $238.09 $332.59 $434.65 $544.26 $634.93 96 Gallon $94.47 $198.42 $297.63 $415.76 $543.29 $680.33 $793.71 For residential units requiring refuse bin service, the monthly residential solid waste management integrated rates for these City-provided bins (refuse) and carts (recycling and organics) shall be:

Number of Collections Per Week
Cubic Yards Monthly Rental Rate 1X 2X
1 $26.98 $147.49 $309.72

1.5 $30.19 $221.24 $464.61
2 $33.59 $295.01 $619.48
(b)

Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $14.67 $30.73 $46.07 $64.36 $84.11 $105.32 $122.87 20 Gallon $22.53 $47.24 $70.90 $99.03 $129.39 $162.05 $189.04 32 Gallon $36.03 $75.64 $113.43 $158.45 $207.06 $259.22 $302.46 45 Gallon $50.65 $106.33 $159.49 $222.80 $291.18 $364.56 $425.33 64 Gallon $72.03 $151.23 $226.83 $316.86 $414.09 $518.52 $604.90 96 Gallon $108.00 $226.83 $340.24 $475.28 $621.08 $777.74 $907.35 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(c) The FY2024 monthly rates for commercial organics (compost) carts, multi- family dwelling units of 5 or more, and businesses, shall be:

Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
32 Gallon $28.83 $60.51 $90.74 $126.76 $165.65 $207.38 $241.96 64 Gallon $57.63 $120.99 $181.46 $253.49 $331.28 $414.81 $483.92 96 Gallon $86.40 $181.46 $272.19 $380.23 $496.86 $622.19 $725.88 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(d) New refuse residential service shall be provided a 20-gallon, 32-gallon, or 64- gallon carts. No new or replacement 13- or 45-gallon carts will be provided. Service will continue for existing containers. If the existing 13-gallon cart requires replacement due to age, damage or theft, a 20-gallon cart shall be provided as replacement and charged at the 20-gallon rate.
(e) No more than two 96-gallon carts will be provided for multi-family customers for refuse, recycling or organics, unless there is inadequate space for a bin (one cubic yard capacity).

Section 4. Regularly Scheduled Commercial Bin Service: The provisions, rates, and charges are applicable for front- and rear-loading refuse, recycling, and organic bins that are mechanically picked up and emptied by the collection vehicles shall be as follows:
(a) The FY2024 monthly rates for refuse and recycling bins (loose), available to 5 dwelling units or more, and businesses, shall be as follows:

Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $26.98 $147.49 $309.72 $464.61 $649.00 $848.09 $1,061.95 $1,238.95

1.5 $30.19 $221.24 $464.61 $696.89 $973.45 $1,272.12 $1,592.94 $1,858.44

2 $33.59 $295.01 $619.49 $929.21 $1,297.92 $1,696.16 $2,123.90 $2,477.89 3 $40.38 $442.47 $929.21 $1,393.82 $1,946.93 $2,544.28 $3,185.86 $3,716.82 4 $60.39 $589.97 $1,238.95 $1,858.44 $2,595.88 $3,392.35 $4,247.82 $4,955.77 5 $60.39 $737.46 $1,548.69 $2,323.04 $3,244.86 $4,240.45 $5,309.76 $6,194.72 6 $66.83 $884.95 $1,858.44 $2,787.64 $3,893.81 $5,088.50 $6,371.69 $7,433.66 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(b) The FY2024 monthly rates for refuse bins (compacted), available to 5 dwelling units or more, and businesses, shall be as follows:

Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $26.98 $294.98 $619.44 $929.23 $1,298.00 $1,696.18 $2,123.90 $2,477.90

1.5* $30.19 $442.49 $929.23 $1,393.78 $1,946.90 $2,544.24 $3,185.87 $3,716.87 2 $33.59 $590.02 $1,238.97 $1,858.41 $2,595.85 $3,392.31 $4,247.80 $4,955.77 3 $40.38 $884.95 $1,858.41 $2,787.64 $3,893.87 $5,088.56 $6,371.72 $7,433.64 4 $60.39 $1,179.95 $2,477.90 $3,716.87 $5,191.77 $6,784.69 $8,495.64 $9,911.54 5* $60.39 $1,474.92 $3,097.38 $4,646.08 $6,489.72 $8,480.90 $10,619.51 $12,389.44 6 $66.83 $1,769.90 $3,716.87 $5,575.28 $7,787.62 $10,177.00 $12,743.39 $14,867.31 *Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(c) The FY2024 monthly rates for organic bins, available to 5 dwelling units or more, and businesses, shall be as follows:

Plus Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $21.58 $117.99 $247.78 $371.69 $519.20 $678.47 $849.56 $991.16

1.5* $24.15 $176.99 $371.69 $557.51 $778.76 $1,017.70 $1,274.35 $1,486.75 2 $26.87 $236.01 $495.59 $743.36 $1,038.34 $1,356.93 $1,699.12 $1,982.31 3 $32.30 $353.98 $743.37 $1,115.06 $1,557.55 $2,035.42 $2,548.69 $2,973.46 4 $48.31 $471.98 $991.16 $1,486.75 $2,076.71 $2,713.88 $3,398.26 $3,964.62 5* $48.31 $589.97 $1,238.95 $1,858.43 $2,595.89 $3,392.36 $4,247.81 $4,955.78 6 $53.46 $707.96 $1,486.75 $2,230.11 $3,115.05 $4,070.80 $5,097.35 $5,946.93 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
*For the above commercial rates, no new 1.5 or 5 cubic yard bins are provided.

Section 4. Regularly Scheduled and Temporary Roll-off Container Service: The provisions, rates and charges for roll-off containers, shall be as follows:

(a) The FY2024 monthly rates for roll-off containers (loose) shall be as follows:

Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $91.24 $1,122.82 $2,366.08 $3,546.07 $4,954.77 $6,471.74 $8,103.05 $9,459.44 12 $148.41 $2,251.73 $4,723.64 $7,090.93 $9,907.11 $12,947.13 $16,212.19 $18,918.89 14 $170.31 $2,626.41 $5,514.36 $8,273.36 $11,557.89 $15,101.53 $18,910.37 $22,062.30 15 $178.82 $2,816.18 $5,915.80 $8,871.88 $12,393.62 $16,198.81 $20,283.79 $23,661.99 16 $188.56 $3,001.09 $6,306.30 $9,459.44 $13,206.24 $17,262.02 $21,613.42 $25,213.02 20 $210.45 $3,333.19 $7,881.65 $11,820.65 $16,509.02 $21,575.71 $27,014.64 $31,516.88 25 $212.89 $3,685.97 $9,848.72 $14,775.51 $20,637.79 $26,967.20 $33,772.26 $39,397.32 30 $217.75 $4,058.22 $11,820.65 $17,729.16 $24,762.92 $32,362.34 $40,526.22 $47,274.10 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(b) The FY2024 monthly rates for roll-off containers (compacted) shall be as follows:

Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(c) There shall be a monthly surcharge of $54.12 (FY 2024) multiplied by the number of service pickups per week where extra handling (spinning) of roll-off containers, or where reloading of a container onto a truck is required.

Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(d) For short-term (4 consecutive days or less including delivery and removal) rental of roll- off containers, the service rates and additional charges per 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $91.24 $2,245.64 $4,732.15 $7,092.15 $9,909.55 $12,943.48 $16,206.11 $18,918.89 12 $148.41 $4,503.45 $9,447.28 $14,181.87 $19,814.23 $25,894.25 $32,424.38 $37,837.77 14 $170.31 $5,252.81 $11,028.72 $16,546.73 $23,115.79 $30,203.07 $37,820.74 $44,124.61 15 $178.82 $5,632.36 $11,831.60 $17,743.76 $24,787.25 $32,397.62 $40,567.58 $47,323.98 16 $188.56 $6,002.17 $12,612.59 $18,918.89 $26,412.48 $34,524.05 $43,226.83 $50,426.04 20 $210.45 $6,666.38 $15,763.31 $23,641.31 $33,018.03 $43,151.41 $54,029.29 $63,033.76 25 $212.89 $7,371.94 $19,697.44 $29,551.03 $41,275.58 $53,934.40 $67,544.51 $78,794.63 30 $217.75 $8,116.44 $23,641.31 $35,458.32 $49,525.83 $64,724.69 $81,052.44 $94,548.21 Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week

haul will be as follows for FY 2024 ( Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.):

Temporary Roll-off (Loose)
Capacity in Cubic
Yards
Short-term Service
Rate - Refuse
Short-term Service
Rate - Organics
6 (dirt only) $540.15 $432.12
12 $374.49 $299.59
14 $437.74 $350.20
16 $499.99 $399.99
20 $567.26 $453.81
30 $674.69 $539.75
Temporary Roll-off (Compacted)
Capacity in Cubic
Yards
Short-term Service
Rate - Refuse
Short-term Service
Rate - Organics
6 (dirt only) not applicable not applicable
12 $748.98 $599.19
14 $875.49 $700.39
16 $999.98 $799.99
20 $1,134.52 $907.62
30 $1,349.38 $1,079.50
For containers left over 4 days there shall be an additional charge of $22.40 per day for no more than 2 additional days. For containers left over 6 days the service will be considered a "new" service and a new full short-term rate shall be charged in addition to the original and extra day charges.

Section 5. Other Special Provisions & Collection Services, Rates & Charges:
(a) Bulky Waste Collection, left at the edge of the right-of-way (sidewalk or if no sidewalk at the curb) on the scheduled Bulky Pickup Day constitutes authorization

for the City to provide services to remove the materials, and charge the following for FY 2024:

Customer Type 1st Collection in Calendar Year
Residential No Charge up to 3 Cubic Yard; $42.15 each additional Cubic Yard Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(b) Extra Pickups. Additional charges apply for collection of carts and bins (any material type) in excess of regularly scheduled service, as follows (for FY 2024):

Container Size
per Container
per Collection
13 Gallon $15.11
20 Gallon $15.84
32 Gallon $17.10
45 Gallon $18.41
64 Gallon $19.10
96 Gallon $20.55
1 Cubic Yd $47.34

1.5 Cubic Yds $64.38
2 Cubic Yds $81.41
3 Cubic Yds $115.47
4 Cubic Yds $149.53
5 Cubic Yds $183.60
6 Cubic Yds $217.66
Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(c) Collection of City-authorized pre-paid bags or containers for overages (i.e., materials do not fit in the customers container used for regularly scheduled collection services). Customers may use pre-paid bags and containers purchased at locations established or authorized by the Public Works Director. For reasons of worker safety and ready identification of items to be disposed, only bags procured from the City or containers provided by the City will be picked up.

1. Customers placing City-authorized pre-paid bags or containers (for extra garbage or plant debris) for collection alongside their regularly scheduled collection container, on a regularly scheduled collection day, will be collected at no additional charge.

2. For FY 2024, the collection of authorized pre-paid bags or containers (for

extra garbage or plant debris) placed for collection on a day other than a regularly scheduled collection day, or from locations not scheduled for service, shall be charged $19.10 for collection of the first bag/container and no charge for additional bags/container (up to 10 bags maximum).

Charges for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(d) Customer-Owned Bin Repairs. For FY 2024, commercial customers who own their bins and requests the following repairs, shall be charged as follows:

1. Complete bin replacement 100% of City cost (3 rd party vendor) plus 10% administrative cost.

2. Wheel replacement, per wheel, $75.00.
• With plate replacement, additional, per plate, $75.00.

3. Side wall(s) replacement, 100% of City cost (3rd party vendor) plus 10% administrative fee.

4. Lid replacement, 100% of City cost (3rd party vendor) plus 10% administrative fee.

Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(e) For FY 2024, there shall be a charge of $26.56 per month, multiplied by the number of service pickups per week of bins and/or carts, for handling customer keys and codes to access containers. There is no charge for use of the standard key recommended by the Zero Waste Division, Solid Waste & Recycling Manager.

Rates
for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(f) Damaged Cart Charges. The charge for replacement of a solid waste cart that was maliciously or willfully destroyed, or for which reasonable care was not used in securing or maintaining the cart, shall be 100% of City’s 3 rd party vendor rate, plus a
10% administrative fee.
(g) Container Cleaning. For FY 2024, charges for cleaning containers upon customer’s request shall be as follows:

Container Type Cleaning Rate
(per container)
Wheeled cart (any size) $20.00
Bin (any size) $90.36
Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(h) Short-Term Bin Service. For FY 2024, short-term (4 consecutive days including delivery and removal days) rental rates are as follows:

Container Type
Short-Term
Service Rate
(per
container)
1 Cubic Yard Bin not available

1.5 Cubic Yard Bin not available
2 Cubic Yard Bin $96.38
3 Cubic Yard Bin $116.46
4 Cubic Yard Bin $146.58
5 Cubic Yard Bin $166.66
6 Cubic Yard Bin $185.74
Additional Days (per day) $27.00
For bins left over 4 days there shall be an additional charge of $27.00 per day, for no more than 2 additional days. For bins left over 6 days, the service will be considered a "new" service and a new full short-term rate will be charged in addition to the original and extra day.

Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1.
(i) Distance Surcharge. To service containers that customers elect to not place at the curb (i.e., on property collection), there shall be an additional charge, as follows (for FY 2024):

Customer/Container Type Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Residential
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per account $34.50 $69.00 $103.50 $138.00 $172.50 $207.00 $241.50 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $57.51 $115.01 $172.52 $230.03 $287.53 $345.04 $402.55 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per account $11.50 $23.00 $34.50 $46.00 $57.50 $69.00 $80.50 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $23.00 $46.00 $69.00 $92.00 $115.00 $138.00 $161.00

Commercial
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Per cart $11.50 $23.00 $34.50 $46.00 $57.50 $69.00 $80.50 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $57.51 $115.01 $172.52 $230.03 $287.53 $345.04 $402.55 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $63.26 $126.52 $189.78 $253.04 $316.30 $379.56 $442.82 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Per cart $2.66 $5.31 $7.97 $10.62 $13.28 $15.94 $18.59
Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $23.00 $46.00 $69.00 $92.00 $115.00 $138.00 $161.00 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $25.30 $50.60 $75.90 $101.20 $126.50 $151.80 $177.10 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1
(j) Stair Surcharge. Where a can is located up or down a flight of stairs (for this purpose, a flight of stairs is at least 10 steps), there shall be a monthly surcharge for each flight of stairs of $11.50 per can multiplied by the number of service pickups per week
, as follows (for FY 2024):

Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Per Cart $11.50 $23.00 $34.50 $46.00 $57.50 $69.00 $80.50 Rates for FY 2025-2028 are included in Attachment 1
(k) There shall be a surcharge of 20% of the applicable base service charge rate where access to refuse, recycling, and/or organic bins is difficult, where moving the bin is dangerous due to narrow gateway, narrow passage or extreme slope, or where there is unusually high exposure to liability.

Section 6. Agreements. The City Council may authorize agreements with the Berkeley Unified School District, the University of California, or any other governmental agency or special district for collection and disposal of refuse, recycling, and organic materials upon such terms and conditions as may be mutually agreed upon.

Exhibit A
Attachment 1
Proposed Solid Waste, Recycling, and Organics Collection Rates for FY2024-FY2028
Residential Solid Waste Management Integrated Cart Rates FY 2024
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $23.78 $49.81 $74.67 $104.33 $136.33 $170.72 $199.15 20 Gallon $33.30 $69.82 $104.79 $146.38 $191.24 $239.52 $279.42 32 Gallon $49.66 $104.25 $156.32 $218.37 $285.37 $357.26 $416.85 45 Gallon $66.63 $139.87 $209.79 $293.06 $383.01 $479.53 $559.47 64 Gallon $75.60 $158.74 $238.09 $332.59 $434.65 $544.26 $634.93 96 Gallon $94.47 $198.42 $297.63 $415.76 $543.29 $680.33 $793.71 FY 2025
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $29.78 $62.38 $93.51 $130.65 $170.73 $213.79 $249.40 20 Gallon $39.30 $82.40 $123.67 $172.75 $225.70 $282.68 $329.76 32 Gallon $55.66 $116.84 $175.21 $244.76 $319.85 $400.43 $467.21 45 Gallon $72.63 $152.46 $228.68 $319.44 $417.48 $522.69 $609.82 64 Gallon $81.60 $171.34 $256.98 $358.99 $469.15 $587.45 $685.32 96 Gallon $100.47 $211.02 $316.53 $442.16 $577.80 $723.54 $844.11 FY 2026
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $35.78 $74.94 $112.35 $156.98 $205.13 $256.87 $299.65 20 Gallon $45.30 $94.98 $142.55 $199.13 $260.16 $325.83 $380.11 32 Gallon $61.66 $129.44 $194.10 $271.14 $354.33 $443.59 $517.57 45 Gallon $78.63 $165.05 $247.57 $345.83 $451.97 $565.87 $660.20 64 Gallon $87.60 $183.94 $275.88 $385.38 $503.64 $630.65 $735.71 96 Gallon $106.47 $223.62 $335.43 $468.57 $612.30 $766.75 $894.52

Exhibit A
FY 2027
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $41.78 $87.51 $131.19 $183.30 $239.52 $299.94 $349.90 20 Gallon $51.30 $107.56 $161.43 $225.50 $294.61 $368.99 $430.45 32 Gallon $67.66 $142.04 $212.99 $297.53 $388.81 $486.75 $567.94 45 Gallon $84.63 $177.65 $266.46 $372.22 $486.46 $609.05 $710.58 64 Gallon $93.60 $196.54 $294.77 $411.78 $538.14 $673.84 $786.10 96 Gallon $112.47 $236.22 $354.33 $494.97 $646.81 $809.96 $944.93 FY 2028
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
13 Gallon $47.78 $100.08 $150.04 $209.62 $273.92 $343.02 $400.15 20 Gallon $57.30 $120.14 $180.32 $251.88 $329.07 $412.15 $480.80 32 Gallon $73.66 $154.63 $231.87 $323.91 $423.28 $529.92 $618.30 45 Gallon $88.09 $184.92 $277.37 $387.47 $506.38 $633.99 $739.69 64 Gallon $99.60 $209.13 $313.67 $438.17 $572.63 $717.03 $836.49 96 Gallon $118.47 $248.82 $373.24 $521.38 $681.31 $853.16 $995.34 Residential Solid Waste Management Integrated Bin Rates FY2024
Number of Collections Per Week
Cubic Yards Monthly Rental Rate 1X 2X
1 $26.98 $147.49 $309.72

1.5 $30.19 $221.25 $464.62
2 $33.59 $295.01 $619.48
FY2025
Number of Collections Per Week
Cubic Yards Monthly Rental Rate 1X 2X
1 $29.41 $160.76 $337.59

1.5 $32.91 $241.16 $506.43
2 $36.61 $321.56 $675.24
FY2026
Number of Collections Per Week
Cubic Yards Monthly Rental Rate 1X 2X
1 $32.06 $175.23 $367.97

1.5 $35.87 $262.87 $552.01
2 $39.91 $350.50 $736.00

Exhibit A
FY2027
Number of Collections Per Week
Cubic Yards Monthly Rental Rate 1X 2X
1 $34.30 $187.50 $393.74

1.5 $38.38 $281.27 $590.66
2 $42.70 $375.04 $787.53
FY2028
Number of Collections Per Week
Cubic Yards Monthly Rental Rate 1X 2X
1 $35.67 $195.00 $409.49

1.5 $39.92 $292.51 $614.28
2 $44.41 $390.04 $819.03
Refuse Commercial Carts and Multi-family Dwelling Units of 5 of More and Businesses FY2024
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X

13 Gallon $14.67 $30.73 $46.07 $64.36 $84.11 $105.32 $122.87 20 Gallon $22.53 $47.24 $70.90 $99.03 $129.39 $162.05 $189.04 32 Gallon $36.03 $75.64 $113.43 $158.45 $207.06 $259.22 $302.46 45 Gallon $50.65 $106.33 $159.49 $222.80 $291.18 $364.56 $425.33 64 Gallon $72.03 $151.23 $226.83 $316.86 $414.09 $518.52 $604.90 96 Gallon $108.00 $226.83 $340.24 $475.28 $621.08 $777.74 $907.35 FY2025
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X

13 Gallon $15.99 $33.49 $50.21 $70.16 $91.68 $114.80 $133.92 20 Gallon $24.56 $51.49 $77.28 $107.95 $141.03 $176.63 $206.06 32 Gallon $39.28 $82.45 $123.63 $172.71 $225.69 $282.55 $329.68 45 Gallon $55.21 $115.90 $173.85 $242.85 $317.39 $397.37 $463.61 64 Gallon $78.51 $164.85 $247.24 $345.38 $451.36 $565.18 $659.34 96 Gallon $117.72 $247.24 $370.86 $518.06 $676.98 $847.74 $989.01 FY2026
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X

13 Gallon $17.43 $36.51 $54.73 $76.47 $99.93 $125.14 $145.98

Exhibit A
20 Gallon $26.77 $56.12 $84.23 $117.66 $153.72 $192.53 $224.60 32 Gallon $42.81 $89.87 $134.76 $188.25 $246.01 $307.98 $359.35 45 Gallon $60.18 $126.33 $189.50 $264.71 $345.95 $433.13 $505.34 64 Gallon $85.58 $179.68 $269.49 $376.46 $491.99 $616.05 $718.68 96 Gallon $128.32 $269.49 $404.24 $564.68 $737.91 $924.03 $1,078.02 FY2027
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X

13 Gallon $18.65 $39.06 $58.57 $81.82 $106.92 $133.89 $156.20 20 Gallon $28.64 $60.05 $90.13 $125.90 $164.48 $206.01 $240.32 32 Gallon $45.81 $96.16 $144.19 $201.43 $263.23 $329.54 $384.50 45 Gallon $64.40 $135.18 $202.76 $283.24 $370.17 $463.45 $540.71 64 Gallon $91.57 $192.26 $288.36 $402.81 $526.42 $659.17 $768.99 96 Gallon $137.30 $288.36 $432.54 $604.21 $789.56 $988.72 $1,153.48 FY2028
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X

13 Gallon $19.40 $40.63 $60.91 $85.10 $111.20 $139.25 $162.44 20 Gallon $29.79 $62.45 $93.73 $130.94 $171.06 $214.25 $249.94 32 Gallon $47.64 $100.01 $149.96 $209.49 $273.76 $342.72 $399.88 45 Gallon $66.97 $140.59 $210.87 $294.57 $384.97 $481.99 $562.34 64 Gallon $95.23 $199.95 $299.89 $418.93 $547.48 $685.54 $799.75 96 Gallon $142.79 $299.89 $449.84 $628.38 $821.14 $1,028.26 $1,199.62 Organics Commercial Carts, Multi-family Dwelling Units of 5 or More and Businesses FY2024
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
32 Gallon $28.82 $60.51 $90.74 $126.76 $165.65 $207.38 $241.97 64 Gallon $57.62 $120.98 $181.46 $253.49 $331.27 $414.82 $483.92 96 Gallon $86.40 $181.46 $272.19 $380.23 $496.86 $622.19 $725.88 FY2025
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
32 Gallon $31.42 $65.96 $98.91 $138.17 $180.56 $226.04 $263.74 64 Gallon $62.81 $131.87 $197.79 $276.30 $361.09 $452.15 $527.47 96 Gallon $94.18 $197.79 $296.69 $414.45 $541.58 $678.19 $791.21

Exhibit A
FY2026
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
32 Gallon $34.24 $71.90 $107.82 $150.60 $196.81 $246.38 $287.48 64 Gallon $68.46 $143.74 $215.59 $301.17 $393.58 $492.85 $574.95 96 Gallon $102.65 $215.59 $323.39 $451.75 $590.33 $739.23 $862.42 FY2027
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
32 Gallon $36.64 $76.93 $115.36 $161.14 $210.58 $263.63 $307.60 64 Gallon $73.26 $153.81 $230.68 $322.25 $421.14 $527.34 $615.19 96 Gallon $109.83 $230.68 $346.03 $483.38 $631.65 $790.98 $922.78 FY2028
Number of Collections per WeekContainer
Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
32 Gallon $38.10 $80.01 $119.98 $167.59 $219.01 $274.18 $319.90 64 Gallon $76.18 $159.96 $239.90 $335.14 $437.98 $548.44 $639.80 96 Gallon $114.22 $239.90 $359.87 $502.71 $656.91 $822.62 $959.70 Refuse Commercial Bins (Loose), Multi-family Dwelling Units of 5 of More and Businesses FY2024
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $26.98 $147.49 $309.72 $464.61 $649.00 $848.09 $1,061.95 $1,238.95

1.5 $30.19 $221.24 $464.61 $696.89 $973.45 $1,272.12 $1,592.94 $1,858.44 2 $33.59 $295.01 $619.49 $929.21 $1,297.92 $1,696.16 $2,123.90 $2,477.89 3 $40.38 $442.47 $929.21 $1,393.82 $1,946.93 $2,544.28 $3,185.86 $3,716.82 4 $60.39 $589.97 $1,238.95 $1,858.44 $2,595.88 $3,392.35 $4,247.82 $4,955.77 5 $60.39 $737.46 $1,548.69 $2,323.04 $3,244.86 $4,240.45 $5,309.76 $6,194.72 6 $66.83 $884.95 $1,858.44 $2,787.64 $3,893.81 $5,088.50 $6,371.69 $7,433.66

Exhibit A
FY2025
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $29.41 $160.76 $337.59 $506.43 $707.41 $924.42 $1,157.52 $1,350.45

1.5 $32.91 $241.16 $506.43 $759.61 $1,061.06 $1,386.61 $1,736.30 $2,025.69 2 $36.61 $321.56 $675.24 $1,012.83 $1,414.74 $1,848.81 $2,315.05 $2,700.89 3 $44.01 $482.30 $1,012.83 $1,519.26 $2,122.16 $2,773.27 $3,472.59 $4,051.34 4 $65.82 $643.07 $1,350.45 $2,025.69 $2,829.51 $3,697.66 $4,630.12 $5,401.79 5 $65.82 $803.83 $1,688.07 $2,532.11 $3,536.90 $4,622.09 $5,787.64 $6,752.24 6 $72.85 $964.59 $2,025.69 $3,038.53 $4,244.25 $5,546.47 $6,945.15 $8,102.68 FY2026
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $32.06 $175.23 $367.98 $552.01 $771.08 $1,007.62 $1,261.70 $1,471.99

1.5 $35.87 $262.86 $552.01 $827.98 $1,156.56 $1,511.41 $1,892.57 $2,208.01 2 $39.91 $350.50 $736.01 $1,103.99 $1,542.06 $2,015.20 $2,523.40 $2,943.98 3 $47.97 $525.70 $1,103.99 $1,656.00 $2,313.15 $3,022.86 $3,785.12 $4,415.96 4 $71.75 $700.95 $1,471.99 $2,208.01 $3,084.17 $4,030.45 $5,046.84 $5,887.95 5 $71.75 $876.18 $1,840.00 $2,760.00 $3,855.22 $5,038.08 $6,308.52 $7,359.95 6 $79.41 $1,051.41 $2,208.01 $3,312.00 $4,626.23 $6,045.65 $7,570.21 $8,831.93 FY2027
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $34.30 $187.50 $393.74 $590.65 $825.05 $1,078.15 $1,350.02 $1,575.03

1.5 $38.38 $281.26 $590.65 $885.94 $1,237.51 $1,617.21 $2,025.05 $2,362.57 2 $42.70 $375.04 $787.53 $1,181.27 $1,650.01 $2,156.27 $2,700.04 $3,150.05 3 $51.33 $562.50 $1,181.27 $1,771.92 $2,475.07 $3,234.46 $4,050.08 $4,725.07 4 $76.77 $750.01 $1,575.03 $2,362.57 $3,300.06 $4,312.58 $5,400.11 $6,300.11 5 $76.77 $937.51 $1,968.80 $2,953.20 $4,125.08 $5,390.74 $6,750.12 $7,875.14 6 $84.96 $1,125.01 $2,362.57 $3,543.84 $4,950.07 $6,468.84 $8,100.12 $9,450.16

Exhibit A
FY2028
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $35.67 $195.00 $409.48 $614.28 $858.05 $1,121.27 $1,404.02 $1,638.04

1.5 $39.92 $292.51 $614.28 $921.37 $1,287.01 $1,681.90 $2,106.05 $2,457.07 2 $44.41 $390.04 $819.03 $1,228.52 $1,716.01 $2,242.52 $2,808.04 $3,276.06 3 $53.38 $585.00 $1,228.52 $1,842.79 $2,574.08 $3,363.84 $4,212.08 $4,914.08 4 $79.84 $780.02 $1,638.04 $2,457.07 $3,432.07 $4,485.08 $5,616.12 $6,552.11 5 $79.84 $975.01 $2,047.55 $3,071.33 $4,290.09 $5,606.37 $7,020.12 $8,190.15 6 $88.36 $1,170.01 $2,457.07 $3,685.59 $5,148.07 $6,727.60 $8,424.13 $9,828.17 Refuse Commercial Bins (Compacted), Multi-family Dwelling Units of 5 of More and Businesses FY2024
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $26.98 $294.98 $619.44 $929.23 $1,298.00 $1,696.18 $2,123.90 $2,477.90

1.5 $30.19 $442.49 $929.23 $1,393.78 $1,946.90 $2,544.24 $3,185.87 $3,716.87 2 $33.59 $590.02 $1,238.97 $1,858.41 $2,595.85 $3,392.31 $4,247.80 $4,955.77 3 $40.38 $884.95 $1,858.41 $2,787.64 $3,893.87 $5,088.56 $6,371.72 $7,433.64 4 $60.39 $1,179.95 $2,477.90 $3,716.87 $5,191.77 $6,784.69 $8,495.64 $9,911.54 5 $60.39 $1,474.92 $3,097.38 $4,646.08 $6,489.72 $8,480.90 $10,619.51 $12,389.44 6 $66.83 $1,769.90 $3,716.87 $5,575.28 $7,787.62 $10,177.00 $12,743.39 $14,867.31 FY2025
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $29.41 $321.52 $675.19 $1,012.86 $1,414.82 $1,848.84 $2,315.05 $2,700.91

1.5 $32.91 $482.31 $1,012.86 $1,519.22 $2,122.12 $2,773.23 $3,472.60 $4,051.39 2 $36.61 $643.13 $1,350.48 $2,025.67 $2,829.47 $3,697.62 $4,630.10 $5,401.79 3 $44.01 $964.59 $2,025.67 $3,038.53 $4,244.32 $5,546.53 $6,945.17 $8,102.67 4 $65.82 $1,286.14 $2,700.91 $4,051.39 $5,659.03 $7,395.32 $9,260.25 $10,803.58 5 $65.82 $1,607.67 $3,376.15 $5,064.22 $7,073.79 $9,244.18 $11,575.27 $13,504.49 6 $72.85 $1,929.19 $4,051.39 $6,077.06 $8,488.50 $11,092.93 $13,890.29 $16,205.37

Exhibit A
FY2026
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $32.06 $350.46 $735.95 $1,104.02 $1,542.15 $2,015.23 $2,523.40 $2,943.99

1.5 $35.87 $525.72 $1,104.02 $1,655.95 $2,313.11 $3,022.82 $3,785.13 $4,416.01 2 $39.91 $701.01 $1,472.02 $2,207.98 $3,084.13 $4,030.40 $5,046.81 $5,887.95 3 $47.97 $1,051.41 $2,207.98 $3,312.00 $4,626.31 $6,045.72 $7,570.24 $8,831.91 4 $71.75 $1,401.90 $2,943.99 $4,416.01 $6,168.34 $8,060.89 $10,093.67 $11,775.90 5 $71.75 $1,752.36 $3,680.00 $5,520.00 $7,710.43 $10,076.15 $12,617.05 $14,719.89 6 $79.41 $2,102.82 $4,416.01 $6,623.99 $9,252.47 $12,091.30 $15,140.42 $17,663.85 FY2027
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $34.30 $374.99 $787.47 $1,181.30 $1,650.10 $2,156.30 $2,700.04 $3,150.07

1.5 $38.38 $562.52 $1,181.30 $1,771.87 $2,475.03 $3,234.41 $4,050.09 $4,725.13 2 $42.70 $750.08 $1,575.07 $2,362.54 $3,300.02 $4,312.53 $5,400.08 $6,300.11 3 $51.33 $1,125.01 $2,362.54 $3,543.84 $4,950.15 $6,468.92 $8,100.16 $9,450.15 4 $76.77 $1,500.03 $3,150.07 $4,725.13 $6,600.13 $8,625.16 $10,800.23 $12,600.21 5 $76.77 $1,875.02 $3,937.60 $5,906.40 $8,250.16 $10,781.48 $13,500.24 $15,750.28 6 $84.96 $2,250.01 $4,725.13 $7,087.67 $9,900.14 $12,937.69 $16,200.25 $18,900.32 FY2028
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $35.67 $389.99 $818.97 $1,228.55 $1,716.11 $2,242.55 $2,808.04 $3,276.07

1.5 $39.92 $585.02 $1,228.55 $1,842.75 $2,574.03 $3,363.79 $4,212.10 $4,914.14 2 $44.41 $780.08 $1,638.07 $2,457.04 $3,432.02 $4,485.03 $5,616.09 $6,552.11 3 $53.38 $1,170.01 $2,457.04 $3,685.59 $5,148.15 $6,727.68 $8,424.16 $9,828.15 4 $79.84 $1,560.03 $3,276.07 $4,914.14 $6,864.13 $8,970.16 $11,232.24 $13,104.22 5 $79.84 $1,950.02 $4,095.11 $6,142.66 $8,580.17 $11,212.74 $14,040.25 $16,380.30 6 $88.36 $2,340.01 $4,914.14 $7,371.18 $10,296.15 $13,455.20 $16,848.26 $19,656.33

Exhibit A
Organics Commercial Bins, Multi-family Dwelling Units of 5 or More and Businesses FY2024
Plus Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $21.58 $117.99 $247.78 $371.69 $519.20 $678.47 $849.56 $991.16

1.5 $24.15 $176.99 $371.69 $557.51 $778.76 $1,017.70 $1,274.35 $1,486.75 2 $26.87 $236.01 $495.59 $743.37 $1,038.34 $1,356.93 $1,699.12 $1,982.31 3 $32.30 $353.98 $743.37 $1,115.06 $1,557.54 $2,035.42 $2,548.69 $2,973.46 4 $48.31 $471.98 $991.16 $1,486.75 $2,076.70 $2,713.88 $3,398.26 $3,964.62 5 $48.31 $589.97 $1,238.95 $1,858.43 $2,595.89 $3,392.36 $4,247.81 $4,955.78 6 $53.46 $707.96 $1,486.75 $2,230.11 $3,115.05 $4,070.80 $5,097.35 $5,946.93 FY2025
Plus Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $23.53 $128.61 $270.07 $405.14 $565.93 $739.54 $926.02 $1,080.37

1.5 $26.33 $192.93 $405.14 $607.69 $848.85 $1,109.29 $1,389.04 $1,620.55 2 $29.29 $257.25 $540.19 $810.26 $1,131.79 $1,479.05 $1,852.04 $2,160.71 3 $35.21 $385.84 $810.26 $1,215.41 $1,697.73 $2,218.62 $2,778.07 $3,241.07 4 $52.66 $514.46 $1,080.36 $1,620.55 $2,263.61 $2,958.13 $3,704.10 $4,321.43 5 $52.66 $643.06 $1,350.46 $2,025.69 $2,829.52 $3,697.67 $4,630.11 $5,401.79 6 $58.28 $771.67 $1,620.55 $2,430.82 $3,395.40 $4,437.18 $5,556.12 $6,482.14 FY2026
Plus Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $25.65 $140.18 $294.38 $441.60 $616.86 $806.10 $1,009.37 $1,177.60

1.5 $28.70 $210.29 $441.61 $662.38 $925.25 $1,209.12 $1,514.06 $1,766.40 2 $31.92 $280.40 $588.81 $883.18 $1,233.66 $1,612.16 $2,018.72 $2,355.18 3 $38.38 $420.57 $883.18 $1,324.79 $1,850.52 $2,418.29 $3,028.10 $3,532.77 4 $57.39 $560.76 $1,177.59 $1,766.40 $2,467.34 $3,224.36 $4,037.46 $4,710.36 5 $57.39 $700.94 $1,472.00 $2,208.00 $3,084.18 $4,030.46 $5,046.82 $5,887.95 6 $63.53 $841.12 $1,766.40 $2,649.60 $3,700.98 $4,836.52 $6,056.17 $7,065.54

Exhibit A
FY2027
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $27.44 $150.00 $314.98 $472.51 $660.05 $862.52 $1,080.02 $1,260.03

1.5 $30.70 $225.01 $472.52 $708.74 $990.02 $1,293.76 $1,620.04 $1,890.05 2 $34.15 $300.03 $630.02 $945.01 $1,320.01 $1,725.01 $2,160.04 $2,520.03 3 $41.06 $450.01 $945.01 $1,417.53 $1,980.06 $2,587.57 $3,240.06 $3,780.06 4 $61.41 $600.02 $1,260.02 $1,890.05 $2,640.05 $3,450.06 $4,320.09 $5,040.09 5 $61.41 $750.00 $1,575.04 $2,362.56 $3,300.07 $4,312.60 $5,400.10 $6,300.11 6 $67.98 $900.00 $1,890.05 $2,835.07 $3,960.08 $5,175.08 $6,480.10 $7,560.12 FY2028
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
1 $28.54 $156.00 $327.58 $491.42 $686.44 $897.02 $1,123.22 $1,310.43

1.5 $31.94 $234.01 $491.42 $737.10 $1,029.61 $1,345.51 $1,684.84 $1,965.65 2 $35.52 $312.03 $655.22 $982.81 $1,372.80 $1,794.01 $2,246.43 $2,620.84 3 $42.70 $468.01 $982.81 $1,474.23 $2,059.26 $2,691.07 $3,369.66 $3,931.26 4 $63.86 $624.02 $1,310.42 $1,965.65 $2,745.66 $3,588.06 $4,492.89 $5,241.69 5 $63.86 $780.00 $1,638.04 $2,457.07 $3,432.07 $4,485.10 $5,616.11 $6,552.12 6 $70.70 $936.00 $1,965.65 $2,948.47 $4,118.46 $5,382.08 $6,739.30 $7,862.53 Refuse Roll-off Containers (Loose)
FY2024
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $91.24 $1,122.82 $2,366.08 $3,546.07 $4,954.77 $6,471.74 $8,103.05 $9,459.44 12 $148.41 $2,251.73 $4,723.64 $7,090.93 $9,907.11 $12,947.13 $16,212.19 $18,918.89 14 $170.31 $2,626.41 $5,514.36 $8,273.36 $11,557.89 $15,101.53 $18,910.37 $22,062.30 15 $178.82 $2,816.18 $5,915.80 $8,871.88 $12,393.62 $16,198.81 $20,283.79 $23,661.99 16 $188.56 $3,001.09 $6,306.30 $9,459.44 $13,206.24 $17,262.02 $21,613.42 $25,213.02 20 $210.45 $3,333.19 $7,881.65 $11,820.65 $16,509.02 $21,575.71 $27,014.64 $31,516.88 25 $212.89 $3,685.97 $9,848.72 $14,775.51 $20,637.79 $26,967.20 $33,772.26 $39,397.32 30 $217.75 $4,058.22 $11,820.65 $17,729.16 $24,762.92 $32,362.34 $40,526.22 $47,274.10

Exhibit A
FY2025
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $99.45 $1,223.88 $2,579.02 $3,865.22 $5,400.70 $7,054.20 $8,832.33 $10,310.79 12 $161.77 $2,454.38 $5,148.77 $7,729.12 $10,798.75 $14,112.37 $17,671.29 $20,621.59 14 $185.64 $2,862.78 $6,010.65 $9,017.97 $12,598.10 $16,460.67 $20,612.30 $24,047.91 15 $194.92 $3,069.64 $6,448.22 $9,670.35 $13,509.05 $17,656.70 $22,109.33 $25,791.57 16 $205.53 $3,271.18 $6,873.86 $10,310.79 $14,394.80 $18,815.61 $23,558.62 $27,482.19 20 $229.39 $3,633.18 $8,591.00 $12,884.51 $17,994.83 $23,517.52 $29,445.96 $34,353.40 25 $232.05 $4,017.71 $10,735.11 $16,105.31 $22,495.19 $29,394.25 $36,811.76 $42,943.08 30 $237.35 $4,423.46 $12,884.51 $19,324.78 $26,991.58 $35,274.95 $44,173.58 $51,528.77 FY2026
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $108.40 $1,334.03 $2,811.14 $4,213.09 $5,886.77 $7,689.07 $9,627.24 $11,238.76 12 $176.33 $2,675.28 $5,612.16 $8,424.74 $11,770.64 $15,382.48 $19,261.71 $22,477.53 14 $202.34 $3,120.43 $6,551.61 $9,829.58 $13,731.93 $17,942.13 $22,467.41 $26,212.22 15 $212.46 $3,345.90 $7,028.56 $10,540.68 $14,724.86 $19,245.81 $24,099.17 $28,112.81 16 $224.02 $3,565.59 $7,492.51 $11,238.76 $15,690.33 $20,509.01 $25,678.90 $29,955.59 20 $250.04 $3,960.16 $9,364.19 $14,044.12 $19,614.36 $25,634.10 $32,096.10 $37,445.21 25 $252.93 $4,379.30 $11,701.27 $17,554.79 $24,519.76 $32,039.73 $40,124.82 $46,807.95 30 $258.71 $4,821.57 $14,044.12 $21,064.01 $29,420.82 $38,449.70 $48,149.20 $56,166.36 FY2027
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $115.99 $1,427.41 $3,007.92 $4,508.01 $6,298.84 $8,227.31 $10,301.15 $12,025.48 12 $188.67 $2,862.55 $6,005.01 $9,014.47 $12,594.59 $16,459.25 $20,610.02 $24,050.96 14 $216.51 $3,338.86 $7,010.22 $10,517.65 $14,693.17 $19,198.08 $24,040.13 $28,047.08 15 $227.33 $3,580.12 $7,520.56 $11,278.53 $15,755.60 $20,593.01 $25,786.11 $30,080.71 16 $239.71 $3,815.18 $8,016.99 $12,025.48 $16,788.66 $21,944.64 $27,476.42 $32,052.48 20 $267.54 $4,237.37 $10,019.69 $15,027.21 $20,987.37 $27,428.48 $34,342.82 $40,066.37 25 $270.64 $4,685.85 $12,520.35 $18,783.62 $26,236.14 $34,282.51 $42,933.56 $50,084.51 30 $276.82 $5,159.08 $15,027.21 $22,538.49 $31,480.28 $41,141.18 $51,519.65 $60,098.01

Exhibit A
FY 2028
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per WeekCapacity in Cubic Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $120.63 $1,484.50 $3,128.23 $4,688.33 $6,550.79 $8,556.40 $10,713.19 $12,506.50 12 $196.22 $2,977.05 $6,245.21 $9,375.05 $13,098.37 $17,117.63 $21,434.43 $25,012.99 14 $225.17 $3,472.42 $7,290.63 $10,938.36 $15,280.89 $19,966.01 $25,001.74 $29,168.96 15 $236.43 $3,723.32 $7,821.39 $11,729.67 $16,385.83 $21,416.73 $26,817.56 $31,283.94 16 $249.29 $3,967.79 $8,337.66 $12,506.50 $17,460.20 $22,822.43 $28,575.48 $33,334.58 20 $278.24 $4,406.87 $10,420.47 $15,628.30 $21,826.86 $28,525.62 $35,716.54 $41,669.02 25 $281.46 $4,873.29 $13,021.17 $19,534.97 $27,285.59 $35,653.81 $44,650.90 $52,087.89 30 $287.89 $5,365.44 $15,628.30 $23,440.03 $32,739.49 $42,786.83 $53,580.43 $62,501.93 Refuse Roll-off Containers (Compacted)
FY2024
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $91.24 $2,245.64 $4,732.15 $7,092.15 $9,909.55 $12,943.48 $16,206.11 $18,918.89 12 $148.41 $4,503.45 $9,447.28 $14,181.87 $19,814.23 $25,894.25 $32,424.38 $37,837.77 14 $170.31 $5,252.81 $11,028.72 $16,546.73 $23,115.79 $30,203.07 $37,820.74 $44,124.61 15 $178.82 $5,632.36 $11,831.60 $17,743.76 $24,787.25 $32,397.62 $40,567.58 $47,323.98 16 $188.56 $6,002.17 $12,612.59 $18,918.89 $26,412.48 $34,524.05 $43,226.83 $50,426.04 20 $210.45 $6,666.38 $15,763.31 $23,641.31 $33,018.03 $43,151.41 $54,029.29 $63,033.76 25 $212.89 $7,371.94 $19,697.44 $29,551.03 $41,275.58 $53,934.40 $67,544.51 $78,794.63 30 $217.75 $8,116.44 $23,641.31 $35,458.32 $49,525.83 $64,724.69 $81,052.44 $94,548.21 FY2025
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $99.45 $2,447.75 $5,158.05 $7,730.44 $10,801.40 $14,108.39 $17,664.66 $20,621.59 12 $161.77 $4,908.77 $10,297.53 $15,458.23 $21,597.51 $28,224.74 $35,342.58 $41,243.17 14 $185.64 $5,725.57 $12,021.30 $18,035.93 $25,196.21 $32,921.35 $41,224.61 $48,095.82 15 $194.92 $6,139.27 $12,896.45 $19,340.69 $27,018.10 $35,313.41 $44,218.66 $51,583.14 16 $205.53 $6,542.37 $13,747.72 $20,621.59 $28,789.60 $37,631.21 $47,117.25 $54,964.38 20 $229.39 $7,266.35 $17,182.00 $25,769.03 $35,989.65 $47,035.04 $58,891.92 $68,706.80 25 $232.05 $8,035.42 $21,470.21 $32,210.62 $44,990.38 $58,788.49 $73,623.52 $85,886.15 30 $237.35 $8,846.92 $25,769.03 $38,649.56 $53,983.16 $70,549.91 $88,347.16 $103,057.55

Exhibit A
FY2026
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $108.40 $2,668.05 $5,622.27 $8,426.18 $11,773.53 $15,378.15 $19,254.48 $22,477.53 12 $176.33 $5,350.55 $11,224.31 $16,849.48 $23,541.28 $30,764.96 $38,523.41 $44,955.06 14 $202.34 $6,240.87 $13,103.22 $19,659.17 $27,463.86 $35,884.27 $44,934.82 $52,424.44 15 $212.46 $6,691.81 $14,057.13 $21,081.36 $29,449.73 $38,491.61 $48,198.34 $56,225.62 16 $224.02 $7,131.18 $14,985.02 $22,477.53 $31,380.67 $41,018.02 $51,357.80 $59,911.17 20 $250.04 $7,920.32 $18,728.38 $28,088.24 $39,228.72 $51,268.19 $64,192.19 $74,890.41 25 $252.93 $8,758.61 $23,402.53 $35,109.58 $49,039.52 $64,079.46 $80,249.64 $93,615.90 30 $258.71 $9,643.14 $28,088.24 $42,128.02 $58,841.64 $76,899.40 $96,298.41 $112,332.73 FY2027
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $115.99 $2,854.81 $6,015.83 $9,016.02 $12,597.68 $16,454.62 $20,602.29 $24,050.96 12 $188.67 $5,725.09 $12,010.01 $18,028.94 $25,189.17 $32,918.51 $41,220.05 $48,101.91 14 $216.51 $6,677.73 $14,020.45 $21,035.31 $29,386.33 $38,396.16 $48,080.26 $56,094.16 15 $227.33 $7,160.23 $15,041.13 $22,557.05 $31,511.21 $41,186.03 $51,572.23 $60,161.41 16 $239.71 $7,630.36 $16,033.97 $24,050.96 $33,577.31 $43,889.28 $54,952.85 $64,104.95 20 $267.54 $8,474.75 $20,039.37 $30,054.42 $41,974.73 $54,856.97 $68,685.65 $80,132.74 25 $270.64 $9,371.71 $25,040.71 $37,567.25 $52,472.28 $68,565.02 $85,867.11 $100,169.02 30 $276.82 $10,318.16 $30,054.42 $45,076.99 $62,960.55 $82,282.36 $103,039.30 $120,196.02 FY2028
Service Collection Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week Capacity
in Cubic
Yards
Monthly
Rental
Rate 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
6 $120.63 $2,969.01 $6,256.47 $9,376.66 $13,101.59 $17,112.80 $21,426.38 $25,012.99 12 $196.22 $5,954.10 $12,490.41 $18,750.10 $26,196.74 $34,235.25 $42,868.85 $50,025.99 14 $225.17 $6,944.84 $14,581.26 $21,876.72 $30,561.79 $39,932.01 $50,003.47 $58,337.92 15 $236.43 $7,446.64 $15,642.77 $23,459.33 $32,771.66 $42,833.47 $53,635.12 $62,567.87 16 $249.29 $7,935.58 $16,675.33 $25,012.99 $34,920.41 $45,644.86 $57,150.96 $66,669.15 20 $278.24 $8,813.74 $20,840.95 $31,256.59 $43,653.72 $57,051.24 $71,433.07 $83,338.05 25 $281.46 $9,746.58 $26,042.34 $39,069.94 $54,571.18 $71,307.62 $89,301.80 $104,175.78 30 $287.89 $10,730.88 $31,256.59 $46,880.07 $65,478.98 $85,573.65 $107,160.87 $125,003.86

Exhibit A
Hard to Service Roll off Containers.

There shall be a monthly surcharge, as shown below where extra handling (spinning) of roll- off containers, or where reloading of a container onto a truck is required. The surcharge shall be multiplied by the number of service pickups per week.

FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
$54.12 $55.74 $57.42 $59.14 $60.91
Temporary Roll-off Containers - Loose
FY2024
Capacity in
Cu Yards
Short-term
Service
Rate -
Refuse
Short-term
Service
Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 $540.15 $432.12
12 $374.49 $299.59
14 $437.74 $350.20
16 $499.99 $399.99
20 $567.26 $453.81
30 $674.69 $539.75
FY2025
Capacity in
Cu Yards
Short-term
Service Rate
- Refuse
Short-term
Service
Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 $588.77 $471.01
12 $408.20 $326.56
14 $477.14 $381.71
16 $544.99 $435.99
20 $618.31 $494.65
30 $735.41 $588.33
FY2026
Capacity in
Cu Yards
Short-term
Service Rate
- Refuse
Short-term
Service
Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 $641.75 $513.40
12 $444.93 $355.95
14 $520.08 $416.07
16 $594.04 $475.23
20 $673.96 $539.17
30 $801.60 $641.28

Exhibit A
FY2027
Capacity in
Cu Yards
Short-term
Service Rate
- Refuse
Short-term
Service
Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 $686.68 $549.34
12 $476.08 $380.86
14 $556.49 $445.19
16 $635.62 $508.50
20 $721.14 $576.91
30 $857.71 $686.17
FY2028
Capacity in
Cu Yards
Short-term
Service Rate
- Refuse
Short-term
Service Rate
- Organics
(dirt) 6 $714.14 $571.32
12 $495.12 $396.10
14 $578.75 $463.00
16 $661.05 $528.84
20 $749.98 $599.99
30 $892.02 $713.61
Temporary Roll-off Containers - Compacted
FY2024
Capacity
in Cu
Yards
Short-term
Service Rate -
Refuse
Short-term
Service Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 not applicable not applicable
12 $748.98 $599.19
14 $875.49 $700.39
16 $999.98 $799.99
20 $1,134.52 $907.62
30 $1,349.38 $1,079.50

Exhibit A
FY2025
Capacity
in Cu
Yards
Short-term
Service Rate -
Refuse
Short-term
Service Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 not applicable not applicable
12 $816.39 $653.11
14 $954.28 $763.43
16 $1,089.98 $871.99
20 $1,236.63 $989.30
30 $1,470.82 $1,176.66
FY2026
Capacity
in Cu
Yards
Short-term
Service Rate -
Refuse
Short-term
Service Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 not applicable not applicable
12 $889.87 $711.89
14 $1,040.17 $832.13
16 $1,188.08 $950.46
20 $1,347.92 $1,078.34
30 $1,603.19 $1,282.55
FY2027
Capacity
in Cu
Yards
Short-term
Service Rate -
Refuse
Short-term
Service Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 not applicable not applicable
12 $952.16 $761.73
14 $1,112.98 $890.38
16 $1,271.25 $1,017.00
20 $1,442.28 $1,153.82
30 $1,715.42 $1,372.33
FY2028
Capacity
in Cu
Yards
Short-term
Service Rate -
Refuse
Short-term
Service Rate -
Organics
(dirt) 6 not applicable not applicable
12 $990.24 $792.20
14 $1,157.50 $926.00
16 $1,322.10 $1,057.68
20 $1,499.97 $1,199.98
30 $1,784.03 $1,427.23

Exhibit A
Bulky Waste Collection
FY2024
Customer Type 1st Collection in Calendar Year
Residential No Charge up to 3 Cubic Yard; $42.15 each additional Cubic Yard FY2025
Customer Type 1 per Year
Residential No Charge up to 3 Cubic Yard; $43.41 each additional Cubic Yard FY2026
Customer Type 1 per Year
Residential No Charge up to 3 Cubic Yard; $44.71 each additional Cubic Yard FY2027
Customer Type 1 per Year
Residential No Charge up to 3 Cubic Yard; $46.06 each additional Cubic Yard FY2028
Customer Type 1 per Year
Residential No Charge up to 3 Cubic Yard; $47.44 each additional Cubic Yard Extra Pickups (in excess of regularly schedule services) Refuse, Recycling, Organics per Container
per Collection
Container Size FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
13 Gallon $15.11 $15.97 $16.84 $17.73 $18.63
20 Gallon $15.84 $16.70 $17.58 $18.46 $19.36
32 Gallon $17.10 $17.96 $18.84 $19.72 $20.62
45 Gallon $18.41 $19.27 $20.14 $21.03 $21.73
64 Gallon $19.10 $19.96 $20.83 $21.72 $22.62
96 Gallon $20.55 $21.41 $22.29 $23.17 $24.07
1 Cubic Yd $47.34 $50.81 $54.56 $57.81 $59.98

1.5 Cubic Yds $64.38 $69.37 $74.80 $79.47 $82.50

Exhibit A
2 Cubic Yds $81.41 $87.94 $95.04 $101.13 $105.03
3 Cubic Yds $115.47 $125.06 $135.50 $144.42 $150.05
4 Cubic Yds $149.53 $162.19 $175.97 $187.73 $195.09
5 Cubic Yds $183.60 $199.32 $216.44 $231.03 $240.12
6 Cubic Yds $217.66 $236.45 $256.91 $274.33 $285.16
Pre-paid Bags and Containers
FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
Collection of pre-paid bag/container $19.10 $19.67 $20.26 $20.87 $21.50 Customer-Owned Bin Repairs
Service FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
Bin Replacement 100% of City Cost (3rd-party vendor) + 10% administration cost Wheel Replacement $77.25 $79.57 $81.95 $84.41 $86.95
Wheel Plate Replacement $77.25 $79.57 $81.95 $84.41 $86.95 Side Wall Replacement 100% of City Cost (3rd-party vendor) + 10% administration cost Lid Replacement 100% of City Cost (3rd-party vendor) + 10% administration cost Key/Access Code Charges
FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
$26.56 $27.36 $28.18 $29.02 $29.90
Container Cleaning
FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
Container Type
Wheeled cart (any size) $20.00 $21.80 $21.80 $21.40 $20.80 Bin (any size) $90.36 $98.49 $107.36 $114.87 $119.47
Short-Term Bin Service
FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028
1 Cubic Yard Bin not available

1.5 Cubic Yard Bin not available
2 Cubic Yard Bin $96.38 $105.06 $114.51 $122.53 $127.43 3 Cubic Yard Bin $116.46 $126.95 $138.37 $148.06 $153.98 4 Cubic Yard Bin $146.58 $159.78 $174.16 $186.35 $193.80 5 Cubic Yard Bin $166.66 $181.66 $198.01 $211.87 $220.35 6 Cubic Yard Bin $185.74 $202.46 $220.68 $236.13 $245.57

Exhibit A
Distance Surcharges
FY2024
Customer/Container Type Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Residential
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per account $34.50 $69.00 $103.50 $138.00 $172.50 $207.00 $241.50 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $57.51 $115.01 $172.52 $230.03 $287.53 $345.04 $402.55 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per account $11.50 $23.00 $34.50 $46.00 $57.50 $69.00 $80.50 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $23.00 $46.00 $69.00 $92.00 $115.00 $138.00 $161.00 Commercial
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per cart $11.50 $23.00 $34.50 $46.00 $57.50 $69.00 $80.50 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $57.51 $115.01 $172.52 $230.03 $287.53 $345.04 $402.55 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $63.26 $126.52 $189.78 $253.04 $316.30 $379.56 $442.82 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per cart $2.66 $5.32 $7.98 $10.64 $13.30 $15.96 $18.62 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $23.00 $46.00 $69.00 $92.00 $115.00 $138.00 $161.00 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $25.30 $50.60 $75.90 $101.20 $126.50 $151.80 $177.10 FY2025
Container Type Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Residential
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per account $35.54 $71.08 $106.62 $142.16 $177.70 $213.24 $248.78 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $59.23 $118.46 $177.69 $236.92 $296.15 $355.38 $414.61 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per account $11.85 $23.69 $35.54 $47.39 $59.23 $71.08 $82.92 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $23.69 $47.38 $71.07 $94.76 $118.45 $142.14 $165.83 Commercial
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per cart $11.85 $23.69 $35.54 $47.39 $59.23 $71.08 $82.92 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $59.23 $118.46 $177.69 $236.92 $296.15 $355.38 $414.61 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $65.15 $130.30 $195.45 $260.60 $325.75 $390.90 $456.05 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per cart $2.74 $5.47 $8.21 $10.94 $13.68 $16.42 $19.15 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $23.69 $47.38 $71.07 $94.76 $118.45 $142.14 $165.83 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $26.06 $52.12 $78.18 $104.24 $130.30 $156.36 $182.42

Exhibit A
FY2026
Container Type Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Residential
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per account $36.61 $73.21 $109.82 $146.42 $183.03 $219.63 $256.24 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $61.01 $122.02 $183.03 $244.03 $305.04 $366.05 $427.06 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per account $12.20 $24.40 $36.60 $48.80 $61.00 $73.20 $85.40 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $24.40 $48.80 $73.20 $97.60 $122.00 $146.40 $170.80 Commercial
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per cart $12.20 $24.40 $36.60 $48.80 $61.00 $73.20 $85.40 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $61.01 $122.02 $183.03 $244.03 $305.04 $366.05 $427.06 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $67.11 $134.22 $201.33 $268.44 $335.55 $402.66 $469.77 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per cart $2.82 $5.64 $8.45 $11.27 $14.09 $16.91 $19.73 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $24.40 $48.80 $73.20 $97.60 $122.00 $146.40 $170.80 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $26.84 $53.68 $80.52 $107.36 $134.20 $161.04 $187.88 FY2027
Container Type Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Residential
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per account $37.70 $75.40 $113.10 $150.80 $188.50 $226.20 $263.90 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $62.84 $125.68 $188.52 $251.36 $314.19 $377.03 $439.87 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per account $12.57 $25.14 $37.70 $50.27 $62.84 $75.41 $87.97 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $25.14 $50.27 $75.41 $100.54 $125.68 $150.81 $175.95 Commercial
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per cart $12.57 $25.14 $37.70 $50.27 $62.84 $75.41 $87.97 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $62.84 $125.68 $188.52 $251.36 $314.19 $377.03 $439.87 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $69.12 $138.24 $207.36 $276.48 $345.60 $414.72 $483.84 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per cart $2.90 $5.80 $8.70 $11.60 $14.50 $17.40 $20.30 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $25.14 $50.27 $75.41 $100.54 $125.68 $150.81 $175.95 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $27.65 $55.30 $82.95 $110.60 $138.25 $165.89 $193.54 FY2028
Container Type Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week

Exhibit A
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Residential
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per account $38.83 $77.66 $116.49 $155.32 $194.15 $232.98 $271.81 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $64.72 $129.44 $194.16 $258.88 $323.60 $388.32 $453.04 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per account $12.94 $25.88 $38.82 $51.76 $64.70 $77.64 $90.58 Bins (1 - 2 cubic yards), per Bin $25.89 $51.78 $77.67 $103.56 $129.45 $155.34 $181.23 Commercial
Distance from Curb (up to 25 feet)
Carts, per cart $12.94 $25.88 $38.82 $51.76 $64.70 $77.64 $90.58 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $64.72 $129.44 $194.16 $258.88 $323.60 $388.32 $453.04 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $71.20 $142.39 $213.59 $284.79 $356.98 $427.18 $498.37 Each Additional 20 feet, or part
thereof
Carts, per cart $2.99 $5.98 $8.97 $11.96 $14.95 $17.94 $20.93 Bins (1 - 3 cubic yards), per Bin $25.89 $51.78 $77.67 $103.56 $129.45 $155.34 $181.23 Bins (4 - 6 cubic yards), per Bin $28.48 $56.96 $85.44 $113.91 $142.39 $170.87 $199.35 Stair Surcharges
FY2024
Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Per Cart $11.50 $23.00 $34.50 $46.00 $57.50 $69.00 $80.50 FY2025
Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Per Cart $11.85 $23.70 $35.55 $47.40 $59.25 $71.10 $82.95 FY2026
Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Per Cart $12.20 $24.40 $36.60 $48.80 $61.00 $73.20 $85.40 FY2027
Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Per Cart $12.57 $25.14 $37.71 $50.28 $62.85 $75.42 $87.99 FY2028
Monthly Charge Based on Number of Collections Per Week
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X
Per Cart $12.94 $25.88 $38.82 $51.76 $64.70 $77.64 $90.58

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL

PROPOSED FIVE YEAR RATE SCHEDULE

FOR ZERO WASTE SERVICES
The public may participate in this hearing by remote video or in-person.

This notice concerns the City of Berkeley’s proposal to increase the rates it charges for both residential and commercial Zero Waste services, including garbage collection, transfer & disposal, recyclables collection and processing, and organics collection and composting. The proposed rates for the five-year rate schedule would fund all costs to deliver these services, including operational, maintenance, financial, and capital expenditures. The costs include annual increases for landfill disposal expenses; labor; vehicle fuel, maintenance, and replacement; composting and recycling expenses; maintenance of the closed landfill; and environmental and design phases of the Transfer Station’s Replacement Project. These rates have not been adjusted since July 2020. The proposed rates are calculated based upon the cost to provide Zero Waste services to each customer based upon each customer’s volume and frequency of collection.

The five-year rate schedule, including the staff report and resolution, are available on the City website at https://berkeleyca.gov/city-services/trash-recycling or at the City Clerk Department at 2180 Milvia Street.

The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 27, 2023, at 6 pm at the Berkeley Unified School District Board Room located at 1231 Addison Street, Berkeley CA 94702.

A copy of the agenda material for this hearing will be available on the City’s website at https://berkeleyca.gov/ as of June 15, 2023. Once posted, the agenda for this meeting will include a link for public participation using Zoom video technology, as well as any health and safety requirements for in-person attendance.

For further information, please contact Leticia Jauregui, Acting Solid Waste & Recycling Manager, Public Works, 510-981-6359, or Liam Garland, Public Works Director, 510- 981-6303.

Written comments should be mailed or delivered directly to the City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704, or e-mailed to
[email protected] in order to ensure
delivery to all Councilmembers and inclusion in the agenda packet.

Communications to the Berkeley City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service.

If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not

include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk at (510) 981-6900 or [email protected] for further information.

Published: June 16, 2023 – The Berkeley Voice
City Clerk shall publish a notice at least 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing with the date, hour, and place of the public hearing for annual levy and collection of assessments.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on June 15, 2023.
__________________________________
Mark Numainville, City Clerk

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

PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Lisa Warhuus, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Subject: Biennial Syringe Services Report

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, accept the Biennial Syringe Services Report.

SUMMARY
In accordance with Health and Safety Code section 121349.3 this biennial report details the status of clean needle and syringe exchange programs operating in the City of Berkeley. The report will include relevant statistics on bloodborne infections associated with needle sharing activity and the use of public funds for these programs.

Syringe exchange is a documented public health intervention that reduces the transmission of blood-borne pathogens and also reduces the number of improperly discarded syringes in the community. Syringe service programs (SSPs) offer many services in addition to providing syringes and sterile injection equipment. These usually include overdose education and naloxone distribution, HIV and hepatitis C testing, and referrals to drug treatment, housing, and mental health services. Most SSPs also provide first aid and basic supplies, such as clean socks and bottled water, to meet the needs of people experiencing homelessness.

There are currently two syringe exchange programs operating in the City of Berkeley:

Berkeley Needle Exchange Emergency Distribution (NEED) and the Berkeley Free Clinic.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Since the late 1980s, California SSPs have been providing sterile syringes, collecting used ones, and acting as points of access to healthcare and providing aid to people who use drugs. SSPs are also essential components of California's infectious disease prevention strategy. They have played a crucial role in reducing HIV infections in the state and preventing the transmission of other blood-borne diseases and their complications. In fact, SSPs have been instrumental in significantly reducing the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B and C viruses, and preventing skin and soft tissue infections among people who inject drugs.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

In addition to their role in infectious disease prevention, SSPs have also become frontline care providers in California's efforts to prevent drug overdose deaths. Studies have shown that individuals who participate in SSPs are five times more likely to enter drug treatment and three times more likely to reduce or stop injecting compared to those who have never accessed a SSP.

Reducing Disease Transmission:

HIV/AIDS:

After a rise and peak of overall HIV/AIDS infections in 2010-2012, cases have continued a downward trend for the last 10 years. HIV/AIDS cases due to injection drug use (IDU) have been on average below 5 cases per year and have continued a downward trend since the early 2000s.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

Hepatitis C:

The graph below shows newly reported cases of chronic hepatitis C among City of Berkeley residents from 2011 through 2021. The increase in cases starting in 2013 is likely due to the initiation of statewide electronic laboratory reporting (ELR) and auto processing of ELR hepatitis C data in October and December, 2013, respectively. The increase in probable cases in 2018 reflects a change in the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologist/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definition for chronic hepatitis C in 2016. This change resulted in fewer cases meeting criteria for a confirmed case in 2018 compared to previous reporting years. Cases reported in 2012- 2015 could be classified as confirmed with only a positive antibody result value above a certain threshold. In 2016, such cases were considered probable and ribonucleic acid (RNA) detection was necessary for confirmation. Cases in this report were classified based on the case definition current at the time of the case report. Case counts from 2019 to 2021 show a decrease or plateau in cases.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

The graph below shows the age distribution of chronic hepatitis C cases in City of Berkeley residents. Since 2017, there has been a shift in the age predominance of hepatitis C cases, with an increase in cases among individuals aged 30 and younger, as opposed to the previous trend where the majority of cases were reported in those aged 50 and older.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

Opioid Overdose:

Using hospitalization and emergency department (ED) data from the Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI), trends in opioid overdose diagnoses among City of Berkeley residents can be monitored. Although opioid hospitalizations and ED visits are not necessarily linked with injection drug use, examining these patterns can provide useful background for evaluating harm reduction methods such as needle exchange services. The opioid crisis is a complex public health emergency that has gripped communities across the United States, including California. It stems from the widespread misuse and addiction to both prescription opioids, such as oxycodone and hydrocodone, and illicit opioids like heroin and fentanyl.

The graph below shows crude incident rates of opioid overdose hospitalizations for Berkeley residents with Alameda County and Statewide estimates for comparison.

Berkeley’s opioid overdose hospitalization rates ranged from a low of 4.7 per 100,000 in 2018 and to a high of 11.0 per 100,000 in 2017. The lowest rate was in 2018, while the highest was in 2017.

The next graph below shows crude rates of opioid overdose ED visits for Berkeley residents, with comparison rates for Alameda County and all of California. For the last five years, rates for Berkeley have increased, from 8.7 per 100,000 in 2017 to 29.2 per 100,000 in 2021. This over threefold increase mirrors a similar pattern of increasing ED visits for Alameda County and California.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

Syringe Exchange Program Data:

Berkeley Needle Exchange Emergency Distribution (NEED) (01/01/22-12/31/22) Program description:

NEED is a volunteer-based collective that was started in September 1990 by a group of HIV positive persons, people in recovery, and health activists as an underground program operating out of a baby carriage on the corner of Hearst and San Pablo Avenues in Berkeley.

Today, NEED operates from a van at three neighborhood sites each week, offering free and anonymous services in a client-centered manner. Their focus is on preventing infectious diseases and improving the physical, spiritual, and political health of drug users. In response to the rising number of overdoses among injection drug users, NEED also provides overdose prevention education.

In addition to syringes, NEED carries an assortment of harm reduction supplies including safer sex, wound care, and hygiene supplies. NEED provides information and referrals for medical, housing, social support, and treatment programs. Once a week, the NEED site is located across the street the Berkeley Free Clinic that provides free, anonymous hepatitis testing and vaccination.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

Exchange data:
 Number of individuals served: 6,089
 Number of syringes distributed: 515,361
 Numbers of syringes collected (note, this is often less as many communities have other alternatives for disposal): 207,490
 Number of overdose kits (Narcan) provided: 2,135
 Number of overdose reversals reported: 390
 Overdose trainings: 9 group trainings for outside groups and 500 individual trainings*
 Number of referrals to substance use disorder treatment programs: Data not collected
 Number of HIV and HCV tests performed: NEED does not perform HIV/HCV tests but refers individuals to testing services, if requested  Community served:
o Demographics of primary exchange participants:
o Gender
 Male: 59.85% Female:19.95% Transgender/genderqueer:2.4% Other: 2.2% Declined: 12.8%
o Race/ethnicity
 White: 39.2% African American: 17.35% Latino/Hispanic: 10.2% Asian/Pacific Islander: 2.3% Multiracial 5.7% Other: 5.15% Declined: 16.35%
o Age
 24 or younger: 2.15% 25-34: 19.9% 35-44: 20.9% 45-54:18.7% 55- 64: 18.25% 65 or older:4.6% Declined: 13.55%
*NEED offers training to anyone who receives naloxone from them. Most of the participants have used and/or been trained in how to use naloxone so they do not need or want training.

Berkeley Free Clinic Syringe Exchange (data from 01/01/22-01/01/23):

Program description:

The Berkeley Free Clinic (BFC) is non-profit community clinic located on Durant Ave. It is operated as a worker-run collective by more than 100 volunteers, that has provided free medical care since opening in 1969. The mission of the BFC is to empower individuals and communities by providing accessible, client-centered health services and information. The BFC offers a variety of services including STI screening and treatment, peer counselling, dental services, vision screening, and local resource navigation and referrals in addition to syringe exchange services. The Clinic is widely known to the Berkeley community as a place to receive harm reduction supplies as well

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

as hygiene items, food, and water. Their harm reduction services are integrated into the clinical services and include needs-based distribution of services, safer injection supplies, fentanyl test strips, naloxone education and distribution, and wound care supplies.

Exchange data:
 Number of individuals served: 4,500
 Numbers of syringes distributed: 19,800
 Numbers of syringes collected (note, this is often less as many communities have other alternatives for disposal): 10,200
 Number of overdose kits (Narcan) provided: 1,820
 Number of overdose reversals reported: 25
 Overdose trainings: 2
 Number of referrals to substance use disorder treatment programs: 27  Number of HIV and HCV tests performed: provided but not recorded  Community served: mostly unhoused, drug of choice:

Methamphetamine(crank)/heroin
Use of Public Funds:

NEED receives funding for syringe services supplies from the Public Health Division of Health, Housing, and Community Services Department. The funding is not to exceed $150,000 over three years (or $50,000 per year).

Outreach and Support-City of Berkeley Activities and Programs:

The City of Berkeley provides support to the injection drug using population in several ways.

Additional syringe disposal sites:
 The Berkeley Police Department maintains sharps and medication disposal at their office building. https://resource.stopwaste.org/vendor/berkeley-police- department-berkeley-2100-martin-luther-king-jr-
way?itemname=Needles%2B%26amp%3B%2BSyringes
 The Mental Health Division of Health, Housing and Community Services has a sharps container available for syringes and appropriate items at its adult clinic.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

Mental Health Division of Health, Housing, and Community Services (BMH):
 Overdose education and naloxone distribution (NARCAN): The HIV Education and Prevention Project of Alameda County (HEPPAC) has provided trainings to BMH and other community organizations for NARCAN administration and has distributed NARCAN to trained teams. BMH physicians prescribe NARCAN as clinically indicated. BMH also conducts drug screen testing when indicated.  HIV and hepatitis C testing: As clinically indicated, BMH physicians order HIV and Hep C blood tests for their patients.
 Education/services/accomplishments: Options Recovery has contracted with BMH to provide co-located substance use disorder (SUD) information, education, and services. Options Recovery street outreach is via a contract with HHCS to provide SUD outreach services and referral to SUD programming. BMH is also utilizing Opioid Settlement funds and Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funding to add a SUD staff person to the Berkeley High School Health Center to provide various SUD, referral, and harm reduction services.
 Referrals to drug treatment: BMH regularly refers to Alameda County SUD ACCESS for services, coordinating care with SUD providers for clients established in care with BMH. BMH also refers patients to various substance use programs including Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Marijuana Anonymous, Nicotine Anonymous, Bonita House, Cronin House, Cherry Hill, Chrysalis, and others.
 Housing, and mental health services: BMH completes intakes for eligible individuals at Bonita House to facilitate access to MH/Dual Diagnosis services, coordinates services and housing assessments for unhoused clients with Bay Area Community Services (BACS), works with Shelter and Care program case managers and staff and partner agencies (e.g. ABODE) to obtain and maintain clients in housing. BMH also assists with linkage to mental health services if someone does not meet BMH criteria for services
Berkeley High School Health Center (BHSHC):

The BHSHC provides a myriad of harm reduction resources to students.  Fentanyl Strips are provided as a “Grab and Go” item at the BHSHC front desk:

The BHSHC provides education about drug use, focusing on overdose prevention and fentanyl information, in partnership with the Harm Education and Reduction Organization (HERO), a student group spearheading an effort to educate their Berkeley High peers.

Biennial Syringe Services Report PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023

Through the partnership with HERO and Berkeley High School Health Center, Fentanyl Strips are provided by Kaiser Permanente to HERO and then given to the Health Center to distribute.
 The BHSHC receives Narcan through NARCANDirect.com: BHSHC has distributed Narcan to the BHS Administrative Team to administer in the event that the health center is closed. In partnership with BHS, the health center has developed a protocol for how staff can support BHS in the event of a suspected opioid overdose when the health center is open.
 Identifying students under the influence with Berkeley High School (BHS) Administration: The BHSHC provides BHS administrative staff with substance use education regarding identifying students under the influence. This yearly training provides BHS staff with the knowledge in identifying students under the influence at BHS events such as Prom.
 Substance Use Education-Provided by BHSHC Staff to clients: The BHSHC provides Health Education on the following:
o STI/HIV education, testing, and prevention
o HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) and Post-exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) Education and Referrals
o Alcohol, tobacco, and drug prevention

BACKGROUND
The California State legislature acknowledges that data from the Needle Exchange Programs in the United States and in Europe have shown that syringe exchange does not increase drug use in the population, can serve as an important bridge to treatment and recovery from drug abuse, and can curtail the spread of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection among the intravenous drug user population. Support of SSPs is a Strategic Plan Priority project, advancing our goal to champion and demonstrate social and racial equity.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
None.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None

CONTACT PERSON
Lisa B. Hernandez, MD, MPH, Health Officer, HHCS, (510) 981-5308

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

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL

BIENNIAL SYRINGE SERVICES REPORT
The public may participate in this hearing by remote video or in-person.

Notice is hereby given by the City Council of the City of Berkeley that a public hearing will be conducted by said city council of the City of Berkeley at which time and place all persons may attend and be heard upon the following:

The Department of Health, Housing, and Community Services is providing the Biennial Syringe Services Report.

The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 27, 2023, at 6 pm at the Berkeley Unified School District Board Room located at 1231 Addison Street, Berkeley CA 94702.

A copy of the agenda material for this hearing will be available on the City’s website at https://berkeleyca.gov/ as of June 15, 2023. Once posted, the agenda for this meeting will include a link for public participation using Zoom video technology, as well as any health and safety requirements for in-person attendance.

For further information, please contact Lisa B. Hernandez, MD, MPH, Health Officer at (510) 981-5300.

Written comments should be mailed or delivered directly to the City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704, or e-mailed to
[email protected] in order to ensure
delivery to all Councilmembers and inclusion in the agenda packet.

Communications to the Berkeley City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service or in person to the City Clerk. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk at 981-6900 or [email protected] for further information.

Published: June 16, 2023 – The Berkeley Voice
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek

InternalJune 27, 2023

Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on June 15, 2023.
__________________________________
Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Office of the City Manager
1 PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Liam Garland, Director, Department of Public Works Subject: Approval and Levy of 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee in FY 2024

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion adopt a Resolution approving the proposed adjusted fees for the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee and ordering the levy of the fees in Fiscal Year 2024.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The Resolution would approve and order the levy of the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee in Fiscal Year (FY) 2024. The fees are to be filed with the Alameda County Auditor and included in the County’s assessment roll. After collection by the County the total amount of the assessment minus a collection fee is paid to the City of Berkeley. The revenue is posted in the Clean Storm Water Fund (Fund 616). Approximately $3.03 million is expected to be collected from the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee in FY 2024. A summary of forecasted FY 2024 revenue and expenditures for Fund 616 is shown in the table below.

Table 1 - FY 2024 Fund 616 Forecast
Clean Stormwater Program Expenditures $ 5,891,265
Revenue
Clean Stormwater Fee (1991) $ 1,921,318
2018 Clean Stormwater Fee $ 3,026,129
Total Revenue $ 4,947,447
Deficit/Surplus $ (943,818)

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee (“2018 Fee”) is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index - U for the San Francisco Bay Area as of December of each succeeding year (the “CPI”). Per the voter approved measure, any increase in the CPI in excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as “Unused CPI” and shall be used to increase the maximum authorized rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. To date there is a current “Unused CPI” balance of 1.24%. For the period beginning in December 2021 and ending in December 2022, the CPI increased by 4.88%; therefore

2018 Clean Stormwater Fee – FY 2024 CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
2 the annual adjustment for FY 2024 will be limited to the prescribed maximum of 3.00% and the excess CPI increase of 1.88% will be reserved as “Unused CPI” balance to be used in future years.

As approved by voters, the annual adjustment may be calculated by taking the sum of the 1991 Clean Stormwater Fee (“1991 Fee”) and the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee, and multiplying the sum by the allowable CPI increase. Calculating the adjustment in this manner allows for the inclusion of a 1991 Fee adjustment as part of the annual 2018 Fee increase. The cumulative adjustment of the 1991 Fee and the 2018 Fee, result in 2018 Fee increases of approximately 5.35%.

The table below details prior year and proposed FY 2024 annual rates for the property- related fee.

Table 2 - Summary of Annual Rates for 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee Rate Category FY 2023
Fee
Proposed
FY 2024 Fee Unit
Single-Family Residential
Small $ 42.01 $ 44.25 parcel
Medium $ 52.51 $ 55.32 parcel
Large $ 63.51 $ 66.90 parcel
Condominium $ 42.01 $ 44.25 parcel
Single-Family Residential parcels with multiple single-family residences pay 22% higher rate Non-Single-Family Residential**
Multi-Family Residential $ 916.01 $ 964.98 acre
Comm / Industrial / Parking $ 1,022.53 $ 1,077.19 acre Office $ 958.62 $ 1,009.87 acre
Institutional / Church $ 873.41 $ 920.10 acre
School / Hospital $ 798.85 $ 841.56 acre
Recreational $ 617.78 $ 650.80 acre
Park $ 63.91 $ 67.32 acre
Vacant (developed) $ 53.25 $ 56.10 acre
Open Space / Agricultural exempt
* Single-Family Residential category also includes duplex, triplex and four-plex units. ** Non-Single-Family Residential parcel size is calculated to the tenth of an acre or portion thereof
Detailed calculations of the annual adjustment and the corresponding rate increases are included in the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee - Fiscal Year 2024 Adjustment Report (Attachment 2). Adoption of the Resolution would approve and order the levy of the 2018 Fee in FY 2024 at the rates described in this report. Following adoption, the fees will be filed with the Alameda County Auditor and included on the County’s assessment roll for collection. Revenue from the Fee will provide needed funding for the Stormwater Program which includes flood management, compliance with clean water requirements, operations and maintenance, and major capital improvements, all of which advance the strategic goals of: 1.) Providing state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities; and 2.) Being a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment.

2018 Clean Stormwater Fee – FY 2024 CONSENT CALENDAR
June 27, 2023
3 BACKGROUND
In 1991, the City was required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board to improve the water quality of urban runoff and discharge storm water runoff to the City’s waterways. The permit requires that the City implement a stormwater control program and best management practices.

To meet the NDPES permit requirements, the City implemented a Clean Storm Water Fee in 1991 for all residences and businesses in the City. The City has been collecting approximately $2 million annually for this fee and rates have not been increased since the fee was established in 1991. Initially, collected revenues were sufficient to fund ongoing maintenance, operations, and capital improvements. However, beginning in Fiscal Year 2014, the program began operating at a deficit. In 2018, in an effort to increase revenues for the program, the City introduced the 2018 Clean Stormwater Initiative to establish a new property-related fee to be assessed separately and in addition to the existing 1991 Fee. Following a Proposition 218 process the initiative was approved by voters and the City Council adopted Resolution No. 68,483-N.S., ordering the levy. The assessment has been levied for the 2019 through 2023 fiscal years.

Provisions of the California Health and Safety Code Section 5473.1 require that a public hearing be held each year that the fees are to be collected on the property tax roll and that a notice be published in a local newspaper. A public notice has been published designating June 27, 2023 as the date for the public hearing.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee provides a secure funding source for environmental protection related to the impacts of stormwater on creeks and the San Francisco Bay.

The fee maintains operations and maintenance activities and reduces environmental impacts of flooding, sink holes, trash, and debris.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The additional funding will allow the City to fund the operating deficit without the use of general funds, continue maintenance service levels, meet clean water regulatory requirements, and develop a long-term financial plan for capital projects, to continue improving water quality and minimizing the impacts of flooding in local areas.

CONTACT PERSON
Ronald Nevels, Interim Manager of Engineering/City Engineer, (510) 981-6439 Ricardo Salcedo, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Works, (510) 981-6407 Attachments:
1: Resolution – Ordering the Levy of 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee in Fiscal Year 2024 2: 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee – Fiscal Year 2024 Adjustment Report

3. Public Hearing Notice

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

APPROVING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY 2018 CLEAN STORMWATER FEE IN FISCAL YEAR 2024
WHEREAS, on February 13, 2018, the Council adopted Resolutions No. 68,334-N.S. and No. 68,335-N.S., to initiate the property related fee process and establish the balloting procedures for the 2018 Clean Stormwater Initiative consistent with California Constitution Article XIII D; and
WHEREAS, on April 3, 2018, the council conducted a public hearing at which a majority protest was not achieved, and subsequently adopted Resolution No. 68,831-N.S. directing the mailing of fee ballots to all property owners of properties within the City subject to the fee; and
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2018, following tabulation of fee ballots and confirming voter approval of the 2018 Clean Stormwater Initiative, Council adopted Resolution No. 68,483- N.S. accepting the ballot tabulation and ordering the levy of the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted by voters, the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee is subject to an annual increase based on the San Francisco - U Consumer Price Index (CPI), not to exceed 3% per year; and any increase in excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as “Unused CPI” and shall be used to increase the maximum authorized rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. The maximum annual CPI adjustment for each property shall be calculated based upon the sum of the 1991 Clean Stormwater Fee and the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee, and multiplying the sum by the CPI or 3% whichever is lower; and
WHEREAS, for the annual period ending in December 2022 the CPI increased by 4.88%, therefore the proposed annual adjustment can be applied at the maximum of 3.00%; and WHEREAS, the proposed fee rate for FY 2024 of FIFTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND THIRTY- TWO CENTS ($55.32) per single-family equivalent unit is in accordance with a City staff authored report dated May 2023 and titled “2018 Clean Stormwater Fee – Fiscal Year 2024 Fee Adjustment Report” (“Report”); and
WHEREAS, the rate increases and the methodology used in the calculation of the rates are described in the Report and are in accordance with the voter approved measure; and.

WHEREAS, provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 5473.1, require a public hearing to be held each year that the fees are to be collected on the property tax roll and a notice to be published in a local newspaper; and

WHEREAS, the notice was published designating June 27, 2023, as the date for public hearing; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 27, 2023 at a regular council meeting.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the levy and collection of fees for FY 2024 at the rates specified in the Report.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that shortly after the adoption of this Resolution, but in no event later than August 10th following such adoption, the City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this Resolution and a fee levy roll with the Auditor of Alameda County (“County Auditor”). Upon such filing, the County Auditor shall enter on the County’s assessment roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of fee thereupon as shown in the levy roll.

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2

CITY OF BERKELEY

2018 CLEAN STORMWATER FEE

Fiscal Year 2024
Fee Adjustment Report

May 2023

Prepared by

RONALD NEVELS, PE

CITY OF BERKELEY

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

ENGINEERING DIVISION

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 CITY’S FACILITIES ................................................................................................................................................ 2 STORM DRAINAGE FUNDING ........................................................................................................................... 2 FINANCIAL NEEDS SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 3 2018 CLEAN STORMWATER FEE RATE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS ........................................................... 4 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS ...................................................................................................... 4 NON-SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS ........................................................................................... 5 EFFECTS OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................. 7 STORM DRAINAGE FEE CALCULATION ......................................................................................................... 7

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1- FY 2024 Fund Forecast ..................................................................................................................... 3 Table 2- Summary of Single-Family Residential Parcels ............................................................................ 5 Table 3 – Summary of Non-SFR Parcels ....................................................................................................... 6 Table 4 - Storm Drainage Fee Schedule ........................................................................................................ 8

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
1 INTRODUCTION

OVERVIEW
In 1991, the City of Berkeley was required to obtain a national Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board to improve the water quality of urban runoff and discharge storm water runoff to the City’s waterways. The permit requires that the City of Berkeley implement a stormwater control program and best management practices. The City adopted the Clean Stormwater Fee in 1991 to comply with clean water regulations and provide a secure funding source for stormwater operations, maintenance, and capital improvements. The program includes flood management, compliance with clean water requirements, operations and maintenance, and major capital improvements.

Stormwater fees are paid by property owners and the fees have not been increased since the program’s inception in 1991. The program has been running a deficit since 2014 attributable to basic operations, maintenance, and compliance with clean water regulations. The Stormwater program also faces a backlog in capital improvements, with more than $208 million in project costs identified in the 2011 Watershed Management Plan1.

In order to increase revenues for the Stormwater program, the City adopted Resolutions No. 68,334-N.S. and Resolution No. 68,335-N.S., to initiate the property related fee process and establish balloting procedures for the 2018 Clean Stormwater Initiative consistent with California Constitution Article XIII D. A public hearing was conducted on April 3, 2018 at which a majority protest was not achieved, subsequently Resolution No. 68,381-N.S. was adopted ordering the mailing of fee ballots to all property owners of properties within the City subject to the fee. Following the tabulation of votes, and confirming approval of the measure, Council adopted Resolution No. 68,483-N.S., accepting the ballot tabulations and ordering the levy of the City of Berkeley’s 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee.

As approved by voters, the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index-U for the San Francisco Bay Area as of December of each succeeding year (the “CPI”), with a maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3%. Per the voter approved measure any increase in the CPI in excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as the “Unused CPI” and shall be used to increase the maximum authorized rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. The maximum authorized rate is equal to the maximum rate in the first fiscal year the Fee was approved adjusted annually by the lower of either 3% or the increase in the CPI plus any Unused CPI as described above. In order for the City’s dedicated storm drainage revenue sources to satisfy costs requirement into the future, the annual

1 Watershed Management Plan: https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/adopted- plans/watershed-management-plan

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
2 adjustment for property may be calculated based upon the sum of the storm drainage fee and the existing Clean Storm Water Fee.

This abbreviated fee adjustment report, has been prepared by City staff to document the annual adjustment of the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee for Fiscal Year 2024. The report also includes an abbreviated description of the storm drainage system, the program’s funding sources, and a five-year fund forecast.

CITY’S FACILITIES
The City operates and maintains a storm drainage system, as it is empowered to do so per Government Code Sections §38900 and §38901. It is comprised of an integrated system of storm drain pipes, culverts and ditches. Local creeks are not considered part of the City’s storm drain system, although they receive most of the urban runoff and are impacted by how the City’s storm drainage system functions.

The Berkeley area began experiencing residential development over one hundred years ago. As the community grew, the storm drainage system was developed along with the neighborhoods and commercial areas while still maintaining many native creek segments. Although the City is highly urbanized, there are a large number of open creek segments that cross streets, private properties and roadways through numerous culvert sections.

In the early 1990s, in response to the federal Clean Water Act amendment of 1987, municipalities were, for the first time, required to obtain an NPDES 2 permit from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board to address urban storm drainage runoff pollution. Under this permit, the City works to reduce stormwater pollution, protect and enhance its watersheds, preserve beneficial uses of local waterways, and implement State and federal water quality regulations within the limits of its jurisdiction.

Over the years, the range of actions taken by the City has greatly increased in response to evolving regulatory requirements and community needs.

STORM DRAINAGE FUNDING
In response to the NPDES permit requirements, the City implemented a Clean Storm Water Fee in 1991 for all residences and businesses in the City. The City collects approximately $2 million annually from this fee which has not been increased since its 1991 inception. Initially, revenues were sufficient to fund ongoing maintenance, operations and capital improvement projects. However, beginning in Fiscal Year 2014,

2 NPDES stands for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System as specified in the Federal Clean Water Act. The City is one of the co-permittees named on the Alameda County NPDES permit issued by the Regional Water Board. The most recent MRP was issued in November 2015, however, these permits typically are renewed every five years, with each new iteration containing additional requirements.

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
3 the program began operating at a deficit. In response to this deficit, the City implemented the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee.

FINANCIAL NEEDS SUMMARY
A Clean Stormwater Fund forecast for FY 2024 is provided below as Table 1.

Table 1- FY 2024 Fund Forecast

Costs

Personnel Costs $ 1,379,847

Non-Personnel Costs
Capital Improvement Program $ 2,005,455
Non-Personnel $ 2,505,963

Subtotal Non-Personnel Costs $ 4,511,418

Total Costs $ 5,891,265

Revenue

Clean Stormwater Fee (1991) $ 1,921,318
2018 Clean Stormwater Fee $ 3,026,159

Total Revenue $ 4,947,447

To (from) General Fund and/or Reserves $ (943,818)

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
4 2018 CLEAN STORMWATER FEE RATE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS
All properties which generate storm and urban runoff which flow into the City’s MS4 are served by the system. The amount of use attributed to each parcel is proportional to the amount of storm and urban runoff flow contributed by the parcel, which is proportional to the amount of impervious surface area (e.g. building roofs, pavement, etc.) on a parcel.

In this Report, the median single-family residential parcel is used as the basic unit of measure, called the single-family equivalent, or “SFE.” Accordingly, since the primary quantifiable attribute for this fee structure is impervious surface area, the amount of impervious surface area on the median SFR parcel serves as the basic unit of impervious area.

The basic unit of impervious area can be expressed by the following formula:

Median SFR Parcel Area
x Average SFR Impervious Percentage
= SFE Impervious Area
The median SFR parcel is 0.11 acres (4,792 square feet). Careful analysis revealed that the average percentage of impervious area (“%IA”) of the medium class of SFR parcels is 44.82%. Therefore, the amount of impervious area for the SFE is 2,148 square feet. This becomes the basis for calculating the SFEs for all other types of land uses. In order to accomplish this, a representative sample of each land use category was studied through aerial photographs to measure the actual impervious area, which was, in turn, used to calculate the %IA for each land use category.

SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS
Berkeley has a wide range of sizes of SFR parcels, which have varying levels of %IA.

Generally, smaller parcels tend to have a higher proportion of impervious area than larger parcels, which tend to have a lower percentage of impervious area. (This can be best visualized by the fact that larger residential properties tend to have a larger proportion of pervious landscaping, and therefore less impervious area.) Therefore, the range of SFRs were broken into three size categories as shown in Table 4 below.

Since the size of a parcel is considered in finite groups, the resultant SFEs were calculated on a per-parcel basis for each size category using the formula above.

It should be noted that the SFR category also includes multiplex parcels of two, three or four units, since their lot development characteristics do not vary significantly from the SFR parcels of similar size. In all, this includes the approximately 3,400 multiplex parcels in the City. Any residential structure with five or more units is categorized as multi-family residential (“MFR”), which is calculated separately. For parcels with multiple SFRs, analysis showed that those parcels contained 22% more impervious area than single-home SFRs within the same size category. Therefore, multiple-SFR parcels are computed separately.

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
5 Special Notes On Condominiums
Condominium units are particularly difficult to categorize as they are often on very small individual parcels, yet share larger common areas that are made up of landscaped (pervious) areas; parking lots and shared roofs (impervious); and other recreational uses (either pervious or impervious). The data for these variables are not readily available, so it is assumed that overall their characteristics were most similar to the small lot make up. Overall, condominium units are smaller than the average SFR, and may include two or more stories of residences in some cases. When combined with the various common areas (which were exempted from the SFE process), the overall effect would be less runoff impact than the median size SFR.

Thus, the Small SFR rate was used.

Table 2- Summary of Single-Family Residential Parcels
Lot
Type
Parcel
Size
Range
(sf)
Total
Parcels
% Imperv
Area
SFE per Parcel
Single
Home
Multiple
Homes
Small Under
3,200 2,416 65.73% 0.80 0.98
Medium 3,200 to
7,200 16,385 44.82% 1.00 1.22
Large 7,200
and over 2,689 29.81% 1.21 1.48
Condos n/a 2,490 n/a 0.80 n/a
TOTAL 23,980

NON-SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS
Unlike the SFR parcels, the non-SFR parcels can vary widely in size as well as characteristics. For this reason, the parcels have been grouped into land use categories according their %IA characteristics (as shown in Appendix B) so that SFE per acre can be computed for each category using the following formula:
(43,560 𝑠𝑓 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒⁄ ) 𝑥 %𝐼𝐴
2,148 𝑠𝑓/𝑆𝐹𝐸 = 𝑆𝐹𝐸 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝐴𝑐𝑟𝑒
Where 2,148 square feet is the amount of the impermeable area in one SFE.

Table 3 below shows a summary of the non-single-family parcel SFEs for each non- SFR land use category.

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
6 Table 3 – Summary of Non-SFR Parcels
Land Use Category
Total
Parcels
%
Imperv
Area
SFE per
Acre
Multi-Family (Apartments) 1,471 86% 17.44
Commercial / Retail / Industrial 1,627 96% 19.47
Office 243 90% 18.25
Institutional / Church 282 82% 16.63
School / Hospital 27 75% 15.21
Recreational 27 58% 11.76
Vacant (developed) 571 5% 1.01
Open Space / Agricultural 93 Exempt
4,341

Each individual parcel’s SFE is then calculated by multiplying the parcel size (in acres3) times the SFE per acre for that land use category, as shown in the following formula:

Developed Vacant Parcels
Developed vacant parcels are distinguished from undeveloped vacant land by one of several characteristics. Typically, a developed vacant parcel has been graded to be ready for building construction (possibly as part of the original subdivision or adjacent street grading). In some cases, the parcel was previously improved, but the improvement has been removed. Although developed vacant parcels may have significant vegetative cover, the underlying soil conditions resulting from grading work can usually cause some rainfall to run off into the storm drainage system. The %IA for developed vacant parcels is conservatively assumed to be 5%. Vacant parcels that have significant impervious paving remaining from prior improvements may be classified as Commercial or some other classification best representing the %IA of the parcel.

3 Parcel size for non-single-family residential parcels is calculated to the tenth of an acre or portion thereof.

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
7 Open Space and Agricultural Parcels are Exempt
The City’s MS4 was developed in response to land development over the past several decades. Tracts of land that have not yet been developed, or have been used primarily for agricultural purposes, have not created an impact on the drainage system beyond the natural condition, and are therefore considered to receive no service from the MS4.

In practical terms, these parcels generate no additional storm runoff beyond the natural condition. For these reasons, open space and agricultural parcels are exempt from the storm drainage fee.

Berkeley is a City with some open space land, which can be situated on portions of developed parcels. For parcels that have a significant portion that is considered open space (or agricultural), those portions have been taken into consideration in the calculations of the %IA and SFEs. For SFR parcels, these open space lands have been included in the sampled lots size when calculating the average %IA, which produced a lower %IA for the large parcel category, and, thus, a lower SFE and Fee to accommodate the open space areas. For non- SFR parcels the fees are calculated on individual acreage. However, the open space portion has been deducted from the acreage prior to all analyses including %IA as well as SFE and fee calculation.

EFFECTS OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT
The current NPDES Permit requires certain properties to construct storm drainage treatment and attenuation facilities, also known as low impact development (“LID”).

These facilities often are designed to capture a portion of the storm flows, retain them, and enable them to infiltrate into the ground. While this is intended to help filter pollutants from the water, it also can reduce the parcel’s storm drainage runoff quantity to some extent. However, LID is designed to capture, retain and treat frequent, but low intensity storms. Conversely, the MS4 is designed around the infrequent, high intensity storms, those storms which will typically overflow most LID facilities. For this reason, no discount in the storm drainage fees is made available for parcels with LID facilities.

STORM DRAINAGE FEE CALCULATION
The primary metric in this analysis is the SFE as illustrated above. To arrive at the fee amount for the various land use categories, the total SFEs must be divided into the total revenue requirement to arrive at the rate per SFE. That calculation is represented by the following formula:

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝐹𝐸𝑠 = 𝑆𝐹𝐸 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒
The total assessment to be collected in FY 2023, includes an allowable adjustment.

As described in the Overview section of this report, the fee is subject to an annual adjustment calculated by taking the sum of the 1991 Clean Stormwater Fee and the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee and multiplying the sum by the allowable CPI increase not to exceed 3%. For the period beginning in December 2021 and ending in December 2022, the CPI increased by 4.88%. As discussed in the Overview section

Internal
ATTACHMENT 2
8 of this report, “Unused CPI” balance from previous years can be used to increase the annual adjustment in years with CPI increases less than 3%. The annual adjustment for FY 2024 is limited to the prescribed maximum of 3% and the excess CPI increase of 1.88% will be reserved as “Unused CPI” balance to be used in future years.

The SFE calculation can be rewritten as follows:
2018 𝐹𝑒𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝑌 23 + (2018 𝐹𝑒𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝑌 23 + 1991 𝐹𝑒𝑒) × % 𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝐹𝐸𝑠
= 𝑆𝐹𝐸 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝑌 24
Or, using numbers from the analysis, the SFE Rate is:
$2,882,029 + ($2,882,029 + $1,921,318) × 0.03
54,701.996 𝑆𝐹𝐸𝑠 = $𝟓𝟓. 𝟑𝟐 𝒑𝒆𝒓 𝑺𝑭𝑬
This SFE rate amount is then multiplied by the SFE per parcel or SFE per acre for the various land use categories to arrive at the Storm Drainage Fee Rate Schedule shown in Table 4 below.

Table 4 - Storm Drainage Fee Schedule
Rate Category SFE Rate Proposed Fee Unit
Single-Family Residential
Small 0.79992 $ 44.25 parcel
Medium 1.00000 $ 55.32 parcel
Large 1.20933 $ 66.90 parcel
Condominium 0.79992 $ 44.25 parcel
Multiple SFR on a single parcel pay 22% higher rate
Non-Single-Family Residential**
Multi-Family Residential 17.44360 $ 964.98 acre
Commercial / Industrial / Parking 19.47193 $ 1,077.19 acre Office 18.25493 $ 1,009.87 acre
Institutional / Church 16.63227 $ 920.10 acre
School / Hospital 15.21244 $ 841.56 acre
Recreational 11.76429 $ 650.80 acre
Park 1.21700 $ 67.32 acre
Vacant (developed) 1.01416 $ 56.10 acre
Open Space / Agricultural exempt
* Single-Family Residential category also includes duplex, triplex and four-plex units. ** Non-Single-Family Residential parcel size is calculated to the tenth of an acre or portion thereof

The proposed $55.32 SFE rate is well within the range of storm drainage rates adopted by other municipalities.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL
LEVY OF 2018 CLEAN STORMWATER FEE FOR FY 2024
The public may participate in this hearing by remote video or in-person.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that at its meeting on Tuesday, June 27, 2023, the Berkeley City Council will conduct a public hearing to consider:

The levy of the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee in Fiscal Year 2024.

The fee is collected through the property tax bill and collected revenue would fund operations, maintenance, and capital improvements of the City’s storm drain system.

The table below details prior year and proposed FY 2024 rates for the property-related fee.

Rate Category FY 2023
Fee
Proposed
FY 2024 Fee Unit
Single-Family Residential
Small $ 42.01 $ 44.25 parcel
Medium $ 52.51 $ 55.32 parcel
Large $ 63.51 $ 66.90 parcel
Condominium $ 42.01 $ 44.25 parcel
Single-Family Residential parcels with multiple single-family residences pay 22% higher rate Non-Single-Family Residential**
Multi-Family Residential $ 916.01 $ 964.98 acre
Comm / Industrial / Parking $ 1,022.53 $ 1,077.19 acre Office $ 958.62 $ 1,009.87 acre
Institutional / Church $ 873.41 $ 920.10 acre
School / Hospital $ 798.85 $ 841.56 acre
Recreational $ 617.78 $ 650.80 acre
Park $ 63.91 $ 67.32 acre
Vacant (developed) $ 53.25 $ 56.10 acre
Open Space / Agricultural exempt
* Single-Family Residential category also includes duplex, triplex and four-plex units. ** Non-Single-Family Residential parcel size is calculated to the tenth of an acre or portion thereof
The 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee (“2018 Fee”) is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index - U for the San Francisco Bay Area as of December of each succeeding year (the “CPI”). Per the voter approved measure, any increase in the CPI in excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as “Unused CPI” and shall be used to increase the maximum authorized rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. For the period beginning in December 2021 and ending in December 2022, the CPI increased by 4.88%; therefore the annual adjustment for FY 2024 will be limited to the prescribed maximum of 3.00% and the excess CPI increase of 1.88% will be reserved as “Unused CPI” balance to be used in future years.

As approved by voters, the annual adjustment may be calculated by taking the sum of the 1991 Clean Stormwater Fee (“1991 Fee”) and the 2018 Clean Stormwater Fee, and multiplying the sum by the allowable CPI increase. Calculating the adjustment in this

manner allows for the inclusion of a 1991 Fee adjustment as part of the annual 2018 Fee increase. The cumulative adjustment of the 1991 Fee and the 2018 Fee, result in 2018 Fee increases of approximately 5.35%.

Public Hearing Information
The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 27, 2023, at 6:00 pm at the Berkeley Unified School District Board Room located at 1231 Addison Street, Berkeley CA 94702.

A copy of the agenda material for this hearing will be available on the City’s website at https://berkeleyca.gov/ as of June 15, 2023. Once posted, the agenda for this meeting will include a link for public participation using Zoom video technology, as well as any health and safety requirements for in-person attendance.

For further information, please contact Ronald Nevels, Interim Manager of Engineering/City Engineer, (510) 981-6439, or Ricardo Salcedo, Associate Civil Engineer, Public Works, (510) 981-6407.

Written comments should be mailed or delivered directly to the City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704, or e-mailed to
[email protected] in order to ensure
delivery to all Councilmembers and inclusion in the agenda packet.

Communications to the Berkeley City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service.

If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk at (510) 981-6900 or [email protected] for further information.

Published: June 16, 2023 – The Berkeley Voice
City Clerk shall publish a notice at least 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing with the date, hour, and place of the public hearing for annual levy and collection of assessments in accordance with Streets and Highway Code Sections 22625, 22626, 22552, and 22553 and Section 6061 of the Government Code. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on June 15, 2023.
__________________________________
Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Office of the City Manager
1 PUBLIC HEARING
June 27, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Liam Garland, Director, Department of Public Works Subject: Levy and Collection of Fiscal Year 2024 Street Lighting Assessments

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion adopt Resolutions confirming the assessments for the Berkeley Street Lighting Assessment District No. 1982-1 and the Street Lighting Assessment District 2018, approving the Engineer’s Reports, and authorizing the levying and collection of assessments in Fiscal Year 2024.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
On June 13, 2023, Council adopted Resolutions No. 70,893–N.S. (District No. 1982-1) and Resolution No. 70,894–N.S. (District 2018) declaring the City’s intent to levy and collect FY 2024 assessments for Berkeley Street Lighting Assessment District No. 1982-1 and Street Lighting Assessment District 2018, collectively referred to herein as the Districts; preliminarily approving the Engineer’s Reports for the Districts; and setting a public hearing for the June 27, 2023 Council Meeting.

The attached Resolutions confirm the assessments, approve the final Engineer’s Reports, and authorize the levy and collection of assessment in Fiscal Year 2024. The assessments are to be filed with the Alameda County Auditor and included on the County’s assessment roll. After collection by the County the total amount of the assessment minus a county collection fee is paid to the City of Berkeley. The revenue collected is posted in the Street Light Assessment District Fund (Fund 142).

A summary of forecasted FY 2024 revenue and expenditures for the Districts is shown in Table 1.

Table 1: FY 2024 Street Light Assessment Revenue & Expenditures Forecast Street Lighting Program Expenditures $ 2,275,155
Projected Assessments & Other Revenue
Street Light Assessment District 1982-1 $ 1,422,966
Street Light Assessment District 2018 $ 773,830

Levy and Collection - FY 2024 Street Lighting Assessment Districts CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023
2 Misc. Revenue $ 957
Projected Net Revenue $ 2,197,752
To (from) General Fund and/or Reserves $ (77,402)
Allowable annual adjustments of the 2018 District assessment rates are expected to raise revenues over the coming years.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The proposed FY 2024 rates for Assessment District 1982-1 (1982 District) are incorporated into the Engineer’s Report (Attachment 3) and reflect no changes to assessment rates in FY 2023. Accordingly, this action is exempt from the notice, protest, and hearing requirements of State Proposition 218 as set forth in Government Code Section 53753.5 (Article XIII D, Sec. 5). Any increase or change in formula for the assessments would make the annual assessment subject to procedures and approval process of Proposition 218 (Government Code Section 53750-53754). Table 2 details prior year and proposed FY 2024 assessment rates for this district.

Table 2: Street Lighting Assessment District No. 1982-1 Rate Schedule Rate Category
Assessment
FY 2023
Proposed
Assessment
FY 2024 Unit
Residential and Institutional $ 0.0108 $ 0.0108 BSF1
Industrial and Utility $ 0.0216 $ 0.0216 BSF
Commercial $ 0.0432 $ 0.0432 BSF
The assessment for Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 (2018 District) is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index-U for the San Francisco Bay Area as of December of each succeeding year (the “CPI”), with a maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3%. For the period beginning in December 2021 and ending in December 2022, the CPI increased by 4.88%2 ; therefore the assessment CPI adjustment for Fiscal Year 2024 will be for the prescribed maximum of 3.00%. As approved by voters, the total annual adjustment may be calculated by taking the sum of the 1982-1 District assessment and the 2018 District assessment, and multiplying the sum by the allowable CPI increase. Calculating the adjustment in this manner allows for the inclusion of a 1982-1 District adjustment as part of the 2018 District adjustment. The cumulative total adjustment results in a 2018 District assessment rate increase of approximately 9%.

These rate increases and the methodology used in their calculation are in accordance with the voter approved measure; therefore the proposed adjustments are exempt from 1 Building Square Footage (BSF)
2 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Data Series CUUSS49BSA0

Levy and Collection - FY 2024 Street Lighting Assessment Districts CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023
3 the notice, protest, and hearing requirements of State Proposition 218 as set forth in Government Code Section 53753.5 (Article XII D, Sec. 5). Table 3 details FY 2023 and proposed FY 2024 assessment rates for this district. Additional information regarding the annual adjustment and the corresponding rate increases is included in the 2018 District Engineer’s Report (Attachment 4).

Table 3: Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 Rate Schedule Rate Category
Assessment
FY 2023
Proposed
Assessment
FY 2024
Unit
Residential
Single Family $ 15.34 $ 16.72 parcel
Multi-Family<5 units $ 12.27 $ 13.38 unit
Multi-Family 5 or more units $ 9.20 $ 10.03 unit
Condominium $ 12.27 $ 13.38 parcel
Mobile Home $ 7.67 $ 8.36 unit
Multiple SFR on parcel $ 15.34 $ 16.72 unit
Non-Residential
General Commercial $ 230.10 $ 250.80 acre
Industrial / Warehouse $ 23.01 $ 25.08 acre
Auto Repair $ 153.40 $ 167.20 acre
Hotel / Motel / Boarding $ 153.40 $ 167.20 acre
Hospital $ 95.88 $ 104.50 acre
Retirement Home $ 19.18 $ 20.90 acre
School / Day Care $ 34.52 $ 37.62 acre
Medical / Dental / Vet $ 191.75 $ 209.00 acre
Church $ 11.51 $ 12.54 acre
Mortuary $ 3.84 $ 4.18 acre
Recreational $ 38.35 $ 41.80 acre
Parking / Transportation $ 76.70 $ 83.60 acre
Mini Storage $ 11.51 $ 12.54 acre
Office $ 57.53 $ 62.70 acre
Bank $ 191.75 $ 209.00 acre
Park / Open Space / Agriculture $ 0.77 $ 0.84 acre
Vacant Not assessed
Revenue from the assessments will provide needed funding for the installation, maintenance, and servicing of public lighting facilities, including but not limited to street lights, traffic signals, and related electrical facilities. The improvements and services provided support the Strategic Plan goals of creating a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared city and of providing state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities.

BACKGROUND
The Berkeley Street Lighting Assessment District No. 1982-1 was established under the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Streets and Highway Code Section 22620-

Levy and Collection - FY 2024 Street Lighting Assessment Districts CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023
4 22631) on July 27, 1982 (Resolution No. 51,449-N.S.) 3. The Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 was established under the same Act on June 12, 2018 (Resolution No. 68,482-N.S.). The Act requires the City Council to hold a public hearing each year to consider adoption of an annual budget and approve changes to the Engineer’s Report. At this hearing owners of assessed properties within the district are allowed to make an oral or written protest against the annual levy.

During the course of, or upon conclusion of the public hearing, City Council may order changes in any of the matters provided in the respective Engineer’s Report, including changes in improvements; zones within the assessment district; and the proposed district diagram, or the proposed assessment, as long as any proposed changes are less than the proposed annual levy. With the incorporation of any changes made by Council to the Engineer’s Report, it is then adopted upon supporting vote by Council confirming the diagrams, assessments, and levying assessments for the coming Fiscal Year.

The City’s Engineering Division has filed the FY 2024 Engineer’s Reports for the assessment districts with the City Clerk. After the public hearing, copies of the Engineer’s Reports with FY 2024 assessments will be available for review on the City’s Website,4 at the reference desk of the main branch of the Berkeley Public Library, and at the City Clerk’s Office.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The City exclusively uses LED (light emitting diode) street lighting. LED lights provide environmental benefits by reducing the level of greenhouse gases emitted; reducing level of toxic materials disposed; maximization of energy and energy cost savings; achieving the City’s illumination standards; and minimizing administration costs and staff time for street light maintenance.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Failure to conduct a public hearing and adopt the Resolutions would result in non- compliance of the requirements set forth in the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 thus preventing the City from levying assessments in FY 2024. The District assessments are needed to establish financial sustainability for the Program and to avoid significant reductions in service.
3 State of California legislation (Streets & Highways §22500) allows local governmental agencies to form Landscape & Lighting Maintenance Districts. A 1972 Act Landscaping and Lighting District is a flexible tool used by local government agencies to pay for landscaping, lighting and other improvements and services in public areas. It is based on the concept of assessing only those properties that benefit from improvements financed, either directly, or indirectly through increased property values. http://www.californiataxdata.com/pdf/1972LLact.pdf
4 https://berkeleyca.gov/city-services/report-pay/property-taxes

Levy and Collection - FY 2024 Street Lighting Assessment Districts CONSENT CALENDAR June 27, 2023
5 CONTACT PERSON
Liam Garland, Director, Department of Public Works, (510) 981-6303 Ronald Nevels, Interim Manager of Engineering/City Engineer, (510) 981-6439 Attachments:
1: Resolution – Levy and Collection of FY 2024 Assessments for Street Lighting Assessment District 1982-1
2: Resolution – Levy and Collection of FY 2024 Assessments for Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
3: Engineer’s Report - Street Lighting Assessment District 1982-1 Fiscal Year 2024 4: Engineer’s Report - Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 Fiscal Year 2024 5: Public Hearing Notice

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

LEVY AND COLLECTION OF FY 2024 ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 1982-1
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Berkeley adopted Resolution No. 70,893- N.S. declaring the City’s intent to levy and collect assessments for FY 2023, approving the preliminary Engineer’s Report, dated April 2023, for the Berkeley Lighting Assessment District 1982-1, and setting a public hearing for June 27, 2023; at a regular Council Meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk published notice of the public hearing 10 days prior to the public hearing in accordance with Streets and Highway Code Sections 22625, 22626, 22552, and 22553 and Government Code Section 6061 in a newspaper with general circulation; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at the regular City Council meeting held via videoconference and teleconference pursuant to Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20; and all interested persons were afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard or file a written protest with the Clerk; and WHEREAS, the Council considered all public comments received against the levy of an annual assessment at the same rate as was levied in FY 2023 and the assessment is in compliance with the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley approves the final Engineer’s Report dated April 2023 and authorizes the levy and collection of assessments within Berkeley Street Lighting Assessment District No. 1982- 1 for FY 2024. The area of Land to be assessed is located in the City of Berkeley, Alameda County.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that improvements to be made in this assessment district are generally described as maintenance or servicing of existing and future public lighting facilities, including, but not limited to street lights, traffic signals, and related electrical facilities; and the installation and construction of public lighting including but not limited to grading, clearing, removal of debris, installation and construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalk, paving, irrigation, and drainage as needed for the installation of public lighting or related electrical facilities.

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

LEVY AND COLLECTION OF FY 2024 ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2018
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Berkeley adopted Resolution No. 70,894- N.S. declaring the City’s intent to levy and collect assessments for FY 2024, approving the preliminary Engineer’s Report, dated April 2023, for the Street Lighting Assessment District 2018, and setting a public hearing for June 27, 2023; at a regular Council Meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk published notice of the public hearing 10 days prior to the public hearing in accordance with Streets and Highway Code Sections 22625, 22626, 22552, and 22553 and Government Code Section 6061 in a newspaper with general circulation; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at the regular City Council meeting held via videoconference and teleconference pursuant to Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20; and all interested persons were afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard or file a written protest with the Clerk; and WHEREAS, the Council considered all public comments received against the levy of an annual assessment at the proposed assessment rate of SIXTEEN DOLLARS AND SEVENTY-TWO CENTS ($16.72) per single-family equivalent benefit unit; and WHEREAS, the proposed annual assessment adjustment is in accordance with formulas established when the assessment district was formed and the assessment is in compliance with the provisions of Proposition 2018 (Article XIII D of the California Constitution) and the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley approves the final Engineer’s Report dated April 2023 and authorizes the levy and collection of assessments within Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 for FY 2024.

The area of land to be assessed is located in the City of Berkeley, Alameda County.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that improvements to be made in this assessment district are generally described as maintenance or servicing of existing and future public lighting facilities, including, but not limited to street lights, traffic signals, and related electrical facilities; and the installation and construction of public lighting including but not limited to grading, clearing, removal of debris, installation and construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalk, paving, irrigation, and drainage as needed for the installation of public lighting or related electrical facilities.

ATTACHMENT 3

1 CITY OF BERKELEY

STREET LIGHTING
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 1982-1

ENGINEER’S REPORT
on the
Levy of an Assessment
for
Fiscal Year 2024

April 2023

Prepared by

RONALD NEVELS, PE

STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 1982-1 ATTACHMENT 3

2 CITY OF BERKELEY

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

ENGINEERING DIVISION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................. 3 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................ 3 ESTIMATE OF COSTS ....................................................................................................................................... 3 DIAGRAM ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 5 APPENDIX A: FY 2024 ASSESSMENT ROLL ................................................................................................ 7

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1- FY 2024 Street Light Fund Forecast ............................................................................................... 4

STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 1982-1 ATTACHMENT 3

3 BACKGROUND
By its Resolution 51,230 N.S., adopted April 6, 1982, the Berkeley City Council initiated proceedings under the provisions of Division 15, Part 2, of the California Streets and Highways Code, entitled “Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972”. The required public hearing was held on July 20, 1982, at which time the Council ordered the improvements and the formation of the assessment district, and confirmed the diagram and assessment. The district so formed was designated the “City of Berkeley Street Lighting Assessment District 1982-1”. Assessments have been levied for the 1983 through 2022 fiscal years.

This report was prepared and filed pursuant to Division 15, Part 2, of the California Streets and Highway Code Section 2250, and is exempt from Government Code Section 53753 since the proposed assessment for FY 2024 will not be increased.

PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
The plans and specifications for this assessment district were prepared and filed with the Engineer’s Report for the 1983 fiscal year, which plans and specifications are incorporated herein by this reference thereto.

METHODOLOGY
The benefit to individual parcels within the Assessment District was established in 1982 based on the median light intensity a parcel receives. Parcel’s Land Use Code (LUC) is used to categorize the parcels. The assessment is calculated by multiplying the building square footage on the parcel times the rate of its category. The rate structure has three categories: 1) Residential and Institutional, 2) Industrial, 3) Commercial. An industrial area has twice the median light intensity of a residential area and a commercial area has four times the median light intensity; therefore, the rates are two and four times higher, respectively, than the residential rate. The rates are:

Residential and Institutional $0.0108/Building Square Footage Industrial and Utility $0.0216/Building Square Footage
Commercial $0.0432/Building Square Footage

ESTIMATE OF COSTS
The improvements to be made in this assessment district are generally described as the maintenance or servicing of existing and future public lighting facilities, including, but not limited to street lights, traffic signals, and related electrical facilities; and the installation and construction of public lighting including grading, clearing, removal of debris, installation and construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks, paving, irrigation, and drainage as needed for the installation of public lighting or related electrical facilities.

STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 1982-1 ATTACHMENT 3

4 An estimate of costs for the maintenance of the improvements is provided in the fiscal year (FY) 2024 Street Light Assessment Fund (Fund 142) forecast provided below.

Table 1- FY 2024 Street Light Fund Forecast

Expenses

Personnel Expenses $ 455,955

Non-Personnel Expenses
Non-Personnel $ 440,530
Debt Service $ 370,451
PG&E Electric Costs $ 483,837
Indirect Costs $ 54,916
Operating Transfer Out $ 12,120
County Collection Fee $ 37,346
Subtotal Non-Personnel Costs $ 1,399,200

Capital Expenses
Deferred Capital/Maint $ 420,000
Subtotal Capital Expenses $ 420,000

Total Expenses $ 2,275,155

Assessments & Other Revenue

Street Light Assessment District 1982-1 $ 1,422,966
Street Light Assessment District 2018 $ 773,830
Misc. Revenue $ 957

Total Revenue $ 2,197,752

Deficit – To (from) General Fund and/or
Reserves $ (77,402)

DIAGRAM
The diagram for this assessment district was prepared and filed with the Engineer’s Report for the 1983 fiscal year.

STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 1982-1 ATTACHMENT 3

5 ASSESSMENT
Except as described below, the assessments to be made against the assessable lots and parcels of land within this assessment district are contained in the “2023 Assessment Roll” for this district, which roll is filed herewith and incorporated herein by this reference thereto.

Said assessment roll filed herewith is based on data contained in the City’s 2023 Library Tax tape and the County Assessor’s 2023 maps. In the event that data contained in the 2023 Library Tax tape and 2023 maps, when issued, conflict therewith, assessments to be made against the affected parcels for this 2024 Fiscal Year shall be based upon the revised data contained in said 2024 tape and 2024 maps.

Dated: ______________ ___________________________
Ronald Nevels, RCE 62524
Engineer of Work

STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2018 ATTACHMENT 3

7 APPENDIX A: FY 2024 ASSESSMENT ROLL
An Assessment Roll (a listing of all parcels assessed within the City of Berkeley Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 and the amount of the assessment) has been filed with the City Engineer, and is, by reference, made part of this report and will be available for public inspection during normal office hours.

Each lot or parcel listed on the Assessment Roll is shown and illustrated on the latest County Assessor records and these records are, by reference, made part of this report.

These records shall govern all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels.

FY 2024

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
April 2023

(This Page Intentionally Left Blank)

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024
Page i

CITY OF BERKELEY
City Council
Jesse Arreguin, Mayor
Rashi Kesarwani, District 1
Terry Taplin, District 2
Ben Bartlett, District 3
Kate Harrison, District 4
Sophie, Hahn, District 5
Susan Wengraf, District 6
Rigel Robinson, District 7
Mark Humbert, District 8

City Manager
Dee Williams‐Ridley

Public Works Department
Liam Garland, Director
Joseph Enke, Manager of Engineering
Ricardo Salcedo, Associate Civil Engineer

City Attorney
Farimah Brown

Engineer of Work
Jerry Bradshaw, P.E., SCI Consulting Group

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024
Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City Council  i
City Manager  i
Public Works Department  i
City Attorney  i
Engineer of Work  i
Introduction  1
Overview  1
Assessment Formation Process  2
Legal Requirements  2
Proposition 218  2
Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority  3
Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property  4
Bonander v. Town of Tiburon  4
Beutz v. County of Riverside  5
Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego  5 Compliance with Current Law  5
Plans and Specifications  6
Fiscal Year 2024 Budget  8
Method of Assessment  10
Discussion of Benefit  10
Special Benefit  11
Improved Visibility and Safety  11
Improved Access, Navigation and Traffic Safety  11
Improved Community Character and Vitality  11
General Versus Special Benefit  12
Quantification of General Benefit  12
Calculation of General Benefit  13
Calculation of the Current General Benefit Contribution from the City  15 General Benefit is More than Offset by City Contribution  15 Method of Assessment  16
Residential Traffic  16
Non‐Residential Traffic  17
Darkness  17
Single‐Family Equivalents  17

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024
Page iii

Annual Assessment Increase  18
Duration of Assessment  19
Appeals and Interpretation  19
Assessment Statement  20
Assessment Diagram  22
Appendix B – Assessment Roll  25

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024
Page iv

List of Tables
Table 1 – FY 2024 Budget Summary ................................................................................... 8 Table 2 – General Benefit for Arterial Streets .................................................................. 14 Table 3 – Calculation of General Benefit .......................................................................... 14 Table 4 – Single‐Family Equivalent Rates  .......................................................................... 18 Table 5 – Maximum Single‐Family Equivalent Rate Calculation  ....................................... 19

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024
Page v

List of Figures
Figure 1 – Assessment Diagram  ........................................................................................ 22

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Introduction
Overview
The City of Berkeley (“City”) provides maintenance and servicing of certain publicly‐ owned street lights throughout the City. In order to fund the installation, maintenance and operation (the “Services”) of these improvements (“Improvements”), the City formed a city‐wide street light assessment district in 1982. The rates for the 1982 assessment district have never been increased. Revenues from these assessments are placed into the streetlight fund (Fund 470).

In time, the financial outlook of the Streetlight fund began to  cause concern as the costs increased for energy, labor and materials, while the revenue remained relatively static.

Accordingly, the Streetlight fund no longer had enough funds to fund the Street light program. As a result, beginning in Fiscal Year 2006
1 the Streetlight fund began to receive
a subsidy from the City’s General Fund in order to balance revenues with expenditures.

However, because of other demands on the General Fund, that subsidy ended beginning Fiscal Year 2018. The modest fund balance was sufficient for Fiscal Year 2018 to cover that year’s anticipated expenses, but under current conditions it was expected to be depleted during Fiscal Year 2019. To establish financial sustainability for the Streetlight fund and avoid significant reductions in service levels, in 2018 the City conducted a funding measure to increase the assessment revenue for street light services.

With the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996, any increase in assessments must be approved by the affected property owners through a specified ballot proceeding. In addition, Proposition 218 and related subsequent court decisions create strict criteria for how assessments can be apportioned to the various propertie s, and the existing 1982 assessment structure may not be adequately consistent with these newer criteria.

While the 1982 assessment structure may continue as a “grandfathered” assessment, any increase must be implemented in accordance with Proposition 218 and court decisions. For this reason, a new district, Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 (“District”), was formed separately, leaving the 1982 assessmen t structure in place, as is.

The District will was formed and the levies are made pursuant to Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, commonly known as the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 (“Act”), and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (“Article”).

1 Fiscal years are referenced in this Report by the year that fiscal period ends.  For example, Fiscal Year 2006 would cover the period from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Assessment Formation Process
This Engineer’s Report (“Report”) describes the Street Lighting Assessment District 2018 ( “ D i s t r i c t ” ) ,  a l o n g  w i t h  t h e  b o u n d a r i e s ,  a  d e s c r i p t i o n  o f  t h e  facilities  and  public improvements  to  be  improved,  serviced  and  maintained  by  the  ass essments  (the "Improvements”), and the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2024 (“Assessments”).

At its meeting on April 3, 2018, the City Council passed a resolution directing that a notice of  assessment  and  assessment  ballot  be  mailed  to  property  owners wi t h in  th e  Di st r i ct whose property receives special benefit from the Improvements.  The notice included a description  of  the  Improvements  to  be  funded  by  the  Assessments ,  the  proposed assessment  amount  for  each  parcel  owned,  and  an  explanation  of  the  method  of completing and submitting the ballot. Ballots were mailed on or about April 11, 2018.

On  May  29,  2018,  a  public  hearing  was  be  held  for  the  purpose  o f  allowing  public testimony regarding the proposed Assessments. At the Public Hearing, the public had the o p p o r t u n i t y  t o  s p e a k  o n  t h e  i s s u e ,  v o i c e  a n y  c o n c e r n s  o r  p r o t e sts,  and  obtain  further information about the proposed Assessments.

The returned ballots were then t abulated, and the ballot result s were announced at the City Council  meeting on June 12,  2018. It  was determined that  t he assessment ballots s u b m i t t e d  i n  o p p o s i t i o n  t o  t h e  p r o p o s e d  A s s e s s m e n t s  d i d  n o t  e x ceed  the  assessment b a l l o t s  s u b m i t t e d  i n  f a v o r  o f  t h e  A s s e s s m e n t s  ( e a c h  b a l l o t  w a s  weighted  by  the proportional financial obligation of the property for which the  ballot was submitted), so the Council was able to take action to approve the levying of A ssessments for Fiscal Year 2019.  The  Assessments  were  so  confirmed  and  approved,  and  the  A ssessment information  was  submitted  to  the  County  Auditor/Controller.  The  C o u n t y Auditor/Controller included the Assessments on the property tax  roll beginning in Fiscal Year 2019. Assessments may now be continued by the City Council from year to year.

Legal Requirements
Proposition 218
This Assessment District was formed consistent with Proposition  218, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, which was approved by the voters of California on  November 6, 1996 and is now codified as Articles XIIIC and XIIID of the California C onstitution. Proposition 218 provides  for  benefit  assessments  to  be  levied  to  fund  the  cost o f  p r o v i d i n g  s e r v i c e s , improvements, as well as maintenance and operation expenses to a public improvement which benefits the assessed property.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Proposition  218  describes  a  number  of  important  requirements,  including  property‐ owner  balloting  for  the  imposition,  increase  and  extension  of  assessments,  and  these requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this Assessment District.

Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara Count y Open Space Authority
In July 2008, the California Supreme Court decided Silicon Vall ey Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (“SVTA”), the most significant court case clarifying  the  substantive  assessment  requirements  of  Proposition  218.  Several  of  the most important elements of the decision included further emphas is that:
 Benefit assessments are for special benefits to property, not general benefits.  The services and/or improvements funded by assessments must be clearly defined.
 Assessment districts must be drawn to contain all parcels that receive a special benefit from a proposed public improvement.
 Assessments paid in each assessment district must be proportional to the special benefit received by each such parcel from the improvements and services funded by the assessment.

This Engineer’s Report and the process used to establish the Assessments are consistent with  the  SVTA  decision  and  with  the  requirements  of  Article  XIIIC  and  XIIID  of  the California Constitution based on the following factors:

1. The District is narrowly drawn to include only the properties t hat receive special benefit from the specific Improvements. Thus, zones of benefit are not required, and the assessment revenue derived from real property in the District is extended only on the Improvements in the District.

2. The Improvements which will be constructed and maintained with  Assessment proceeds in the District are located in close proximity to the real property subject to  the  Assessment.  The  Improvements  provide  illumination  to  str eets  and sidewalks enabling improved access to the residents of such ass essed property.

The  proximity  of  the  Improvements  to  the  assessed  parcels  and  the  improved access and increased safety provided to the residents of the as sessed parcels by the  Improvements  provides  a  special  benefit  to  the  parcel  being   assessed pursuant to the factors outlined by the Supreme Court in that decision.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

3. Due to their proximity to the assessed parcels, the Improvement s financed with Assessment  revenues  in  the  District  benefit  the  properties  in  that  District  in  a manner different in kind from the benefit that other parcels of  real property in the  area  derive  from  such  Improvements,  and  the  benefits  conferred  on  such property in the District are more extensive than a general incr ease in property values.

4. The assessments paid in the Distr ict are proportional to the sp ecial benefit that each parcel within the District receives from the Improvements because:
a) The costs of the specific lighting Improvements and maintenance and utility costs in the District are specified in this Report; and

b) Such Improvement and maintenance costs in the District are allocated among different types of property located within the District and equally among those properties which have similar characteristics, such as single‐ family residential parcels, multi‐family residential parcels, commercial parcels, industrial parcels, etc.

Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property
On June 8, 2009, the Court of Appeal amended its original opini on upholding a benefit assessment  for  property  in  the  downtown  area  of  the  City  of  Pom ona  in  Dahms  v.

Downtown Pomona Property (“Dahms”). On July 22, 2009, the California Supreme Court denied review. In Dahms the Court upheld an assessment that was 100% special benefit (i.e. 0% general benefit) on the rationale that the services an d improvements funded by the assessments were directly provided to property in the asses sment district. The Court also upheld discounts and exemptions from the assessment for certain properties.

Bonander v. Town of Tiburon
On December 31, 2009, in Bonander v. Town of Tiburon (“Bonander”), the Court of Appeal overturned  a  benefit  assessment  approved  by  property  owners  to  pay  for  placing o v e r h e a d  u t i l i t y  l i n e s  u n d e r g r o u n d  i n  a n  a r e a  o f  t h e  T o w n  o f  T iburon. The  Court invalidated  the  assessments  primarily  on  the  grounds  that  the  assessments  had  been apportioned to assessed property based in part on relative costs within sub‐areas of the assessment  district  instead  of  the  overall  cost  of  the  improveme n t s  a n d  t h e  o v e r a l l proportional special benefits.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Beutz v. County of Riverside
On  May  26,  2010  the  Court  of  Appeals  issued  a  decision  in  Steven  Beutz  v.  County  of Riverside  (“Beutz”). This  decision  overturned  an  assessment  for  park  maintenance i n Wildomar,  California,  primarily  because  the  general  benefits  as sociated  with improvements and services was not explicitly calculated, quanti fied and separated from the special benefits.

Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego On  September  22,  2011,  the  Court  of  Appeal  issued  a  decision  in   Golden  Hill Neighborhood  Association  v.  City  of  San  Diego  appeal. This  deci sion  overturned  an assessment  for  street  and  landscap ing  maintenance  in  the  Greate r  Golden  Hill neighborhood of San Diego, California. The Court described two  primary reasons for its decision. First, like in Beutz, the Court found the general benefits associated with services were  not  explicitly  calculated,  quantified  and  separated  from  t he  special benefits. Second,  the  Court  found  that  the  City  failed  to  recor d  the  basis  for  the assessment on its own parcels.

Compliance with Current Law
This Engineer’s Report is consistent with the requirements of A rticles XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution and with the  SVTA decision because the Improvements to be funded are clearly defined; the I mprovements are directly avail able to and will directly benefit  property  in  the  District;  and  the  Improvements  provide a  direct  advantage  to property in the District that would not be received in absence of the Assessments.

This Engineer’s Report is consistent with  Beutz, Dahms and Greater Golden Hill  because the Improvements will directly benefit property in the District  and the general benefits have been explicitly calculated and quantified and excluded fro m the Assessments. The Engineer’s  Report  is  consistent  with  Bonander b e c a u s e  t h e  A s s e s s m e n t s  h a v e  b e e n apportioned based on the overall cost of the Improvements and Services and proportional special benefit to each property.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Plans and Specifications
The work and Improvements to be undertaken by the City and the cost paid from the levy of the annual assessment provide special benefit to assessor pa rcels within the District defined in the Method of Assessment herein. Consistent with the Act, the Improvements are generally described as follows:

The  installation,  maintenance,  and  servicing  of  local  street  lights  in  close  proximity  to certain lots and parcels which provide a direct special benefit to such lots or parcels.

The  installation,  maintenance,  and  servicing  of  peripheral  stree t  l i g h t  st r u c t u r e s  w h i c h provide a special benefit to all  the assessable parcels within  the District whether or not such parcels are in close proximity to such lighting.

The installation or construction of public lighting facilities, or the acquisition of any new improvements.

Plans and Specifications for the Improvements for the District are voluminous and are not bound  in  this  Report  but  by  this  reference  are  incorporated  and  made  a  part  of  this Report. The Plans and Specifications are on file in the office  of the Public Works Director where they are available for public inspection.

Article XIII D of the California Constitution defines "maintenance and servicing expenses" as, "the cost of rent, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, fue l, power, electrical current, care  and  supervision  necessary  to  properly  operate  and  maintain  a  permanent  public improvement".  The  Improvement  funding  includes,  but  is  not  limited  to,  the  removal, repair,  replacement  or  relocation  of  light  standards,  poles,  bu lbs,  fixtures  and appurtenances,  electrical  energy,  supplies,  engineering  and  incidental  costs  relating  to the maintenance and servicing of the local lighting improvement s benefiting the parcels within the District.

The Improvements to be maintained and serviced within the District are to be part of the local street light system of the City of Berkeley that confers special benefit to the District's parcels.  The  specific  location  of  local  street  light  Improvements  within  the  City  can  be found in the Streetlight Condition Assessment by Tanko Lighting , which is on file in the office of the Director of Public Works, where it is available for public inspection.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

The Improvements to be maintained and serviced within the Distr ict include City‐owned street  lights  within  the  right  of  way  of  the  local  public  stree t s  l o c a t e d  w i t h i n  t h e boundaries of the District. These lights are all within close proximity to the parcels within the District identified as receiving local lighting benefit in the Method of Assessment, and, as such, provide special benefit to these parcels.

All street light maintenance will be performed by the City of Berkeley or its contractors.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Fiscal Year 2024 Budget
A  summary  budget  for  fiscal  year  2024  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Improvements  is provided below. The full Itemized budget for the Assessment District is voluminous and is not bound in this report but by reference is incorporated and m ade a part of this report.

The Itemized budget is on file in the Department of Public Work s where it is available for public inspection.

Table 1 – FY 2024 Budget Summary

Notes on the Budget:

1. The Act requires that proceeds from the Assessments must be deposited into a special fund that has been set up for the revenues and expenditures of the District. Moreover, funds raised by the Assessment shall be used only for the purposes stated within this Report. Any balance remaining at the end of the Fiscal Year, June 30, must be carried over to the next Fiscal Year. The City may also establish a reserve fund for contingencies and special projects, as well as a capital improvement fund for accumulating funds for FY 2024
Revenue
1982 Assessment Dist 1,422,966$
SLAD 2018 Assessments  1 773,830
Mis c. Revenue  957
TOTAL REVENUE 2,197,752$
Expenses
Personnel Expenses
Personnel 455,955
Other Operating Expenses
Non‐Personnel 440,530
Indirect Costs 54,916
Gas/Electricity 483,837
Debt Service Payment 370,451
Operating Transfer Out 12,120
County Collection Fee 37,346
Other Operating Subtotal 1,399,200$
Capital Expenses
Deferred Capital/Maint 420,000
Capital Subtotal 420,000$
TOTAL EXPENSES 2,275,155$
To (from) General Fund and/or Reserves (77,402)$
Budget Allocation to Parcels
Total Street Light 2018 Assessments 1 773,830$
Total Street Light 2018 SFEs 46,277.819
Assessment per SFE 2 16.72$

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

larger capital improvement projects or capital renovation needs. Any remaining balance would either be placed in the reserve fund, the capital improvement fund, or would be used to reduce future years' assessments.

2. The rate shown here is for a Single‐Family Equivalent (“SFE”), which is a single‐family home or its equivalent. For the definition of the term SFE and rates for other types of property, see the section titled, “Method of Assessment” and the sections following it in this report.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Method of Assessment
This section of the Engineer’s Report includes an explanation of the benefits derived from the installation, maintenance and servicing of the Improvements  throughout the District and the Assessment methodology used to apportion the total Asse ssment to properties within the District.

The  District  consists  of  all  assessor  parcels  within  the  boundaries  as  defined  by  the Assessment  Diagram  and  the  parcels  identified  by  the  Assessor  Parcel  Numbers  listed with the levy roll included with this Report. The parcel list includes all assessable privately and publicly owned parcels within the boundaries. The method used for apportioning the Assessment is based on the proportional special benefits to be derived by the properties in the District over and above general benefits conferred on real property or to the public at large. The apportionment of special benefit is a two‐step process: the first step is to identify the types of special benefit arising from the Improvem ents and the second step is to allocate the Assessments to property based on the estimated relative special benefit for each type of property.

Discussion of Benefit
In summary, the Assessments can only be levied based on the special benefit to property.

This benefit is received by property over and above any general benefits. Moreover, such benefit is not based on any one property owner’s use of the Improvements or a property owner’s  specific  demographic  status.  With  reference  to  the  requ irements  for Assessments, Section 22573 of the Act states:

The net amount to be assessed  upon lands within an assessment d istrict may be apportioned  by any formula or method which fairly  distributes t he net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements.

Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that Assessments must be based on the special benefit to property:

No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

Special Benefit
Street lighting is an optional improvement, not required by state or federal law, that is an enhancement over and above requisite infrastructure, and thus is a special benefit. The majority of the benefits of the street lights are received by the benefited property, with a small portion of the benefits received by the general public on  major streets only. This portion received by the general public is captured and quantified in the following section.

The factors that determine special benefit conferred on parcels are detailed below:

Improved Visibility and Safety
Well maintained, effective street lighting provides special ben efit to proximate parcels, within range of the light, because it allows for safer and improved use of the property in the evenings, early morning, and at night. Street lighting provides special benefit because it increases neighborhood safety and, at least indirectly, reduces the likelihood of crime on the proximate parcels. Over time, the Improvements continue  to confer a particular and distinct special benefit upon parcels within the District because of the nature of the Improvements.  The  proper  maintenance  of  the  street  lights  and  appurtenant  facilities increases  visibility  and  local  human  presence  and,  in  many  situ ations,  helps  reduce property‐related crimes, especially vandalism, against assessed properties in the District.

Improved Access, Navigation and Traffic Safety
Well maintained, effective street lighting enhances ingress, egress and accessibility of all forms to the assessed parcels in the evening, early morning, and at night by increasing visibility. Improved visibility also helps prevent local automo bile, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic  accidents  related  to  the  assessed  parcels.  This  benefit  includes  a  reduction  in accidents during non‐daylight hours.

Improved Community Character and Vitality
Well  maintained,  effective  street  lighting  promotes  evening  and  nighttime  social interaction of residents and customers of businesses and industry. This creates a positive atmosphere and enhanced community image in the evening and at night for the assessed parcels.

All of the above‐mentioned items also contribute to a specific  enhancement to each of the parcels within the District.  The proximate street lights ma ke each parcel safer, more visible, more accessible, more useful, more valuable and more desirable; and this further strengthens the basis of these Assessments.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

General Versus Special Benefit
The proceeds from the Assessments are used to fund the describe d Improvements and increased  levels  of  maintenance  to  the  other  City  facilities  that  serve  and  benefit  the properties in the District. In absence of the Street Lighting Assessment District 2018, such Improvements would not be properly maintained. Therefore, the D istrict’s purpose is to ensure that the necessary and beneficial public facilities for property in the District are properly maintained, operated and repaired over time. The Assessments will ensure that street  lighting  and  associated  improvements  within  and  adjacent  t o  t h e  D i s t r i c t  a r e functional,  well  maintained  and  effective.  These  public  resources  directly  benefit  the p r o p e r t y  i n  t h e  D i s t r i c t  a n d  w i l l  c o n f e r  d i s t i n c t  a n d  s p e c i a l  benefits  to  the  properties within the District.

The Improvements and Services are specifically designed, located and created to provide additional and improved resources for property inside the Distr ict and not the public at large  although  the  Improvements  maintained  by  the  Services  may  be  available  to  the general  public.  Other  properties  that  are  outside  the  District do  not  enjoy  the  unique proximity  and  other  special  benefit  factors  described  previously .  T h e s e  I m p r o v e m e n t s and Services are of special benefit to properties located withi n the District because they provide a direct advantage to properties in the District that would not be provided in the absence of the Assessments.  Any general benefits to surroundin g properties outside of the Assessment District, if any, are collateral and conferred concomitantly.

Quantification of  General Benefit
Although the analysis used to support these assessments concludes that the benefits are solely special, as described above, consideration is made for the suggestion that a portion of the benefits are general. General benefits cannot be funded by these assessments. The funding for general benefits must come from other sources.

The maintenance and servicing of these Improvements is also par tially funded, directly and indirectly, from other sources, including the City of Berke ley, Alameda County, and the  State  of  California.  This  funding  comes  in  the  form  of  grants,  development  fees, special  programs,  and  general  funds,  as  well  as  direct  maintenance  and  servicing  of facilities  (e.g.  curbs,  gutters, streets,  drainage  systems,  etc.).  This  funding  from  other sources more than compensates for general benefits, if any, rec eived by the properties within the Assessment District.

City of Berkeley
Street Lighting Assessment District 2018
FY 2024

In the 2009  Dahms case, the Court upheld an asse ssment that was 100% special ben efit o n  t h e  r a t i o n a l e  t h a t  t h e  s e r v i c e s  f u n d e d  b y  t h e  a s s e s s m e n t s  w ere  directly  provided within the assessment district. It is also important  to note  th at the improvements and services  funded  by  the  assessments  in  Pomona  are  similar  to  the  improvements  and s e r v i c e s  f u n d e d  b y  t h e  A ss e s s m e n t s  d e s c r i b e d  i n  t h i s  E n g i n e e r ’ s  Report  and  the  Court found these improvements and services to be 100% special benefi t. Also similar to the assessments  in  Pomona,  the  Assessments  described  in  this  Engineer’s  Report  fund Improvements  and  Services  directly  provided  within  the  District a n d  e v e r y  b e n e f i t i n g property  in  the  District  enjoys  proximity  and  access  to  the  Improvements.  Therefore, Dahms  establishes  a  basis  for  minimal  or  zero  general  benefits  from the  Assessments.

Nonetheless,  possible  general  benefits  have  been  liberally  calculated  below  and  then shown to be more than offset by resources from non‐assessment sources.

Calculation of G eneral Benefit
The Illumination Engineering Society of North America provides a widely‐used standard for  street  lighting  which  has  become  the  de‐facto  industry  stan dard.  This  standard specifies footcandle requirements as a measurement of illumination at the roadway level, which  are  different  for  local,  collector,  and  major  streets  usi ng  three  levels (low/medium/high) of pedestrian activity. The three street classifications and pedestrian activity levels are described below with a discussion of their general benefit contribution from the street light system.

Local Streets – a street that is used to gain access to the property bordering it. The street l i g h t s  o n  l o c a l  s t r e e t s  p r i m a r i l y  s e r v e  t h e  a d j a c e n t  p r o p e r t y  owner.  Therefore,  per industry standard, the street lights on local streets have no general benefit component.

Collector Streets – low to moderate capacity roads which serve to move traffic from local streets to arterial roads. Similar to local streets, collector streets are primarily used by local  residents  and  per  industry  standard  are  also  deemed  to  have  no  general  benefit component. This street classification will be used as the basel ine for this analysis.

Arterials  –  high  capacity  streets  that  serve  as  the  principal  ne t wo r k  f o r  t h r o u g h  t r a f f i c flow. These routes connect areas of principal traffic generatio n and important regional roadways traversing the City. As such, this traffic includes a significant number of drivers from  outside  the  District  and  the  street  light  Improvements  may c o n f e r  s o m e  g e n e r a l benefit on those drivers.