Berkeley City Council
November 7, 2023

Appointment of Tanir Ami to the Board of Library Trustees CONSENT CALENDAR November 7, 2023
collaboration and partnerships on behalf of the Library, and meet the criteria as described in the BOLT Selection Criteria Summary. The ad hoc subcommittee recommended six candidates for BOLT to interview. One of the six candidates withdrew their application. Five applicants were interviewed at BOLT Regular Meeting on May 3, 2023. Following the interviews, Trustees discussed the candidates, noting the many highly qualified individuals who applied and were interviewed. The Trustees voted to recommend Lupe Gallegos-Diaz to serve as Trustee.

It was later determined that this candidate was not eligible to serve under Section 9.5 of the Berkeley City Charter.

At the June 7 Board meeting, Trustees Hahn, Greene, Roth and Selawsky discussed how to proceed with the current vacancy, given the fact that the BOLT Bylaws do not explicitly address what occurs in the event that someone is selected by BOLT and is unable to serve. For this reason, it was necessary for the Board to act to delineate the process. If this did not occur, the process would have defaulted to the existing process enumerated for new vacancies in the BOLT Vacancies Policy. A motion to follow the following process carried at the June 7 BOLT meeting:

Process:
 The President appoints a new nomination subcommittee
 Staff sends a letter to all current applicants (or a specific subset) and asks if they would like to be considered again, due to the change in the original recommendation
 The new Subcommittee reviews the applicants still in the pool, and either:
o Recommends up to five for consideration by the full board - OR - o Recommends that a new process be initiated, that would allow both past applicants, and new applicants, to participate
 On the basis of the recommendation by the subcommittee, the staff either coordinates interviews for the next possible BOLT meeting, or reinitiates the recruitment process.
 Additionally, President Roth appointed a new ad hoc subcommittee including herself and Vice President Hahn.

President Roth, Vice President Hahn, and Secretary Mayer met on Wednesday June 21, 2023 and determined that staff would send an inquiry to all current applicants, inquiring as to whether they still want to be considered for the current vacancy. Then, the subcommittee met on August 3 to review the applications of those expressing continued interest and prepare to recommend to BOLT a subset of candidates to interview at an upcoming BOLT meeting.

BOLT scheduled a special meeting on September 21 to conduct interviews of the candidates selected to participate that have confirmed their participation.

Appointment of Tanir Ami to the Board of Library Trustees CONSENT CALENDAR November 7, 2023

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Library originally received and reviewed 25 applications for the vacancy. 17 candidates responded and confirmed that they still wanted to continue to participate in the process. The ad hoc subcommittee consisting of President Roth, Vice President Hahn, and Director Mayer (serving as Secretary to the Board), reviewed applications and selected six candidates to interview.

Four people participated in the interviews scheduled on September 21.

On October 4, BOLT engaged in an informal discussion of the candidates, followed by a vote.

BOLT’s recommendation will be referred to City Council. A majority vote of all the members of the City Council is required to appoint a member to the board.

The new Trustee’s term is anticipated to begin November 8, 2023.

After thoughtful consideration, BOLT voted to approve Resolution No. R23-047 (Attachment 2), recommending that the City Council appoint the preferred candidate, Tanir Ami, to the Board of Library Trustees. Vote: Ayes: Trustees Hahn, Roth and Selawsky. Noes: None. Abstentions: Greene.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Not applicable.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The City Council needs to appoint a new Trustee for a 4-year term to fill the current vacancy, fulfilling the Charter requirement that the Board consist of five members. Tanir Ami has been recommended by the BOLT and exceeds the stated qualifications and experience desired in a Trustee, including (1) a demonstrated commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion, (2) executive leadership, business, financial and administrative skills, (3) leadership experience in community-based, non-profit, or government agencies, and (4) strong public library advocacy and a passion for lifelong learning and community engagement.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Tess Mayer, Director of Library Services and Secretary to the Board of Library Trustees 510-981-6195
Attachments:

1. Resolution to Appoint Tanir Ami to the Board of Library Trustees

2. Board of Library Trustees Resolution No. R23-047

3. Tanir Ami BOLT application

4. Board of Library Trustees Nomination Policy

Appointment of Tanir Ami to the Board of Library Trustees CONSENT CALENDAR November 7, 2023

5. BOLT Selection Criteria Summary

Appointment of Tanir Ami to the Board of Library Trustees CONSENT CALENDAR November 7, 2023
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

APPOINTMENT OF TANIR AMI TO THE BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES WHEREAS, the Board of Library Trustees consists of five members appointed by the City Council to serve four-year terms; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Library Trustees currently has an open position to be filled by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Library Trustees undertook a robust recruitment effort to identify a candidate to recommend for appointment by the City Council to fill the current opening on the Board; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting of the Board of Library Trustees on May 3, 2023, the Trustees voted unanimously to recommend Lupe Gallegos-Diaz be appointed to the Board of Library Trustees to serve a four-year term; and WHEREAS, the Lupe Gallegos-Diaz was not able to serve; and WHEREAS, the Board established a process and conducted a new round of interviews; and
WHEREAS. at a regular meeting of the Board of Library Trustees on October 4, 2023, the Trustees voted (Vote: Ayes: Trustees Hahn, Roth and Selawsky. Noes: None. Absent:

None. Abstentions: Trustee Greene.) to recommend Tanir Ami be appointed to the Board of Library Trustees to serve a four-year term; and
WHEREAS, the Board recommends Council set the conditions for this appointment as a 4-year term with the effective date of November 8, 2023; and WHEREAS, Tanir Ami exceeds the qualifications, experience, and passion for public libraries desired in a Library Trustee.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that Tanir Ami be appointed to a four-year term on the Board of Library Trustees beginning on November 8, 2023.

BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES
RESOLUTION NO: R23-047
Attachment 1

RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY

REGARDING THE PREFERRED CANDIDATE TO FILL THE TRUSTEE VACANCY N NOVEMBER 8, 2023 ON THE BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES
WHEREAS, Trustee Davenport's four-year term ended on May 15, 2023; and WHEREAS, during the March 1, 2023 meeting of the Board of Library Trustees (BOLT), the Board instructed staff to begin solicitation for applications to fill the upcoming vacancy; and WHEREAS, the Board of Library Trustees directed staff to issue a press release, advertise on website, at all library locations, in newsletter, and as an insert with City Councilmember communications to constituents.

WHEREAS, the City Clerk's Office of the City of Berkeley received 25 applications from interested parties; and WHEREAS, the Board of Library Trustees interviewed 6 of the applicants during the regular BOLT meeting on May 3, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the first candidate nominated was not able to serve; and WHEREAS, the Board established a process and conducted a new round of interviews; and WHEREAS, the Board recommends Council set the conditions for this appointment as a 4-year term with the effective date of November 8, 2023; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Library Trustees of the City of Berkeley recommends to the City Council of the City of Berkeley that the preferred candidate Tanir Ami be appointed to the Board of Library Trustees beginning November 8, 2023.

ADOPTED by the Board of Library Trustees of the City of Berkeley during a regular meeting held on October 4, 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTENTIONS:

Trustees Hahn, Roth, and Selawsky
None
None
Trustee Greene
Tess Mayer, Director of Library Services
Serving as Secretary to the Board of Library Trustee

III Action Calendar
Item A, Attachment 3

BERKELEY PUBLIC LIBRARY

POLICIES
SUBJECT: Board of Library Trustees Vacancies
Policy
ORIGINAL DATE: 05/04/2022
BOLT Resolution #: R22-025
REVISED DATE: 05/04/2022
PAGE: 1 of 2
I. PURPOSE
Pursuant to Section 30 of the Charter of the City of Berkeley (the “Charter”), “five Library Trustees shall be appointed and may be removed by a vote of five members of the Council and one of such trustees must be appointed by the Council from its own members.” When a Board of Library Trustees (“BOLT”) vacancy has occurred or is planned to occur, the Board of Library Trustees can assist the City Council by facilitating a nomination process. This policy enumerates that process.

II. POLICY
A. Ad-hoc Trustee Nominating Sub-committee - When a BOLT vacancy has occurred or is planned to occur, the President of BOLT will appoint an ad hoc trustee nominating sub- committee to identify candidates. The Library Director as Secretary to BOLT will assist the sub-committee.

B. Candidate Search Objectives - The sub-committee’s purpose will be to ensure that nominations are inclusive and broadly represents the diverse perspectives of the community. The sub-committee will seek candidates with varied backgrounds, knowledge, abilities, expertise, and networks that can advance the Mission and Vision of the Library. The search objectives include finding candidates able to carry out the trustee role, functions, and duties, as described in the BOLT Bylaws.

C. Search Process - The sub-committee will convene to take account of current BOLT needs and to schedule the process for its purposes. The process will include the creation and posting of a vacancy announcement, the application period, the review of candidates, the recommendation to BOLT, and action taken by BOLT.

D. Vacancy Announcement - The sub-committee will write an announcement that BOLT is seeking interested parties, including the requirements thereof, the manner and form of applying, and the due date for submission of applications; the sub-committee, working with the Library Director and the City, and with the approval of BOLT, will advertise the call for interest.

E. Application Procedure - For consideration, any applicant must be a resident of the City of Berkeley, California. Applicants must submit a resume and a supplemental statement

BERKELEY PUBLIC LIBRARY Board of Library Trustees Vacancies Policy Page 2 Approved via BOLT resolution R22-025 on May 4, 2022
of interest that addresses questions or topics enumerated by the ad hoc trustee nominating sub-committee.

F. Review of Candidates - The sub-committee will review each application based on the applicant’s submitted information. The purpose of the review is to identify nominees that meet the search objectives, will be able to carry out the duties and functions of the Trustee as stated in the Bylaws, will advance the Vision and Mission of the Library, and will be a resource for collaboration and partnerships on behalf of the Library.

G. Nominations – The sub-committee will provide a summary of its process, evaluation, and recommendation for one or more nominees to BOLT for action and furtherance to the Council. A recommendation from the ad hoc trustee nominating sub-committee is not binding.

Reviewed by:

Director of Library Services Date
Approved by:

Chair, Board of Library Trustees Date

III Action Calendar, Item A
Attachment 4
2090 Kittredge Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-6195 ● Website: www.berkeleypubliclibrary.org Board of Library Trustees,
Selection Criteria Summary
Desired Qualifications:
 Candidates should be public library champions, passionate about lifelong learning and community engagement.
 A demonstrated commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion is essential.  Candidates with executive leadership, technology, business, financial management and/or administrative skills are encouraged to apply.
 Candidates with leadership experiences in community-based, non-profit, or government agencies General Qualifications
 Demonstrated interest in and enthusiasm for the library  Readiness to devote time and effort
 An open mind coupled with respect for the opinion of others and, a steadfast belief in intellectual freedom and privacy.
 Ability to plan creatively.
 Courage to withstand pressures and resist influences based on prejudice  Ability to analyze the business and administrative procedures, and to be part of the accountability process to the public and provide oversight.
 Possession of common sense
 Reflects the diversity of the Berkeley community, including a diversity of experiences working in different sectors of the community as well as age, ethnicity, religion, gender identities, abilities, and sexual orientation
 Willing and able to work with management, staff and the union.

Practical background and/or direct experience in one or more of these areas is desirable:
 Involvement in community organizations
 An understanding of local government operations, of public boards, and commissions; previous experience highly valued
 An interest in long-range planning
 Personal experience in one or more of these areas:
o Education
o Architecture/Construction Accounting/Finance Business o Personnel management Technology Law/Government
o Humanities
o The Arts
 Availability and openness to the public

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Louis, Chief of Police
Subject: Audit Recommendation Status - Data Analysis of the City of Berkeley’s Police Response

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Auditor’s report included 2 recommendations. Both of the recommendations have been implemented and the audit is closed. This item was referred to the Public Safety Policy Committee by a Councilmember at the City Council meeting on 5/23/23.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On September 18, 2023, the Public Safety Committee adopted the following action:

M/S/C (Taplin/Wengraf) to forward the item to Council with a positive recommendation.

Vote: All Ayes.

BACKGROUND
On July 2, 2021, the City Auditor’s Office issued its audit, Data Analysis of the City of Berkeley’s Police1 This audit report included 2 recommendations. The purpose of this report is to update the Public Safety Policy Committee on the Police Department’s completion of the City Auditor’s recommendations. In brief, multiple datasets including Crime Mapping, Use of Force, Calls for Service, RIPA, the Arrest and Booking Logs are now published and available on the BPD Transparency Hub. The Transparency Hub also information where there was a documented mental health or homelessness component involved: https://bpd-transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.
1 City Auditor’s Office Data Analysis Audit (7/2/2021)
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Data-Analysis-Berkeley-Police-Response.pdf

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff time for various members of BPD and the Department of Information Technology.

CONTACT PERSON
Captain Kevin Schofield, Police Department, (510) 981-5815

ATTACHMENTS

1. Data Analysis Recommendation Table

2. Audit Recommendations PowerPoint

3. Original Information Report to Council from May 23, 2023

Internal
Audit Title: Data Analysis of Berkeley's Police Response Finding Lead
Depart
ment
Expected or
Actual
Implement
ation Date
Status of Audit Recommendations, Corrective Action Plan, and Progress Summary
The City can improve
the transparency of
Police Department
activity data on the
Open Data Portal.

1.1 To improve access to data,
we recommend the
Berkeley Police
Department make calls for
service data available on
the City’s Open Data Portal
for all call types allowable
by Berkeley Police
Department policy and
law, and update regularly
to facilitate transparency.

This data should be
published in machine
ready format, and contain
as many years of data as is
available.

Police Ongoing Status: Partly Implemented
The outside vendor assigned to this project, GTG, is still working with staff to implement the recommended solutions. As of August 12, 2022, the project is over 80% completed. This is the most recent update from the vendor:

ITEMS THAT ARE COMPLETED:

Police Department ArcGIS Hub
•AGOL Access provided
•ArcGIS Hub design and configuraƟon
oMet with Berkeley PD and will proceed with adding a new page to the existing PD Transparency Hub rather than building a whole new Hub site
oOpen Data configuraƟon to replace Socrata
•AddiƟon of web applicaƟons to Hub
Crime Mapping solution replacement
•SQL Query Update
•VerificaƟon of GIS data update from SQL
oBerkeley to create enterprise geodatabase
oUpdate to include addiƟonal fields from CAD export
•Deployment of scheduled scripts
oUpdated script to accommodate new CAD fields in export
•Publishing GIS data
oAwaiƟng necessary access from City of Berkeley to publish GIS data to the ArcGIS Server
Recommendation

Internal
• Development of Berkeley Crime Viewer application Parcel Condition Widget
• Rebuild widget in ArcGIS Online
o Develop new GIS web application to replace the current ‘Portal’ o Rebuild custom widget in AGOL using COTS tools and Arcade expressions, rather than custom code
• Provide new web application to City of Berkeley for website and Hub • Update application reference once PROD server has been upgraded to 10.9 City-wide ArcGIS Hub
• Provided spreadsheet for content
ITEMS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS:
• Spreadsheet filled out with Berkeley content to include in the Hub o Applications
o Open Data Layers
o Other Hub links o External Links
• ArcGIS Hub site completed with all requested content, items, links, and materials Training
• Training on deployed GIS solutions
• Documentation on deployed GIS solutions
Berkeley Police
Department can
better track mental
health and
homelessness calls.

2.1 To improve access to data,
we recommend the
Berkeley Police
Department identify all
calls for service where
there is an apparent
mental health issue and/or
homelessness component
in a manner that protects
the privacy rights of the
individuals involved.

Police 6/29/2022 Status: Implemented
Starting July 1, 2021, the department formally began utilizing “H” homeless and “MH” mental health disposition codes when closing out any call involving a homeless person or a person with mental health issues. Officers were instructed that they were not required to ask people what their housing status is unless necessary for identification purposes. Unless there are mental health issues which are related to the call, they are not required to ask them what their mental health status is either. Officers are expected to use their best judgement / perception in determining if a call is related to a homeless issue or someone suffering from a mental health issue. If so, they are directed to add the “H” and/or “MH” disposition to the CAD disposition.

Update on Audit Recommendations
DATA ANALYSIS OF BERKELEY’S POLICE RESPONSE

Findings

1. Berkeley Police Department can better track mental health and homelessness calls.

2. The City can improve the transparency of Police Department activity data on the Open Data Portal.

Implementation Status Overview
2 total recommendations
2 implemented

Recommendation 1.1
To improve access to data, we recommend the Berkeley Police Department identify all calls for service where there is an apparent mental health issue and/or homelessness component in a manner that protects the privacy rights of the individuals involved.. Starting July 1, 2021, the department formally began utilizing “H” homeless and “MH” mental health disposition codes when closing out any call involving a homeless person or a person with mental health issues. Officers were instructed that they were not required to ask people what their housing status is unless necessary for identification purposes. Unless there are mental health issues which are related to the call, they are not required to ask them what their mental health status is either. Officers are expected to use their best judgement / perception in determining if a call is related to a homeless issue or someone suffering from a mental health issue. If so, they are directed to add the “H” and/or “MH” disposition to the CAD disposition.

FINDING 1: OVERTIME IS USED TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM PATROL STAFFING SET BY BPD.

IMPLEMENTED

Recommendation 2.1
To improve access to data, we recommend the Berkeley Police Department make calls for service data available on the City’s Open Data Portal for all call types allowable by Berkeley Police Department policy and law, and update regularly to facilitate transparency. This data should be published in machine ready format, and contain as many years of data as is available. Multiple datasets including Crime Mapping, Use of Force, Calls for Service, RIPA, the Arrest and Booking Logs are published and available on the BPD Transparency Hub: https://bpd-transparency-initiative-
berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/.

FINDING 1: OVERTIME IS USED TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM PATROL STAFFING SET BY BPD.

IMPLEMENTED

INFORMATION CALENDAR
May 23, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Louis, Interim Chief of Police
Subject: Audit Recommendation Status - Data Analysis of the City of Berkeley’s Police Response

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Auditor’s report included 2 recommendations. Both of the recommendations have been implemented.

BACKGROUND
On July 2, 2021, the City Auditor’s Office issued its audit, Data Analysis of the City of Berkeley’s Police1 This audit report included 2 recommendations. The purpose of this report is to update the City Council on the Police Department’s progress on implementing the City Auditor’s recommendations. This is the second and final status report for this audit. In brief, multiple datasets including Crime Mapping, Use of Force, Calls for Service, RIPA, the Arrest and Booking Logs are now published and available on the BPD Transparency Hub. The Transparency Hub also information where there was a documented mental health or homelessness component involved: https://bpd- transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff time for various members of BPD and the Department of Information Technology.

CONTACT PERSON
Captain Kevin Schofield, Police Department, (510) 981-5815

ATTACHMENTS
1: Data Analysis Recommendation Table
1 City Auditor’s Office Data Analysis Audit (7/2/2021)
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Data-Analysis-Berkeley-Police-Response.pdf

Audit Title: Data Analysis of Berkeley's Police Response Finding Department Last Period:

Status
Expected or
Actual
Implementation
Date
Status of Audit Recommendations, Corrective Plan,
and Progress Summary
Berkeley Police
Department can
better track
mental health and
homelessness
calls.

1.1 To improve access to data, we recommend
the Berkeley Police Department identify all
calls for service where there is an apparent
mental health issue and/or homelessness
component in a manner that protects the
privacy rights of the individuals involved.

Police Implemented 6/29/2022 Implemented:

Starting July 1, 2021, the department formally began
utilizing “H” homeless and “MH” mental health
disposition codes when closing out any call involving a homeless person or a person with mental health
issues. Officers were instructed that they were not
required to ask people what their housing status is
unless necessary for identification purposes. Unless
there are mental health issues which are related to
the call, they are not required to ask them what their
mental health status is either. Officers are expected
to use their best judgement / perception in
determining if a call is related to a homeless issue or someone suffering from a mental health issue. If so,
they are directed to add the “H” and/or “MH”
disposition to the CAD disposition.

The City can
improve the
transparency of
Police Department
activity data on
the Open Data
Portal.

2.1 To improve access to data, we recommend
the Berkeley Police Department make calls
for service data available on the City’s
Open Data Portal for all call types allowable
by Berkeley Police Department policy and
law, and update regularly to facilitate
transparency. This data should be
published in machine ready format, and
contain as many years of data as is
available.

Police Partly
Implemented
1/11/2023 Implemented:

Multiple datasets including Crime Mapping, Use of
Force, Calls for Service, RIPA, the Arrest and Booking
Logs are published and available on the BPD
Transparency Hub: https://bpd-transparency-
initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/.

Recommendation

Office of the Mayor

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín, Councilmember Sophie Hahn, Councilmember Susan Wengraf
Subject: United Against Hate Week 2023

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt a Resolution declaring November 12 th – 18th, 2023 as United Against Hate Week.

2. Adopt a Resolution approving the D-13 expenditure in an amount not to exceed $500 per Councilmember, to support the cost associated with the Berkeley event at the UC Theatre. The total cost is $3,000.

BACKGROUND
Starting in Berkeley in 2017 in response to far-right rallies, United Against Hate was originally a poster campaign and spread throughout Alameda County. It has since transformed into an annual statewide event. The goal for United Against Hate Week is to provide communities with the tools, resources, and support they need to create locally driven actions to stand united against growing intolerance. This annual week of activities and follow up events are designed to not just raise awareness about the dangers of hate and the need for respect and civil discourse, but to help community members build stronger connections with civic leaders, businesses, and schools, so that deeper engagement can continue year-round. (www.unitedagainsthateweek.org) Not in Our Town (www.niot.org) is a non-profit that serves communities across the country working to build safety, inclusion and equity for all. They are, once again, facilitating the organization for United Against Hate Week, and have recently received a Stop the Hate grant award from the State of California for the ongoing administration of United Against Hate Week for the next 2 years. This will be the foundation for a long- term and sustainable week of action.

Additionally, this year, United Against Hate Week has formed a new partnership with CA vs. Hate, an initiative out of the California Civil Rights Department, who will be helping with coordinating outreach and amplifying the work across the state.

Berkeley will be hosting an event on Monday, November 13th in partnership with Berkeley Unified School District at 3pm at the UC Theatre that will include a short film and panel discussion for teachers, students and their families. Proceeds from Council

United Against Hate Week 2023 CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023

office contributions will be used to offset the cost of expenses associated with the set-up and labor for the event. The UC Theatre is donating the venue.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
$500 from the Mayor’s D-13 account and up to $500 from other Councilmembers who wish to contribute.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with adopting this recommendation.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Attachments:
1: Resolution Proclaiming November 12 – 18, 2023 as United Against Hate Week 2: D-13 Resolution

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

COMMEMORATING UNITED AGAINST HATE WEEK 2023
WHEREAS, the United States is a nation of immigrants, whose strength comes from its diversity; and
WHEREAS, the Constitution enshrines equality on all individuals, regardless of race, gender, orientation, religion, or political view; and
WHEREAS, rhetoric continues to generated a toxic environment that encourages the propagation of racist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and other bigoted views by emboldened hate groups and individuals; WHEREAS, deep divisions within our country are the result of extreme ideology, further strengthening a cycle of mistrust and suspicion fueled by fear, anxiety, and insecurity; and
WHEREAS, the number of hate crimes across the United States continues to increase with hate crimes against African Americans and Asian Americans especially increasing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley is dedicated to preventing and opposing hate and intolerance in our communities. Berkeley started United Against Hate Week in 2017, which has since expanded into a national movement; and
WHEREAS, education, compassion, and cooperation are key to unlocking understanding and embracing differences between people, with United Against Hate Week an important step in bridging divisions and strengthening our communities.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that it hereby proclaims November 12 - 18, 2023 as United Against Hate Week in the City of Berkeley.

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF SURPLUS FUNDS FROM THE OFFICE

EXPENSE ACCOUNTS OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS FOR NOT IN OUR TOWN’S UNITED AGAINST HATE WEEK
WHEREAS, Mayor Jesse Arreguin has surplus funds in his office expenditure account; and
WHEREAS, Berkeley will be hosting an event on Monday, November 13th in partnership with Berkeley Unified School District at 3pm at the UC Theatre that will include a short film and panel discussion for teachers, students and their families. Proceeds from Council office contributions will be used to offset the cost of expenses associated with the set-up and labor for the event at the UC Theatre. The UC Theatre is donating the venue.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that up to $3,000 in funds relinquished by the Mayor and Councilmembers from their Council Office Budget up to $500 per office shall be granted to the UC Theatre.

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
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín, Councilmember Sophie Hahn,
Councilmember Susan Wengraf
Subject: Berkeley Holiday Fund: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to General Fund and Grant of Such Funds

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $500 per Councilmember including $500 from Mayor Arreguin to the Berkeley Holiday Fund’s annual campaign with funds relinquished to the City’s general fund for this purpose from the discretionary Council Office Budgets of Mayor Arreguin and any other Councilmembers who would like to contribute.

BACKGROUND
The Berkeley Holiday Fund has helped make the holiday season happier for hundreds of Berkeley's neediest residents for 110 years. An all-volunteer organization, the Berkeley Holiday Fund has been partnering with 27 social service agencies to identify Berkeley citizens in need of help during the holidays. By keeping operating costs to a minimum, the Berkeley Holiday Fund ensures that all contributions go directly to help those who need it the most. Last year, they were able to bring a little cheer into the lives of more than 1,100 Berkeley families distributing almost $167,000.

The Mayor’s office has actively participated in this program for over 25 years, along with generous support from the City Council. This year the Berkeley Holiday Fund anticipates distributing approximately 1,200 checks to individuals and families. This item requests the City Council approve an expenditure, not to exceed $500 of funds from the from the Mayor’s office budget to help cover these costs.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
No General Fund impact. $500 is available from the Mayor’s office budget discretionary account.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with adopting this recommendation.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100

Berkeley Holiday Fund 2020 CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023

Attachments:
1: Resolution
2: Letter from Berkeley Holiday Fund

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

BERKELEY HOLIDAY FUND 2023
WHEREAS, the Berkeley Holiday Fund has been making small grants to Berkeley’s neediest citizens for 110 years; and
WHEREAS, last year, the Berkeley Holiday Fund distributed almost $167,000 to more than 1,100 Berkeley families; and
WHEREAS, Berkeley Holiday Fund partners with 27 social service agencies to identify Berkeley citizens in need of help during the holidays; and WHEREAS, the Berkeley Mayor’s Office has supported the Berkeley Holiday Fund’s efforts for over 25 years, along with generous support from the City Council; and WHEREAS, Mayor Arreguín has surplus funds in his office expenditure account; and WHEREAS, the Berkeley Holiday Fund seeks funds in the amount of $500 to help cover the costs of providing checks to Berkeley Holiday Fund recipients; and WHEREAS, the provision of such services would fulfill the following municipal public purpose of providing services to low-income residents of the City of Berkeley.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that funds relinquished by the Mayor and Councilmembers from their Council Office Budget up to $500 per office shall be granted to the Berkeley Holiday Fund for helping cover the costs of providing checks to Berkeley Holiday Fund recipients.

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
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín, Councilmember Sophie Hahn,
Councilmember Rigel Robinson, Councilmember Susan Wengraf Subject: Budget Referral: Supplemental Funding for Housing Retention Program

RECOMMENDATION
Refer $1,000,000 from Measure P tax receipts to the Fiscal Year 2024 AAO1 Budget Process to augment the Housing Retention Program, (administered by the Eviction Defense Center, EDC) as part of the City’s anti-displacement programs (launched in 2017), for the purpose of providing rental assistance to tenants.

BACKGROUND
The Housing Retention Program is an essential tool in preventing tenant displacement and preserving Berkeley’s racial, economic and cultural diversity. In 1993, the City of Berkeley began the Homeless Prevention Grants Program, which in 2008 became the Housing Retention Program (HRP).

The program was reconstituted and bolstered in 2017 with an increased allocation of $250,000 annually which was continued in all budgets since FY 2019. The City Council’s annual allocation of General Fund revenues was made possible due to the passage of Measure U1 in 2016 which increased the business license tax for large rental properties, generating between $4-7 Million annually.

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting shelter in place order, the City Council launched the Berkeley Relief Fund and allocated $3 Million to initially capitalize the fund, to be split three ways between rental assistance, grants for arts non-profits and grants to small businesses. Tenant rent assistance was funded $1,000,000 to expand the Housing Retention Program during this emergency with an additional $900,000 added as private donations came in through the East Bay Community Foundation. Approved households were eligible to receive up to $5,000 as a one-time grant, and an additional one-time grant of up to $10,000 during the specified COVID-19 emergency. Additional funding was provided through a CBDG CARES grant from the Federal Government. A separate budget referral to continue funding of the COVID Emergency Rental Assistance Program with funds available through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) was approved at the April 26, 2022 City Council meeting. Additional funding of $1,800,000 ($900,000 annually) was added to the programs in the FY2023 - 2024 budget cycle.

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023

Funding for this program is needed as many low-income households remain in massive debt that has accrued over the course of the pandemic. As Berkeley’s eviction moratorium has ended, people can be evicted for lack of payment of rent. Additionally, there are tenants who owe back rent that accrued during the moratorium. Inflation and cost of living, which disproportionately impacts low-income households, could put some people in a position of falling behind on rent in the coming months.

In March 2023, Council approved a budget referral to include an additional $2 million to supplement the Housing Retention Program, which was included in the budget approved in June. Given both the high success and high demand of the program, it is anticipated that funding will run out by January 2024. Therefore, additional funding in the amount of $1 million is needed to continue this vital program and prevent evictions.

With the end of the eviction moratorium on September 1st, data from the Rent Stabilization Board shows a sharp increase in eviction notices. Between September 1st and September 29th, the Rent Board received 130 eviction notices. For comparison, in 2019, the last year before the eviction moratorium went into effect, there was an average of 70 eviction notices a month. In 2021, when the eviction moratorium was in full effect, there was an average of 10 a month. During the Transition Period between May and August 2023, there was an average of 40-50 a month. While many of these notices are three day or thirty-day notices to pay rent or quit – a precursor to an unlawful detainer (a lawsuit to evict a tenant) – six of the notices are for unlawful detainers. In many of the cases where a notice to pay rent or quit were made, tenants have relied on the Housing Retention Program to resolve the situation.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Total allocation of $1,000,000 from Measure P tax receipts.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100

Budget Referral: Housing Retention Program Funding

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Terry Taplin (Author) and Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani and Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Co-Sponsors)
Subject: Transgender Awareness Month and Day of Remembrance Resolution

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution declaring November as Transgender Awareness Month and November 20 as Transgender Day of Remembrance in the City of Berkeley

BACKGROUND
Between 1995 and 1998, Chanelle Pickett, Monique Thomas, and Rita Hester, three Black transgender women, were murdered in acts of anti-transgender violence. In 1999, the first Transgender Day of Remembrance was held to honor their lives. Additionally, the week leading up to this occasion is observed as Transgender Awareness Week to honor, celebrate, and uplift the transgender community while addressing the numerous issues they face. The City of Berkeley stands with our transgender community members and is proud to raise the Transgender Pride Flag throughout the month of November.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
N/A

FISCAL IMPACTS
Costs associated with staff time necessary to organize the flag raising ceremony.

CONTACT
Councilmember Terry Taplin, District 2, (510) 981-7120, [email protected]

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

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

DECLARING THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER AS TRANSGENDER AWARENESS MONTH AND NOVEMBER 20 AS TRANSGENDER DAY OF REMEMBRANCE IN

THE CITY OF BERKELEY
WHEREAS, Transgender Day of Remembrance, November 20, is an annual observation that began in 1999 with a vigil honoring the memories of Chanelle Pickett, Monique Thomas, and Rita Hester, three Black transgender women murdered in years prior, and honors the memory of those whose lives were lost in acts of violence; and WHEREAS, Transgender Awareness Week, observed from November 13 to 19, is an annual occasion to honor, celebrate, and uplift the transgender community while addressing the numerous issues they face, including, but limited to, barriers in receiving medical treatment, discriminatory housing and employment practices, and a lack of adequate and appropriate representation across various facets of society; and WHEREAS, since 2013, the Human Rights Campaign has tracked incidents of fatal transgender violence, the same year that the Federal Bureau of Investigation began reporting on hate crimes motivated by anti-transgender bias, and in 2023 so far, at least 19 transgender and gender non-conforming lives have been tragically and inhumanely taken through violent means, including through gun and interpersonal violence; and WHEREAS, although the City of Berkeley honors the bravery and resilience of the transgender individuals who live in their authentic gender and is proud of the existing protections we have in place for transgender individuals to pursue their lives free from discrimination in the San Francisco Bay Area, we reaffirm our commitment to ongoing efforts to promote full inclusion of transgender individuals in Berkeley and beyond; and WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley is grateful to the organizations that provide valuable resources to transgender individuals, such as care navigation, counseling, mentorship, and legal services, including, but not limited to, the Berkeley Free Clinic, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Oasis Legal Services, Pacific Center for Human Growth, Partnerships for Trauma Recovery, and UC Berkeley’s Gender Equity Resource Center.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Berkeley City Council does hereby declare the month of November as Transgender Awareness Month and November 20 as Transgender Day of Remembrance in the City of Berkeley and authorizes the city manager to fly the Transgender Pride Flag annually at the Civic Center in November.

Kate Harrison
Councilmember, District 4
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7140 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 644-1174 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Harrison, Councilmember Taplin
Subject: Budget Referral: Refer $6,000 to the November 2023 AAO #1 for Two Pilot Special Mentoring and Violence Prevention Events for Berkeley Youth

RECOMMENDATION
Refer $6,000 to the November AAO #1 to fund two pilot special mentoring and violence prevention events for Berkeley youth as organized by the Berkeley Jr. Jackets and the Young Lives Matter Foundation.

BACKGROUND
The Berkeley Junior Jackets was founded in 2017 and is a division of the Young Lives Matter Foundation, an all-volunteer-supported nonprofit 501(c)3 NorCal American Youth Football and Cheer sanctioned football and cheer program. These programs serve more than 150 Black and Latino underserved youth through competitive football and cheerleading—the majority of whom attend school within Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD). The Jr. Jackets is the largest organized gathering of Black students and parents across the district.

Jr. Jackets community events are used as an opportunity to (1) bring in a wide range of services and activities to meet the needs of the families and (2) listen to the families and help organize the desired changes they wish to see within BUSD and the wider community. Their programs are open to everyone regardless of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or ability to pay. The collective power of the Jr. Jackets community has only begun to be realized to leverage the changes that Berkeley needs to implement to bring peace to our streets, schools, homes, and families.

Berkeley Jr. Jackets and the Young Lives Matter Foundation are requesting funding from the City of Berkeley to support two additional special mentoring and violence prevention events for Berkeley youth. Both organizations have a proven track record of delivering critical mentoring and violence prevention events throughout the year, such as football and cheer program practices and games. Their use of the Berkeley Unified School District fields is currently subsidized by the City of Berkeley.

While existing sports programs deliver mentoring and violence prevention throughout

Budget Referral: Refer $6,000 to the 2023 AAO #1 for Pilot Special Mentoring and Violence Prevention Events for Berkeley Youth

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
2 the year, these two special events underscore the deeper mission of the organization: to support underserved youth with life skills and culturally attuned relationships that teach life skills and promote positive development.

The two annual events are described below and will be piloted next year. In the future, Jr. Jacket and the Young Lives Foundation would like to provide ongoing dedicated programming in these areas in support of the City’s violence prevention and community building programs.

Boys2Men is an evening dinner event designed to inspire and instruct the boys in Berkeley Jr. Jackets and Young Lives Matter to grow into healthy, strong, purposeful men. The boys and their parents dress up for the event, enjoy a catered meal, and hear from a range of speakers on the topics of: conflict resolution, childhood trauma and mental health, violence prevention, and emotional intelligence. The coaches and leaders of Jr. Jackets and the guest speakers model healthy manhood while teaching the young men the life skills to grow into their best selves.

Girl Talk is a girls empowerment program for the girls in Berkeley Jr. Jackets cheer program. The event is designed to empower girls to become the strong leaders they can be. Through speakers and a presentation, art journal processing, and small group discussion, leaders address topics such as conflict resolution, violence prevention, mental health, childhood trauma, and emotional intelligence.

It is in the public interest to ensure that underserved youth in Berkeley receive the support they need to thrive and prevent violence.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
$6,000 in General Funds for two community events to provide youth with training in conflict resolution, childhood trauma and mental health, violence prevention, and emotional intelligence.

Space rental: $250
Catered meal: $2000
DJ: $300
2 guest speakers, 1 singer: $600 ($200 each)
Decorations (table clothes, balloons, etc.): $500
Total: $3,650
Space rental: $150
Catered meal: $1000
Art supplies and journals: $150
Trainers: $300
DJ: $300
Singer: $200
Decorations (table clothes, balloons, etc.): $100
Total: $2,200

Budget Referral: Refer $6,000 to the 2023 AAO #1 for Pilot Special Mentoring and Violence Prevention Events for Berkeley Youth

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No identifiable impact.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Kate Harrison, (510) 981-7140

Kate Harrison
Councilmember, District 4
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7140 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 644-1174 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Harrison
Subject: Budget Referral: Refer $800,000 to the November 2023 AAO #1 for Matching Funds to Repair Eight Deficient Tide Tubes to Avoid Catastrophic Structural Failure and Escalating Construction Costs

RECOMMENDATION
Refer $800,000 to the November 2023 AAO #1 to repair eight deficient tide tubes to avoid catastrophic structural and transportation failure, escalating construction costs, certain climate and sea level rise impacts, and further environmental catastrophe by providing the Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Department matching funds for a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) PROTECT or other available grants.

BACKGROUND
The City’s tide tubes connect the lagoon at Aquatic Park created as part of the construction of I-80 in the 1930s and the San Francisco Bay. The lagoon combines storm water run-off along with water from the Bay, creating brackish water that has hosted a wide variety of marine life.

Well-functioning tide tubes not only help collect influxes of storm water (increasing because of climate change), but also help flush toxins from the lagoon and attract salt water species such as leopard sharks, bat rays, and pelicans.1 The City is also subject to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency directive to improve water quality, particularly in the Bay, which Aquatic Park is a part, and spends tens of millions per year to prevent storm water infiltration and the release of partially treated sewage into the Bay.

The tubes are prone to blockage from invasive tubeworm species, contributing to poor water quality, flooding, and further harm to species and ecosystems. According to the City Manager and the Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Department, thanks to the evaluation and structural repair of the five main tide tubes (completed in 2022 under 1 Aquatic Park Webpage, City of Berkeley, https://berkeleyca.gov/community-recreation/parks- recreation/parks/aquatic-park.

Budget Referral: Refer $800,000 to the November 2023 AAO #1 for Matching Funds to Repair Eight Deficient Tide Tubes to Avoid Catastrophic Structural Failure and Escalating Construction Costs

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
2 T1), more fish and other creatures live in the lagoon than before the renovation.2 Part of this project included partial dredging and repairs to the tide gates and the ends of the tubes.3 Despite recent upgrades to the five main tubes, three other tubes are still not fully functional. During the January 2023 atmospheric river event, the lagoon the City saw a mass die off of sharks and rays. The City’s consultants indicated that a deluge of fresh water from the storm draining into the lagoon changed the salinity and created a toxic environment for aquatic life. However, ill-functioning tubes are likely to have exacerbated the event as only five of the eight tubes are fully functional.

Credit: Berkeleyside and Citizen reporter Credit: Berkeleyside and Citizen reporter During the Measure T1 evaluation, the City found that a large portion of the five main Tide Tubes are clay walls that are failing. The evaluation recommended the City replace or sleeve the tubes as soon as possible and that the City could expect complete failure in no later than 10 years from 2020. Additionally, there are three other tide tubes that need repair. Two of the tubes travel from the Aquatic Park lagoon to the Model Yacht Basin and another from the basin to the Bay. Each are significantly clogged and likely require sleeving. Renovating all eight Tide Tubes will help improve the water quality in the lagoon and help eliminate fecal matter by regular flushing of the lagoon with bay water. Renovated tide tubes will also prevent the collapse of Interstate 80 that is projected to occur due to the scouring effects of water flowing through the tide tubes, which will worsen with increased storms and rising tides associated with climate change.

To help fund these expensive repairs, the Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Department is pursuing a variety of grant possibilities. The 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 2 Update on Aquatic Park, Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager, February 15, 2023, https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2023-02-15-PRW-aquatic%20park.pdf. 3 Aquatic Park Central Tide Tubes Repair Sediment Removal Webpage, City of Berkeley https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/aquatic-park-central-tide-tubes-repair- sediment-removal.

Budget Referral: Refer $800,000 to the November 2023 AAO #1 for Matching Funds to Repair Eight Deficient Tide Tubes to Avoid Catastrophic Structural Failure and Escalating Construction Costs

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
3 established the Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost- Saving Transportation (PROTECT) Program to “help make surface transportation more resilient to natural hazards, including climate change, sea level rise, flooding, extreme weather events, and other natural disasters….” The PROTECT Program includes over $8.7 billion over five years (FY22 – FY26) through competitive grants to State DOTs, metropolitan planning organizations, local governments, Indian tribes, Territories and other eligible entities.4 All construction grant applications for this funding source require at least 20% in local matches.

In August 2023 the City submitted an initial $466,000 grant application to the FHWA PROTECT Discretionary Grant Program for the Interstate 80 and Aquatic Park Lagoon Subsurface Culvert Resiliency and Habitat Project, and will provide a 12% local cash match of $63,600 from the Parks Tax. This planning and design project will investigate feasible methods to renovate the existing failing subsurface culverts (tide tubes) that connect Aquatic Park to the Bay underneath I-80, and to the Model Yacht Basin. The planning effort, when paired with construction, will increase the resilience of I-80, Bolivar Drive at Aquatic Park, and the adjacent local City roads (e.g., 2nd Street) from the impacts of sea-level rise and increased storms due to climate change.

This grant only includes the planning and environmental process for the needed maintenance on all eight tide tubes. The Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Department is currently prevented from applying for the larger grant to perform construction work due to lack of readily available local matching funds as required. Additionally, the Public Works Department has determined that such a project is not eligible for the City’s Sanitary Sewer or Storm Water Funds as matching funds for these grants. It is unclear whether the City could use Solid Waste funds.

The total cost for repairing the eight tubes and all the related costs is estimated to be $3.6-$4.0M with a required 20% local match. This budget referral would provide a 20% match with an option to adjust the amount as needed at the Budget Committee or Council through the budget process if this price increases.

Contractors and environmentalists indicate that it is in the public interest to address outstanding repairs “as soon as possible.” It is also critical to leverage any available state or federal funding immediately to perform the needed repairs ahead of likely additional inflation, structural failure, and additional environmental catastrophes. The PROTECT grant funding is in place only through Fiscal Year 2026.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
$800,000 from the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Properly-functioning tide tubes allow saltwater from the Bay to flow into the lagoon with the daily tide cycle and also allow fresh water from storms to drain quickly from the 4 FHWA PROTECT Grant Program Webpage, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/protect/.

Budget Referral: Refer $800,000 to the November 2023 AAO #1 for Matching Funds to Repair Eight Deficient Tide Tubes to Avoid Catastrophic Structural Failure and Escalating Construction Costs

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
4 lagoon into the Bay, helping maintain a high-quality aquatic habitat at the lagoon. In addition, the renovated tide tubes will prevent the collapse of Interstate 80 that is projected to occur due to the scouring effects of water flowing through the tide tubes, which will worsen with increased storms and rising tides associated with climate change.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Kate Harrison, (510) 981-7140

CONSENT CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Author); [Mayor Arreguin, Councilmembers Bartlett and Taplin (Co-Sponsors)]
Subject: Resolution Supporting Efforts to Exonerate the Port Chicago 50

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a new resolution supporting local, State, and federal efforts to exonerate the Port Chicago 50; 50 Black sailors who were wrongfully convicted of mutiny during WWII in the wake of a massive, devastating explosion at the Port Chicago naval base near Concord, CA.

SUMMARY
The Port Chicago Disaster, a deadly munitions explosion that occurred in 1944 and killed 320 mostly-African American sailors and civilians, led to the wrongful and racist convictions of 50 Black sailors for so-called mutiny. President Bill Clinton granted the Port Chicago 50 a Pardon in 1999, which excuses but does not undo a wrongful conviction. There is a movement to set the record straight by obtaining a full exoneration for the wrongful and racist convictions.

The Port Chicago 50 were not responsible for the disastrous explosion and loss of life, and their refusal to continue working under the same hazardous conditions was an act of extreme courage, not mutiny. This item asks Berkeley City Council to join the cities of Albany, Antioch, Brentwood, Concord, Danville, Lafayette, Martinez, Orinda, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek by adopting a resolution in support of formal exoneration of the Port Chicago 50, and encourages other Alameda County jurisdictions to do the same.

BACKGROUND1
The Port Chicago Disaster and the Protest of Port Chicago Sailors During World War II, nearly a million Black Americans served in the U.S. Armed Forces, but the military at that time was racially segregated, and Black servicemen in the Navy were restricted to non-combat assignments. These assignments were usually the least desirable duties deemed unfit for White sailors, which ranged from menial tasks to the most back-breaking work.

At Port Chicago Naval Magazine near Concord, California, newly-arriving Black sailors hoped to serve at sea and engage in combat, but quickly learned their duties would be limited to the hazardous task of loading ammunition and explosives into Navy ships. 1 “The Port Chicago Disaster and the Protest of the Port Chicago Sailors.” Port Chicago Alliance.

Accessed October 16, 2023. https://portchicago50.com/history.html.

2 The naval base was racially segregated, so the commanding officers at Port Chicago were all White and the sailors loading were all Black. The work was grueling, and Jim Crow segregation policies were strictly enforced. For example, Black sailors were prohibited from using the "Whites only" restrooms aboard the ships they were loading, so they were made to walk a half- mile to use the restroom. Although loading bombs and explosives is extremely dangerous work, the Navy neglected to provide the sailors with adequate resources to safely carry out their duties. The sailors were not given specialized training in handling explosives. Basic gear like gloves to grip the grease-slathered bombs were not provided. Sailors who looked to officers for guidance on safest methods for carrying explosives were erroneously told the munitions could not explode because they had no fuses or detonators.

Ships were loaded non-stop, 24 hours a day with sailors working in three 8-hour shifts.

Commanders at Port Chicago wanted the ships loaded as quickly as possible, and following Naval safety regulations slowed production, so federally-mandated safety codes were ignored.

Sailors lifted live bombs by hand and were encouraged to roll heavier bombs along the dock.

Powered winches were used to lift heavy loads, and although the machinery was often in disrepair — with broken levers, valves, and even brakes — sailors were instructed to load these devices beyond their weight capacity to speed up the process. Naval officers also raced divisions of sailors against each other, betting on which group could load explosives the fastest.

Practices that prioritized speed over safety led to a dangerous working environment at Port Chicago, and many sailors felt the working conditions were unacceptable. Actor, singer, and civil rights icon Harry Belafonte, who served briefly at Port Chicago in 1944, wrote in 2011 about the dangers of loading munitions:
"Not only was this menial work, it was incredibly dangerous, the more so because none of us had had any training for it. We knew exactly why we'd been chosen. This was scut work for the lowliest and most expendable sailors in the U.S. Navy: the black ones." The sailors filed complaints with the Navy about unsafe procedures, requested a change of assignment, and asked to be transferred. Complaints and requests were ignored or denied. A year before the disaster, in a letter to a local attorney asking for assistance, the sailors wrote:
"We, the Negro sailors of the Naval Enlisted Barracks of Port Chicago, California, are waiting for a new deal. Will we wait in vain?”
The Port Chicago Disaster
On the night of July 17, 1944, two Liberty ships, the SS Quinault Victory and SS E.A. Bryan, were being loaded with explosive incendiary bombs, depth charges, and ammunition. At 10:18pm, two massive explosions at the docks, just seconds apart, lit up the sky. Fiery debris and chunks of metal rained down on the base and surrounding areas. Smoke and fire extended nearly two miles into the air.

All 320 of the men on duty that night died instantly, almost two thirds of whom were African American, amounting to 15% of all Black American military deaths during World War II. 390

3 civilians and military personnel were injured, many seriously. The Naval Magazine was completely destroyed.

As Port Chicago sailor Robert Routh recalled, "These were the kind of young Blacks that made the conditions tolerable because of their attitude and ready to joke and make you glad to be alive. And now to know that in three to four seconds their lives were just snuffed out... There was nothing said about this, the tragic loss of life. Where was the reporters then, writing about that?"
The nearby town of Port Chicago was severely damaged and the blast caused structural damage and broken windows in surrounding communities. The explosions were felt as far away as Nevada. It was the largest homefront disaster of the war.

The surviving Black sailors were off-duty that night, and many of them were injured from the blast as windows shattered in their barracks. Uninjured sailors fought valiantly to put out fires and contain the damage caused by the explosions. Afterwards, a Rear Admiral proclaimed, "I am gratified to learn that, as was expected, Negro personnel performed bravely and efficiently in the emergency."
In the days that followed, many of the surviving injured Black sailors, still shaken from the traumatic event, were tasked with cleaning up the remnants of the disaster, including the body parts of their brothers-in-arms. Port Chicago 50 sailor Jack Crittenden described the traumatic experience:
"It was a sight that you don't want to talk about. Arm here, leg here, head here, a shoe with a foot in it. This is on the water and on the ground and, oh man. Awful." Meanwhile, as the Black sailors were made to clean up the grisly scene, their White counterparts were granted a 30-day survivor's leave to return home, heal from their wounds, and visit family and loved ones. The Black sailors were never granted such a leave.

The Port Chicago Protest
Within days after the gruesome cleanup, with the war raging on and our troops still needing munitions overseas, the sailors were sent to Mare Island Naval Shipyard about 25 miles from Port Chicago in Vallejo, California. There they learned they would soon be again tasked with loading explosives onto ships. The Navy's investigation into the cause of the disaster was not yet complete, so sailors and commanding officers did not know what precautions to take in order to prevent another disaster. The sailors would be serving under the same leadership responsible for previous safety violations and there would be no changes to procedures, conditions, or safety practices.

On August 9, 1944, when 328 sailors were directed to march toward the ships to load munitions, the sailors all stopped in their tracks. When asked if they would resume handling explosives, the majority of them resisted. Some sailors were too traumatized from the events to continue

4 working with explosives. Others wanted to be assigned to different duties. Still others were tormented by the fact that White sailors were granted leave while Black sailors were not only denied leave but made to clean up body parts after the explosions. They all wanted their lives to be valued the same as the White sailors who were being safeguarded from the dangers of loading munitions.

When asked individually if they would follow orders to load, about 70 of the sailors agreed to return to loading duties. The remaining sailors explained to the officers they would serve their country performing other duties, they'd accept transfers, or fight overseas in combat, but would not continue loading munitions under the same dangerous conditions.

Rather than train the sailors, bring working conditions up to code, or reassign White sailors to loading duties, the Naval officers packed 258 of the Black sailors onto a prison barge and threatened them with death-by-firing-squad if they did not return to loading munitions. After over two days on the overcrowded barge, 208 of the sailors reluctantly returned to loading.

In an act of nonviolent civil disobedience, fifty of the sailors, now known as the Port Chicago 50, stood firm and refused to continue loading munitions until the Navy changed their policies and practices.

As sailor Freddie Meeks later recalled, "We said, 'If we're going to be shot, we'll be shot.' We were not going back to those conditions."
For this, the fifty sailors were to be charged with mutiny. Although the standard charge for disobeying an order is "insubordination," which carries a punishment of forfeiture of pay and dishonorable discharge, Port Chicago leadership pushed for a more severe charge of "mutiny" which carried a maximum wartime punishment of death.

The Navy’s Court of Inquiry
A Naval Court of Inquiry, or official investigation, began on July 21 but wasn't completed until August 29, twenty days after the sailors were directed to return to loading munitions. As part of the investigation, three senior officers and a judge advocate interviewed 125 witnesses over a month, only five of whom were Black sailors.

The inquiry report found Port Chicago leadership had shown a "general failure to foresee and prepare for the tremendous increase in explosive shipments." It also cited leadership's "failure to provide an adequate number of competent petty officers or even personnel of petty officer caliber."
In regard to hazardous working conditions and practices on the base, the report confirmed leadership's "failure to assemble and train the officers and crew for their specialized duties prior to the time they were required for actual loading." It found that Port Chicago leadership had violated safety code and regulations, encouraged competition, and promoted criminalized loading practices.

5 The facts and evidence included in the report were interpreted by Navy captains and commanders in a final "opinions" section. Although the report was unable to find evidence of a specific cause for the explosions, the "opinion" section theorized that if the explosions were caused by human error, it was likely caused by the deceased Black sailors themselves.

Specifically, the opinion was that the explosions were caused by "rough or careless handling by an individual or individuals", not any failures of leadership. To back this theory, Naval leadership included a racist theory that Black sailors were inherently inferior to White sailors, including the opinion that Black sailors were "neither temperamentally [nor] intellectually capable of handling high explosives."
The report ultimately absolved all White officers of wrongdoing by stating the aforementioned illegally-unsafe practices "were contrary to the Coast Guard ship loading regulations [but] were not dangerous and did not increase the hazards."
The Mutiny Trial
Following the release of the inquiry report on August 29, which confirmed negligence and hazardous working conditions at Port Chicago, it became clear to many why the sailors were hesitant to return to loading explosives. On September 2, just three days after the inquiry report was released, President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent a letter to Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal outlining his opinion on the sailors. The President's letter read:
"It seems to me we should remember in the summary court martials of these 208 men that they were motivated by mass fear and that this was understandable. Their punishment should be nominal."
Although the reasons for the sailors' collective disobedience was understandable to President Roosevelt, the Navy would grant no leniency for the Port Chicago 50. The mutiny trial was scheduled to take place at Treasure Island in the San Francisco Bay on September 14, 1944. It would be the largest mass mutiny trial in American history.

The U.S. military does not typically send public invitations to military trials, however the Navy made an exception in order to invite the national press to cover the mutiny trial. One member of the public attending the trial was future Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, then a young civil rights lawyer for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who observed the trial and heard statements from each of the sailors. He publicly stated that the Navy was mishandling the case and was attempting to cover up its racist policies and blatant negligence by shifting blame for the disaster onto the Black sailors. Unfortunately, as a civilian lawyer, Marshall could not represent the sailors in a military trial.

The fifty sailors were not granted the right to choose their own representation, and were denied their right to individual counsel, as the Navy appointed five Naval attorneys who represented blocks of ten sailors each. Additionally, the Navy-appointed attorneys were all made to play by Navy rules, which barred evidence of hazardous conditions and necessitated the young men be

6 instructed not to testify about things that could incriminate the Navy or Port Chicago leadership.

This left the sailors with very little recourse to prove their innocence, as the reasons they spontaneously refused to load munitions had much to do with hazardous working conditions caused by Port Chicago leadership's negligence and disregard for the Black sailors' safety. As a result, subjects like safety violations, unsafe practices, and racial discrimination were disallowed from the trial and not part of witness examination.

As the sailors were instructed to limit their answers to their own actions and behavior and not the mistakes of Naval leadership, many sailors could only respond to questioning with testimony of their personal feelings of fear and confusion or what we would now call post-traumatic stress disorder or PTSD. These testimonies of fear and confusion were used to further Port Chicago leadership's racist narrative that Black sailors were inherently emotionally unstable, unintelligent, untrainable, and mistake-prone. To this end, officers testified about the sailors' mishandling of bombs and inability to be trained. From a legal perspective, this narrative had very little to do with proving a mutiny occurred, and more to do with establishing that the Black sailors, and not the Navy, were responsible for the Port Chicago disaster. Although this narrative had no bearing on the trial itself – and inadvertently made the sailors' case for granting them reassignment – the narrative of blame would be a stigma the sailors would find hard to shake.

After weeks of proceedings, evidence of a mutiny was scant, as an attempt to usurp power had not occurred and the sailors continued to follow all orders other than loading munitions. The "mutiny" narrative was especially hard to maintain once officers testified that sailors were respectful and followed every order except requests to load munitions. With the prosecution unable to present sufficient evidence of a mutiny, one would expect the Navy to proclaim the sailors innocent of mutiny, however the prosecution changed tactics mid-trial and attempted to prove the sailors were guilty of "conspiracy to commit mutiny." This charge inherently suggests that a mutiny never occurred, so prosecution would try to prove the sailors planned to eventually attempt a mutiny.

Reaching a verdict about collective planned action would theoretically require a careful examination of evidence and testimony for each sailor's alleged role in that action; a complicated task with fifty individual defendants. Additionally, a conspiracy charge would require the prosecution to show evidence of private conversations and alleged agreements, of which there were none. Making the task more difficult, was Naval leadership's inability to match the faces of the Black sailors to specific actions or events. Sailors testified that commanders never gave them direct orders to load munitions, only asked them questions about their willingness to perform the duties. A petty officer backed up the sailors' claims, saying he had never heard his division officer give the men an order to load ammunition. When the sailors' lead attorney asked a Naval commander if he could identify any of the fifty men he gave an order to, he replied, "No, I cannot."
In a flagrant violation of the sailors' rights to a fair trial, judges allowed the prosecution to submit unsubstantiated hearsay evidence and coerced involuntary confessions, while the defense was

7 not allowed to submit evidence of illegally-unsafe working conditions or unlawful orders. As Port Chicago sailor Joseph Small once said:
"That's why I always knew that the verdict was mandatory. The Navy was coming up with it regardless of what was brought out during the trial or what testimony was brought out, or who was found to be guilty of what, the verdict would have been the same. Not because the verdict would have been justified, but because it was the only way to save face." On October 24, 1944, after six weeks and 32 days of proceedings, the 7-member jury, composed of an Admiral and six high-ranking Navy officers, would need to arrive at a verdict.

There was insufficient evidence of a mutiny, insufficient evidence there was a plot to eventually attempt mutiny, and insufficient evidence that the sailors present in the courtroom were ever given a direct order at all. Nevertheless, the Naval jury deliberated for 80 minutes over lunch – which amounts to about 96 seconds deliberation per sailor – before delivering their verdict. The men were pronounced guilty of "conspiracy to commit mutiny" and were indiscriminately sentenced to 15 years prison and hard labor.

Desegregating the Navy
Mainstream press coverage of the mutiny trial widely reported the Navy's point-of-view that the sailors were cowards and traitors to their country. It also opened the Navy up to scrutiny for its policies of racial segregation. Many Black and liberal publications questioned the Navy's treatment of the Black sailors, as many Americans were unaware that segregation was being so strictly enforced in states like California where Jim Crow segregation was outlawed. These publications focused on the unethical treatment the sailors were subjected to because of the color of their skin. For many, the post-traumatic stress the sailors were experiencing after the disaster and cleanup was understandable, and some believed their request to be reassigned to alternative duties following the disaster was a reasonable request and should have been granted.

The ongoing trial was exposing racial inequality in the Navy for the first time. Under intense scrutiny, Naval leadership realized it needed to take steps to avoid future incidents like the one at Port Chicago. They concluded the Port Chicago protest could have been handled differently, and so in extreme cases commanders should be encouraged to assign Black sailors to alternative assignments, even if that means serving alongside White sailors.

As a result, on October 9, 1944, while the mutiny trial was still being conducted, the Navy's Bureau of Personnel released a directive titled "Negro Enlisted Personnel - Abolishment of Restrictions on the Assignment Of" which lifted restrictions for Black American assignments where "personnel problems" were present:
"In order to enable overall commands to deal successfully with personnel problems brought about by changing conditions and needs, authority is hereby granted addressees to assign Negroes under their cognizance to such activities, and in such numbers, as they see fit."

8 As a result, while the Port Chicago 50 were still on trial, the Navy ordered the formation of two divisions of White sailors to load munitions at Port Chicago and Mare Island. The racial integration of the Navy had officially begun, and it was in direct response to the Port Chicago protest.

For Black American military personnel around the world, the mutiny trial and verdict had a profound effect. It reinforced the perception that Black lives were not valued by the military, and it resulted in morale dropping to new lows. In the months following the verdict, resentment and frustrations with racially-discriminatory policies led to acts of protest throughout the military.

These acts of protest included a race riot in Guam in December 1944, a hunger strike of 1000 Navy Seabees in Port Hueneme in March 1945, and the Freeman Field "Mutiny" of April 1945 in which Black airmen refused to leave an all-White officers club.

The case of the Port Chicago sailors began to serve as an example of everything that was wrong with racial segregation in the military. The Navy's mistreatment of the sailors was being written about and published across the country with photographs, and it didn't sit well with many Americans, including those in military leadership.

Many in the Navy were becoming convinced that segregating enlisted men by race was no longer viable, and integrating personnel only under extreme circumstances was simply not enough. Some believed integration was good for national morale and harmony, while others believed all-Black divisions needed to end because they increased the potential for collective action and protest. Regardless of the reason, there was agreement on what needed to be done, and plans to fully integrate the Navy were underway.

In the months following the verdict, the NAACP publicly advocated for the Port Chicago 50 to be released from prison with their widely-distributed Mutiny pamphlet. The publication was distributed far and wide, including to First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt who supported the campaign to have the men released. Letters from organizations were calling for justice for the Port Chicago 50 while organized drives were being held at churches to sign petitions to end segregation in the military.

In April 1945, on behalf of the fifty sailors, Thurgood Marshall appealed the case directly to the Navy's Judge Advocate General's Office in Washington DC. Although the Navy refused to publicly concede that racial discrimination and bias influenced its judgment of the sailors, just 205 days after Marshall's appeal case was denied, the sailors' sentences were commuted and they were quietly released from prison. Rather than allow the sailors to go home and join their families, the young men were given the "opportunity to complete their enlistments" serving the Navy overseas performing menial tasks like sweeping, picking up trash, and other menial tasks.

Just one month after they were released from prison, in February 1946, after intense public pressure initiated by the Port Chicago protest, subsequent protests, and a public appeal campaign, the Navy became the first branch of the military to end racial segregation. Two years later, the remaining branches of the U.S. Armed Forces integrated.

9 The 1994 Navy Review
45 years later, with the release of Robert Allen's definitive book "The Port Chicago Mutiny" in 1989, people were hearing the full history of Port Chicago for the first time. Many felt the sailors were unfairly treated and wrongfully convicted. Advocates like Robert Allen, Sandra Evers- Manly, and Reverend Diana McDaniel were joined by lawmakers Rep. George Miller, Senator Dianne Feinstein, and Senator Barbara Boxer in urging the Navy to re-examine the mutiny case.

In 1992, after much advocacy from supporters – including high-profile entertainers Morgan Freeman, Danny Glover, and Louis Gossett Jr. – the Navy agreed to "examine all aspects of the allegations of racial prejudice and discrimination." Following a two year review, the final report found that "racial discrimination did play a part in the assignment of African-American sailors to load munition." According to the Navy's report, assignments were the only aspect of Naval life that was affected by racial discrimination. The report concluded that "neither racial prejudice nor other improper factors tainted the original investigations and trials" and "no error or injustice occurred."
At the time, one of the Port Chicago survivors said the Navy's ruling was "like saying it's raining everywhere but right here." Port Chicago sailor Harry Belafonte said "The Port Chicago mutiny was one of America's ugliest miscarriages of justice and a national disgrace. Those sailors were court-martialed... because they'd dared to stand up to blatant institutional racism." Advocates continued to make the case that, despite the Navy's conclusions, policies of racial segregation didn't just affect working assignments, but normalized racial discrimination throughout the Navy and encouraged behavior that devalued Black sailors. They maintained that documented racial prejudice and bias tainted the original investigation, charges, and trial.

Repairing the Sailors’ Legacies
Unrelenting in their goal to bring the sailors of Port Chicago justice, advocates next approached the sailors with the idea of requesting pardons from the President of the United States. Many of the sailors turned it down. On that subject, Port Chicago sailor Joseph Small once said, "We don't want a pardon because that means, 'You're guilty, but we forgive you.' We want the decisions set aside and reimbursement of lost pay."
By 1999, 47 of the 50 sailors had died. As one of the last three survivors, sailor Freddie Meeks believed seeking a presidential pardon would be a meaningful and lasting way to set the record straight and bring public attention to this little-known history. "After all these years, the world should know what happened at Port Chicago," he said. In December 1999, President Bill Clinton honored the Port Chicago 50 by granting Freddie Meeks a presidential pardon. The remaining two sailors declined, with sailor Jack Crittenden explaining that he refused to ask forgiveness for a crime he didn't commit.

Today, the sailors have all passed away, yet efforts to seek justice for their legacies continue.

Naval historians now say the heroic actions of the 50 sailors probably prevented another

10 disaster and likely saved lives. Acknowledging the racism the sailors experienced, President Barack Obama once wrote, "Faced with tremendous obstacles, they fought on two fronts – for freedom abroad and equality at home."
A growing chorus of Americans believe our nation owes the sailors a debt of gratitude for drawing attention to issues of racial inequality within the Navy and our society as a whole.

Celebrating the Sailors
The Port Chicago 50 are now being honored and celebrated as heroes in schools, parks, and public institutions. In 2021, the East Bay Regional Park District, the largest park district in the country, named a regional park in honor of Thurgood Marshall and the Port Chicago 50. The 2,540-acre Thurgood Marshall Regional Park - Home of the Port Chicago 50 in Concord, California will teach of the Port Chicago 50's courage and how their act of protest, and Marshall's public appeal campaign, forever changed our country for the better.

In 2022, Treasure Island Museum announced they are working with the National Park Service to honor and memorialize the fifty sailors at Yerba Buena Island in the San Francisco Bay where the mutiny trial took place. Plans for a hilltop park on the island include exhibits, panels, plaques, and an American flag waving in their honor.

Through education and advocacy, the legacies of the Port Chicago 50 and the brave fallen sailors of Port Chicago Naval Magazine lives on.

Previous action by the Berkeley City Council
In 2015, the Berkeley City Council adopted a resolution calling on President Obama to support justice for the Port Chicago 50 and exoneration for the convicted Port Chicago sailors. In light of renewed interest and momentum for exoneration, this item seeks to provide a more robust and updated statement of continued support.

FISCAL IMPACTS
N/A

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
N/A

CONTACT
Sophie Hahn, Council District 5, (510) 981-7150

11 RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL EFFORTS TO EXONERATE THE PORT CHICAGO 50
WHEREAS, on July 17, 1944, the deadliest home front disaster of World War II took place when a tragic explosion occurred at the Port Chicago Naval Magazine killing 320 men (of whom 202 were African American) and wounding 390 (of whom 233 were African American); and WHEREAS, Port Chicago Naval Magazine was racially segregated and all sailors loading munitions at the time of the explosion were African American; and WHEREAS, the surviving sailors were entitled to standard survivors’ leave but were denied leave and ordered to clean up after the disaster; and
WHEREAS, the surviving sailors were ordered back to handling high explosives before an investigation could determine the cause of the deadly explosion; and WHEREAS, 258 ammunition handlers engaged in peaceful work stoppage rather than return under the same unsafe working conditions; and
WHEREAS, fifty of these men were unlawfully charged with mutiny, prosecuted as guilty and sentenced to prison; and
WHEREAS, three weeks after the work stoppage, a Naval Court of Inquiry report confirmed working conditions and practices enforced by Port Chicago leadership were in violation of Naval safety regulations and federal safety code; and
WHEREAS, the actions of the sailors, the public mutiny trial, and public advocacy from their champion Thurgood Marshall, initiated the desegregation of the Navy in February 1946; and WHEREAS, there have been several attempts over the years to appeal the decision, but all have failed; and
WHEREAS, starting in the 1990s, Congressman George Miller worked to preserve the history of the Port Chicago 50 and worked towards their exoneration, and in 1992, his legislation designated the site of the Port Chicago Naval Magazine as a national memorial, which is managed by the National Park Service; and
WHEREAS, in 2009, President Obama signed legislation to incorporate Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a full and permanent unit of our National Park System; and WHEREAS, the East Bay Regional Park District received part of the Concord Naval Weapons Station through a Public Benefit Conveyance on July 19, 2019, and has named the park the Thurgood Marshall Regional Park – Home of the Port Chicago 50, which honors the courage

12 and legacy of the Port Chicago 50 and all those who sacrificed their lives in our nation’s ongoing struggle for social justice, racial equality, and workers’ rights; and WHEREAS, Naval historians now recognize the actions of the Port Chicago 50 potentially saved lives and changed the Navy for the better; and
WHEREAS, in 2022, the City of Concord, the City of Albany, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors passed resolutions supporting local, state, and federal efforts to exonerate the sailors wrongfully convicted of mutiny following the Port Chicago disaster of 1944.

WHEREAS, in 2022, the State of California successfully passed SJR-15 urging the President of the United States and Congress to restore honor to the sailors unjustly blamed for, and the sailors convicted of mutiny following, the Port Chicago disaster, and to rectify any mistreatment by the military of those sailors, including the full exoneration of those who were convicted at court-martial; and
WHEREAS, in 2023, US Representative Mark DeSaulnier (CA-11), US Representative Barbara Lee (CA-12) and US Representative John Garamendi (CA-08) introduced a resolution recognizing the victims of the Port Chicago disaster and calling for the exoneration of the Port Chicago 50; and
WHEREAS, in June 2023, the Philadelphia 15 were exonerated by Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin Parker. This case serves as an example and pathway to exonerate the Port Chicago 50.

WHEREAS, in August 2023, Vice President Kamala Harris praised the Port Chicago 50, writing that they “pushed for progress, and our Armed Forces are stronger today because they reflect the diversity of our country.”
NOW, THEREFORE, The City of Berkeley DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City of Berkeley does hereby support all efforts to exonerate the Port Chicago 50 and recognize their service to our country.

Section 2. The City of Berkeley recognizes the efforts that this case presents in our nation’s struggle for social justice, racial equity, and workers’ rights.

Section 3. The City of Berkeley urges all Alameda County cities and the County of Alameda to adopt similar resolutions of support, and directs the City Manager to share this Resolution with all such jurisdictions and with Berkeley’s State and Federal representatives.

Section 4. The City of Berkeley affirms support for all future efforts which urge the President, Congress of the United States, and Secretary of the Navy to take all necessary actions to restore honor to, and rectify the mistreatment by the United States Military of, any sailors who were unjustly blamed for and convicted of mutiny after the Port Chicago disaster, which occurred in the town of Port Chicago, California, in 1944.

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.berkeleyca.gov

ACTION CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Mark Numainville, City Clerk
Subject: Initiative Petition – Initiative Ordinance Prohibiting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in the City of Berkeley

RECOMMENDATION
1) Take action on the initiative petition to:
a) Adopt the provisions of the measure without alteration. -OR-
b) Adopt a Resolution submitting the measure, without alteration, to a vote of the people at the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election.
2) Designate, by motion, specific members of the Council to file ballot measure arguments on this measure as provided for in Elections Code Section 9282.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
No direct fiscal impacts related to the recommended action.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
An initiative petition titled “Initiative Ordinance Prohibiting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in the City of Berkeley” was filed with the City Clerk on September 5, 2023.

The proponents of this petition submitted 4,989 prima facie signatures.

Under Berkeley City Charter Article XIII, a successful initiative petition must include valid signatures of at least 5% (2,985) of the votes for all candidates for Mayor in November 2020 (57,885).

The Alameda County Registrar of Voters verified the signatures by reviewing a random sampling of 500 signatures in accordance with State Elections Code §9215. This statistical sampling found 419 valid signatures. When this ratio of valid signatures is applied to the actual number of signatures submitted, it results in a validity rate of 134%, which exceeds the required threshold in the state Elections Code for the petition to be deemed sufficient. Therefore, the petition was certified by the Registrar of Voters as being sufficient on September 25, 2023.

Initiative Petition ACTION CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
Additionally, with respect to who can author arguments for measures placed on the ballot by petition, Elections Code Section 9282 provides the City Council may authorize the Council as a whole, or members of the Council, to submit an argument against the initiative ordinance.

BACKGROUND
Pursuant to the City Charter, Article XIII §92, once a petition has been found to have a sufficient amount of signatures, the City Council must consider whether to a) Adopt said ordinance without alteration within twenty days after the attachment of the City Clerk’s certificate of sufficiency to the accompanying petition (subject to a referendary vote, under the provision of Article XIV of this Charter); or b) Submit the ordinance to the voters of the City of Berkeley at the next general election.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or climate impacts associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposed action is mandated by state codes and the provisions of the City Charter.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Mark Numainville, City Clerk, 981-6900
Attachments:

1. Resolution
Exhibit A: Full Text of Measure

2. City Clerk’s Certificate of Sufficiency

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

CALLING THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024 AND SUBMITTING TO THE BERKELEY ELECTORATE AN INITIATIVE

ORDINANCE PROHIBITING CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS IN

THE CITY OF BERKELEY
WHEREAS, the Berkeley City Council has elected to submit to the voters at the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election, an initiative measure prohibiting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in the City of Berkeley; and
WHEREAS, certain actions are required in connection with said election.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the General Municipal Election to be held in the City of Berkeley on November 5, 2024, is hereby called.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED as follows:

1. In accordance with the provisions of Section 10002 and 10403 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors is requested to consolidate the City of Berkeley General Municipal Election with the Presidential General Election to be held November 5, 2024, and to authorize the county elections official to render services specified.

2. The Registrar of Voters of Alameda County is requested to perform services in connection with said election at the request of the City Clerk. These services include all necessary services related to signature checking for nomination petitions and signatures-in-lieu of filing fee, official ballot creation, sample ballot and voter information pamphlet preparation, vote-by-mail, drop boxes, voting centers, poll workers, voter registration, voting machines, canvass operations, and any and all other services necessary for the conduct of the consolidated election.

3. The Board of Supervisors of Alameda County is requested to include on the ballots and sample ballots, all qualified measures submitted by the City Council to be ratified by the qualified electors of the City of Berkeley.

4. That the City of Berkeley acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code Section 10418.

5. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause the posting, publication, and printing of all notices or other election materials pursuant to the requirements of the Charter of the City of Berkeley and the Elections and Government Codes of the State of California.

6. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to enter into any contracts necessary for election consulting services, temporary employment services, printing services, and any such other supplies and services as may be required by the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of the City of Berkeley for the conduct of the November General Municipal Election.

7. The City of Berkeley agrees to reimburse the County of Alameda in full for the cost of election services performed.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the Board of Supervisors of Alameda County is hereby requested to include on the ballots and sample ballots the measure enumerated above to be voted on by the voters of the qualified electors of the City of Berkeley.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that full text of the measure and the City Attorney’s analysis shall be printed in the Voter Information Pamphlet mailed to all voters in the City of Berkeley.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the above enumerated measure requires a majority vote threshold for passage.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9285 (b), the City Council hereby adopts the provisions of Elections Code Section 9285 (a) providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city ballot measures.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said proposed initiative measure shall appear and be printed upon the ballots to be used at said election as follows:

CITY OF BERKELEY INITIATIVE ORDINANCE
YES
Shall the measure prohibiting the establishment within the City of Berkeley of facilities where livestock are kept for 45 days or more in a 12-month period and which meet size and other regulatory thresholds established by the Environmental Protection Agency; prohibiting the expansion of existing facilities; requiring existing facilities to cease operations within one year; establishing a penalty of $10,000 per violation per day; and allowing enforcement by the City Council or by private lawsuit, be adopted?
NO
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the text of the initiative ordinance be shown as Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

Exhibits
A: Text of Ordinance

PROHIBITION ON CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS (CAFOs) The People of the City of Berkeley ordain as follows:

That Chapter 23.336 Prohibition on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) be added to to Title 23 ZONING of the Berkeley Municipal Code as follows:

Chapter 23.336 Prohibition on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) Section 23.336.010 Findings.

A. Hundreds of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) presently operate in California.

B. Animal agriculture is responsible for 38% of methane emissions in the United States, and it is projected that the global agriculture sector will nearly double in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

C. By worsening climate change via the release of greenhouse gases, CAFOs are a major contributor to the drought and wildfires in California.

D. CAFOs are contributing to the ongoing water crisis in California, with some facilities using up to 4 million gallons of water per day and others polluting water sources with chemical fertilizers and manure.

E. Globally, animal agriculture is the primary driver of biodiversity loss through its dependence on inputs such as fertilizer, pesticides, energy, land, and water, and on practices such as monocropping and heavy tilling, which in turn reduces the variety of landscapes and habitats.

F. It is a well-established scientific fact, as supported by 2,500 studies exploring animal cognition, that nonhuman animals have emotions, personalities, and the ability to feel pain, fear, and stress.

G. Millions of nonhuman animals are routinely confined and abused in CAFOs across California.

H. The treatment of nonhuman animals in CAFOs routinely violates California animal cruelty laws, with little to no enforcement.

I. Three out of four emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic, and CAFOs pose a serious risk to public health.

J. Investigators have found antibiotic resistant bacteria and infectious diseases in CAFOs in California and across the U.S.

K. Workers in the animal agriculture industry experience higher rates of substance abuse, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and domestic violence.

L. In summary, CAFOs are a leading cause of environmental destruction, pose grave risks to public health, abuse and kill nonhuman animals, and often create dangerous and exploitative conditions for workers.

Section 23.336.020 Prohibition on Establishment and Operation of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)
A. Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following definition shall apply:
a. “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation” or “CAFO” means an agricultural operations where animals have been, are, or will be stabled or confined and fed or maintained for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period, and which meets

the regulatory definition set out by the Environmental Protection Agency seen in the following table
Regulatory Definitions of Large CAFOs, Medium CAFO, and Small CAFOs A Large CAFO confines at least the number of animals described in the table below.

A Medium CAFO falls within the size range in the table below and either:
 Has a manmade ditch or pipe that carries manure or wastewater to surface water; or  the animals come into contact with surface water that passes through the area where they’re confined.

If an operation is found to be a significant contributor of pollutants, the permitting authority may designate a medium-sized facility as a CAFO.

A Small CAFO confines fewer than the number of animals listed in the table and has been designated as a CAFO by the permitting authority as a significant contributor of pollutants.

Size Thresholds (number of animals)Animal Sector
Large
CAFOs
Medium
CAFOs1
Small
CAFOs2
cattle or cow/calf pairs 1,000 or
more
300 - 999 less
than 300
mature dairy cattle 700 or
more
200 - 699 less
than 200
veal calves 1,000 or
more
300 - 999 less
than 300
swine (weighing over 55 pounds) 2,500 or
more
750 - 2,499 less
than 750
swine (weighing less than 55 pounds) 10,000 or
more
3,000 - 9,999 less
than
3,000
horses 500 or
more
150 - 499 less
than 150
sheep or lambs 10,000 or
more
3,000 - 9,999 less
than
3,000
turkeys 55,000 or
more
16,500 - 54,999 less
than
16,500
laying hens or broilers (liquid manure handling
systems)
30,000 or
more
9,000 - 29,999 less
than
9,000
chickens other than laying hens (other than a liquid
manure handling systems)
125,000 or
more
37,500 - 124,999 less
than
37,500
laying hens (other than a liquid manure handling
systems)
82,000 or
more
25,000 - 81,999 less
than
25,000

ducks (other than a liquid manure handling systems) 30,000 or more
10,000 - 29,999 less
than
10,000
ducks (liquid manure handling systems) 5,000 or
more
1,500 - 4,999 less
than
1,500
1 Must also meet one of two "method of discharge" to be defined as a CAFO or may be designated. 2 Never a CAFO by regulatory definition, but may be designated as a CAFO on a case-by-case basis.

B. Prohibition.
a. No person, corporation, or other entity shall establish a CAFO of any size within the city of Berkeley.
b. No person, corporation, or other entity shall expand an existing CAFO of any size within the city of Berkeley.
c. Any CAFO in operation within the city of Berkeley at the time of this initiative’s passage shall be phased out within a period of 1 year.

Section 23.336.030 Enforcement and Penalties.

A. The The City Council shall have the authority to enforce this initiative, including the power to inspect premises suspected of violating its provisions.

B. This Chapter also provides a private right of action upon any person or entity to seek injunctive relief and penalties against a person or business who violates this prohibition.

C. Any person that violates this prohibition is civilly liable for a penalty in an amount of $10,000 per violation per day.

D. A court shall award a plaintiff who prevails on a cause of action reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

Section 23.336.040 Severability.

If any provision of this initiative is found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such finding shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining provisions.

Section 23.336.050 Effective Date.

This initiative shall become effective immediately after its passage by the voters.

for

Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

ACTION CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Louis, Chief of Police
Liam Garland, Director of Public Works
Subject: Pursuant to Chapter 2.99 of the Berkeley Municipal Code Surveillance Technology Report for Automatic License Plate Readers, GPS Trackers, Body Worn Cameras, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s), the Street Level Imagery Project, and External Fixed Surveillance Video Cameras

RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to Chapter 2.99 of the Berkeley Municipal Code Adopt a Resolution Accepting the Surveillance Technology Report for Automatic License Plate Readers, GPS Trackers, Body Worn Cameras, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s), the Street Level Imagery Project, and External Fixed Surveillance Video Cameras.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
These technologies have existing budget approval and there are no new fiscal impacts associated with adopting the attached resolution.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On March 27, 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance 7,592-N.S., adding Chapter 2.99 to the Berkeley Municipal Code, which is also known as the Surveillance Technology Use and Community Safety Ordinance (“Ordinance”). The purpose of the Ordinance is to provide transparency surrounding the use of surveillance technology, as defined by Section 2.99.020 in the Ordinance, and to ensure that decisions surrounding the acquisition and use of surveillance technology consider the impacts that such technology may have on civil rights and civil liberties. Further, the Ordinance requires that the City evaluate all costs associated with the acquisition of surveillance technology and regularly report on their use.

The Ordinance imposes various reporting requirements on the City Manager and staff.

The purpose of this staff report and attached resolution is to satisfy the annual reporting requirement as outlined in Section 2.99.070.

One of the reporting categories of the surveillance technology use is whether complaints have been received by the community about the various technologies. To

Resolution Accepting the Surveillance Technology Report ACTION CALENDAR November 7, 2023
date Berkeley Police Department Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) has not received any external personnel complaints surrounding these technologies. External complaints from community members can be made in writing, via email, in person or via telephone.

Complaints can be received with direct communication to Internal Affairs from the complainant and/or be received by any member of the Department and then forwarded through the chain of command. If a community member initiates a complaint against a subject employee and during the investigation it is determined the subject employee violated policy regarding the misuse of technology, an additional complaint is initiated by the Chief of Police.

Community members also have the right to initiate complaints against employees of BPD by reporting directly to the Police Accountability Board (PAB). The Director of Police Accountability notifies the Chief of Police when an investigation into a complaint is initiated by the PAB, which would prompt a parallel IAB investigation.

Attached to this staff report are Surveillance Technology Reports for Automatic License Plate Readers, GPS Trackers, Body Worn Cameras, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s), the Street Level Imagery Project, and External Fixed Surveillance Video Cameras.

During this reporting period the Berkeley Police Department collaborated with the Police Accountability Board, Public Safety Policy Committee, and City Attorney’s Office to author a Surveillance Use Policy, Use Policy and an Acquisition Report related to Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV or drones). The policies were approved by the Berkeley City Council on July 25, 2023 and therefore, this will be the last reporting period in which drones will be reported as temporary use surveillance technology per BMC 2.99.030 and 2.99.040. This year the Berkeley Police Department had two instances pursuant to BMC 2.99.040 in which the City Manager authorized the Police Department to temporarily use an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, commonly referred to as a drone, for critical incidents. These incidents were reported by the City Manager to Council pursuant to 2.99.040(2) and are included in this annual report pursuant to BMC

2.99.949(3). At this time, the Berkeley Police Department is not actively working to acquire drones.

During this reporting period the Berkeley Police Department collaborated with the Police Accountability Board, Public Safety Policy Committee, and City Attorney’s Office to author a Surveillance Use Policy, Use Policy, and an Acquisition Report related to External Fixed Video Surveillance Cameras. At the time of submission of this report, an additional fixed camera has been installed at the intersection of University Avenue and Sixth Street to assist in criminal investigations. That camera is managed by the Public Works Department but the Police Department has access for criminal investigations.

During this reporting period, the newly installed camera at University Avenue and Sixth Street, as well as the existing cameras in San Pablo Park and the Berkeley Marina, were accessed four times by the Berkeley Police Department.

Resolution Accepting the Surveillance Technology Report ACTION CALENDAR November 7, 2023
During this reporting period the Berkeley Police Department collaborated with the Police Accountability Board, Public Safety Policy Committee, and City Attorney’s Office to author a Surveillance Use Policy, Use Policy, and an Acquisition Report related to Automated License Plate Readers for criminal investigations. Previously, the Berkeley Police Department only utilized ALPR operated out of the Traffic Bureau primarily for Parking Enforcement Operations. At the time of submission of this report, the Berkeley Police Department is in the process of requesting Council approval for the funds to purchase law enforcement focused ALPR for a two year pilot period not to exceed $425,000. Therefore, it is likely that next year there will be two reports in the Surveillance Technology Report related to ALPR; one for ALPR associated with the Traffic Bureau and Parking Enforcement Operations, and a new report related to ALPR focused on law enforcement criminal investigations.

Policy 1302, Automated License Plate Reader for Parking Enforcement Operations, requires an audit of the system twice a year. According to policy, the audit shall be documented in the form of an internal department memorandum to the Chief of Police.

The memorandum shall include any data errors found so that such errors can be corrected. After review by the Chief of Police, the memorandum and any associated documentation shall be placed into the annual report filed with the City Council pursuant to BMC Section 2.99.020, published on the City of Berkeley website in an appropriate location, and retained within Professional Standards Bureau.

During this reporting period the Department completed the first audit since the policy went live late last year. This audit analyzed ALPR data from January 2023 to June 2023 and is attached to this report. The next audit will be conducted in January 2024.

BACKGROUND
On March 27, 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance 7,592-N.S., adding Chapter 2.99 to the Berkeley Municipal Code, which is also known as the Surveillance Technology Use and Community Safety Ordinance. Section 2.99.070 of the Ordinance requires that the City Manager must submit to the City Council a Surveillance Technology Report as defined by Section 2.99.020(2) of the Ordinance annually, at the first regular City Council meeting in November.

For each of the six technologies, the Surveillance Technology Reports were prepared to satisfy the specific, section-by-section requirements of the Ordinance, and are attached to this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the content of this report.

Resolution Accepting the Surveillance Technology Report ACTION CALENDAR November 7, 2023

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
City Council is being requested to adopt the attached resolution for the City to be in compliance with the Ordinance.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
City Council could decide not to adopt the resolution.

CONTACT PERSON
Jennifer Louis, Chief of Police, (510) 981-5700
Michael Durbin, Professional Standards Captain, (510) 981-5760

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Surveillance Technology Report: Body Worn Cameras

3. Surveillance Technology Report: Global Positioning System (GPS) Tracking Devices

4. Surveillance Technology Report: Automated License Plate Readers

5. Surveillance Technology Report: Street Level Imagery Project

6. Surveillance Technology Report: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV’s)

7. Surveillance Technology Report: External Fixed Surveillance Video Cameras

RESOLUTION NO. XX,XXX-N.S.

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY REPORT FOR

AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READERS, GPS TRACKERS, BODY WORN CAMERAS, UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES (UAV’S), THE STREET LEVEL IMAGERY

PROJECT AND EXTERNAL FIXED SURVEILLANCE VIDEO CAMERAS
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance 7,592-N.S., which is known as the Surveillance Technology Use and Community Safety Ordinance (“Ordinance”); and
WHEREAS, Section 2.99.070 of the Ordinance requires that the City Manager must submit to the City Council a Surveillance Technology Report as defined by Section

2.99.020(2) of the Ordinance at the first regular City Council meeting in November; and WHEREAS, the Surveillance Technology Reports satisfy the requirements of the Ordinance.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the Council hereby accepts the Surveillance Technology Reports for Automatic License Plate Readers, GPS Trackers, Body Worn Cameras, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s), the Street Level Imagery Project, and External Fixed Surveillance Video Cameras.

Surveillance Technology Report: Body Worn Cameras
October 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2023
Description A description of all non-privileged and non-confidential information about use of the Surveillance Technology, including but not limited to the quantity of data gathered and sharing of data, if any, with outside entities. If sharing has occurred, the report shall include general, non-privileged and non-confidential information about recipient entities, including the names of the entities and purposes for such sharing.

Body Worn Cameras are used to capture video recordings of contacts between department personnel and the public, to provide an objective record of these events.

These recording are used in support of criminal prosecutions, to limit civil liability, increase transparency and enhance professionalism and accountability in the delivery of police services to the community. Body Worn Camera (BWC) files are shared with the Alameda County District Attorney’s office in support of prosecution for crime, and may be shared with other law enforcement agencies to support criminal investigations.

Policy regarding activation of the Body Worn Camera BPD Policy 425.7 Members shall activate the BWC as required by this policy in (a)-(f) below, and may activate the BWC at any time the member believes it would be appropriate or valuable to record an incident within the limits of privacy described herein.

The BWC shall be activated in any of the following situations:
(a) All in-person enforcement and investigative contacts including pedestrian stops and field interview (FI) situations.
(b) Traffic stops including, but not limited to, traffic violations, stranded motorist assistance and all crime interdiction stops.
(c) Self-initiated field contacts in which a member would normally notify the Communications Center.
(d) Any search activity, including the service of search or arrest warrants; probation, parole, or consent searches where the member is seeking evidence of an offense, or conducting a safety sweep or community caretaking sweep of the premises. Once a location has been secured and the member is not interacting with detainees or arrestees, the member may mute their BWC when conducting a search for evidence.
(e) Any other contact that the member determines has become adversarial after the initial contact in a situation where the member would not otherwise activate BWC recording.
(f) Transporting any detained or arrested person and where a member facilitates entry into or out of a vehicle, or any time the member expects to have physical contact with that person.

What data is captured by this technology:

BWC use is limited to enforcement and investigative activities involving members of the public. The BWC recordings will capture video and audio evidence for use in criminal investigations, administrative reviews, training, civil litigation, and other proceedings protected by confidentiality laws and department policy. Improper use or release of BWC

recordings may compromise ongoing criminal and administrative investigations or violate the privacy rights of those recorded and is prohibited.

How the data is stored:

BWC videos are stored on a secure server. All BWC data will be uploaded and stored on Axon Cloud Services, Evidence.com. Axon complies with the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework and the Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework as set forth by the U.S.

Department of Commerce regarding the collection, use, and retention of personal information transferred from the European Union and Switzerland to the United States (collectively, “Privacy Shield”). Axon has certified to the U.S. Department of Commerce that it adheres to the Privacy Shield Principles.

Retention duration of digital data:

All BWC videos and digital evidence are assigned a category. The categories are used to organize data. Each category also defines the retention duration. The category definitions and retention durations are as follows:

NAME RETENTION DURATION
Uncategorized Until manually deleted
187 / Felony Sex Assault Until manually deleted
Civil / City / Non-Evidence 1 year
Collision 2 years
Consent / Aid 108 weeks
Detention / Warrant Only 108 weeks
Felony Evidence 5 years
Litigation Until manually deleted
Misdemeanor Evidence 2 years
Officer Injury Until manually deleted
OIS / Critical Incident Until manually deleted
Pending Review Until manually deleted
Personnel / VSA 3 years
Personnel Complaint Until manually deleted
Traffic Stop 108 weeks
Training 60 days
Use of Force 108 weeks

Summary of Body Worn Camera Videos Uploaded Oct. 1, 2022 to Sept. 30, 2023:

Number of BWC Videos 68,750
Hours of Videos 18,609.65
GB of Videos 32,323.13
Summary of Digital Evidence Uploaded, Oct. 1, 2022 to Sept. 30, 2023:

Type File Count
Audio 2,141
Document 1,470
Image 76,044
Other 625
BWC Video 68,750
Other Video* 6,161
Total 155,191
* Includes all uploaded non-BWC videos and other videos booked into the evidence management system.

Other videos include iPhone videos, security camera video, and copies of BWC videos (for redaction, etc.).

Geographic
Deployment
Where applicable, non-privileged and non-confidential information about where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically.

Body Worn Cameras are worn by all BPD uniformed officers city-wide at all times; BWC’s are not deployed based on geographic considerations.

Complaints A summary of each complaint, if any, received by the City about the Surveillance Technology.

There have been no complaints about the deployment and use of Body Worn Cameras.

Audits and
Violations
The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.

File meta-data are routinely reviewed by our BWC manager, to ensure required metadata fields are completed. There have been no complaints with regards to violations of the Surveillance Use Policy.

Data Breaches Non-privileged and non-confidential information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response.

There have been no known data breaches or other unauthorized access to BWC data.

Effectiveness Information that helps the community assess whether the Surveillance Technology has been effective in achieving its identified outcomes.

Body Worn Cameras have proven effective in supporting criminal prosecutions, as video footage is available for all criminal prosecutions. Body Worn Cameras have been effective for training purposes, as footage can be reviewed in incident de-briefs. Body Worn Cameras have been extremely effective in support of Internal Affairs investigations and Use of Force Review.

Costs Total annual costs for the Surveillance Technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs.

The annual cost for the Body Worn Cameras, including cameras, replacement cameras, software, and Axon’s secure digital evidence management system is $222,442 per year over a five-year, $1,112,213 contract. The contracted started in 2022 and will expire in August, 2026. There is one full-time employee assigned to the BWC program, an Applications Programmer Analyst II, at a cost of $168,940 per year, including benefits.

ATTACHMENT 3

Surveillance Technology Report: Global Positioning System Tracking Devices October 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2023
Description A description of all non-privileged and non-confidential information about use of the Surveillance Technology, including but not limited to the quantity of data gathered and sharing of data, if any, with outside entities. If sharing has occurred, the report shall include general, non-privileged and non-confidential information about recipient entities, including the names of the entities and purposes for such sharing.

Global Positioning System Trackers are used to track the movements of vehicles, bicycles, other items, and/or individuals.

What data is captured by this technology:

A GPS Tracker data record consists of date, time, latitude, longitude, map address, and tracker identification label. The data does not contain any images, names of subjects, vehicle information or other identifying information on individuals.

How the data is stored:

The data from the GPS tracker is encrypted by the vendor. The data is only accessible through a secure website to BPD personnel who have been granted security access.

Retention period of data:

Tracker data received from the vendor shall be kept in accordance with applicable laws, BPD policies that do not conflict with applicable law or court order, and/or as specified in a search warrant.

The Global Positioning System “Electronic Stake Out” (ESO) devices were not deployed during this reporting period. This program was suspended in mid-March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In June of 2022, we renewed our service with the company and paid for new updated equipment with the intent of restarting the program. The program was not reimplemented during the dates specific to this report.

COVERTTRACK Stealth V GPS devices were used in three separate investigations during this reporting period:
(1) An investigation into individuals for their involvement in several robberies and shootings in Berkeley. The case investigation resulted in the arrest of three individuals and the recovery of 5 firearms.
(2) An investigation into individuals for their involvement in a commercial burglary. This case is still active and no arrests have been made. (3) An investigation into a robbery and carjacking in Berkeley. The case investigation resulted in the identification of two suspects. One suspect has been arrested and the other has an outstanding warrant.

Data may be shared with the District Attorney’s Office for use as evidence to aid in prosecution, in accordance with laws governing evidence; other law enforcement

ATTACHMENT 3

personnel as a part of an active criminal investigation; and other third parties, pursuant to a court order.

Geographic
Deployment
Where applicable, non-privileged and non-confidential information about where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically.

COVERTTRACK Stealth V GPS devices are deployed with judicial pre-approval, based on suspect location, rather than geographical consideration.

Complaints A summary of each complaint, if any, received by the City about the Surveillance Technology.

There were no complaints made regarding GPS Trackers.

Audits and
Violations
The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.

There were no audits and no known violations relating to GPS Trackers.

Data
Breaches
Non-privileged and non-confidential information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response.

There were no known data breaches relating to GPS Trackers.

Effectiveness Information that helps the community assess whether the Surveillance Technology has been effective in achieving its identified outcomes.

The GPS ESO trackers were not used during this time period. The program was suspended in mid-March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and has not been reimplemented. Our subscription was renewed and we upgraded our equipment, however, we have not used the trackers during this reporting period.

COVERTTRACK Stealth V GPS trackers are effective in that they provide invaluable information on suspect vehicle locations. During complex investigations, many suspects are moving throughout the Bay area and beyond. These devices assist investigators with developing information regarding suspect locations that may never have been discovered without GPS assistance.

GPS trackers greatly reduce costs associated with surveillance operations. Surveillance operations generally involve three or more officers for the entire duration of an operation. A moving surveillance is extremely resource-intensive, requiring multiple officers in multiple vehicles for extended periods of time.

Evidence can be fleeting, and GPS trackers allow officers to investigate in a timely manner. GPS trackers have assisted officers with recovering evidence that may have been removed or discarded if officers were unable to quickly develop a location for a suspect.

Costs Total annual costs for the Surveillance Technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs.

The annual cost for the COVERTTRACK Stealth V GPS data service is $1,834.53.

ATTACHMENT 3

There was no cost for the GPS “Electronic Stake Out” (ESO) this year. In April of 2022, the police department paid $2,364.88 to upgrade the devices and for three years of tracking service.

There are staff time costs associated with preparing and placing COVERTTRACK GPS trackers. The investigator must prepare a search warrant and obtain a judge’s approval, and a small number of officers must place the tracker on the suspect’s car. The total number of hours is a fraction of the time it would take to do a full surveillance operation involving numerous officers.

There are staff time costs associated with preparing ESO trackers and placing ESO tracker-equipped bikes for bait bike operations. The time associated to prepare an ESO GPS equipped surveillance is approximately two-four hours. The total number of hours is extremely small, given the large number of operations, and resulting arrests from prior cases.

ATTACHMENT 4

Surveillance Technology Report: Automated License Plate Readers October 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2023
Description A description of all non-privileged and non-confidential information about use of the Surveillance Technology, including but not limited to the quantity of data gathered and sharing of data, if any, with outside entities. If sharing has occurred, the report shall include general, non-privileged and non-confidential information about recipient entities, including the names of the entities and purposes for such sharing.

Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) are used by Parking Enforcement Bureau vehicles for time zone parking. The City’s Transportation Division uses anonymized information for purposes of supporting the City’s Go Berkeley parking management program. ALPR use replaced the practice of physically “chalking” tires, which a more effective means of identifying violators.

What data is captured by this technology:

ALPR technology functions by automatically capturing an image of a vehicle's license plate, transforming that image into alphanumeric characters using optical character recognition software, and storing that information, along with relevant metadata (e.g. geo-location and temporal information, as well as data about the ALPR).

How the data is stored:

The data is stored on a secure server by the vendor.

Retention period of data:

During this reporting period collected images and metadata of hits were stored no more than 365 days. Metadata of reads were not stored more than 14 days in accordance with policy 1302. Current use policy adopted September 13, 2022 sets new retention periods that are now in effect.

Summary of ALPR Time Zone Enforcement Data
Read Data (only retained for 14 days)
There was a total of 3,134,195 reads
From 10/1/2022 to 9/30/2023
Hit Data
There were 98,224 “Hits”
36,953 “Enforced Hits” resulted in citation issuance.
1,966 “Not Enforced” hits due to either, 1) ALPR experiencing technical issues and officer unable to validate the hit the system, which only gives option to not enforce, or 2) Officer error in accepting the hit initially.
59,305 Hits were not acted upon for a variety of reasons including but not limited to:
1) Customer comes out to move a vehicle. PEO’s are directed not to issue that citation.

ATTACHMENT 4

2) Officer gets to the dashboard and sees a permit not visible from a previous location.
3) Officer does a vehicle evaluation and confirms that the vehicle moved from the hit location (e.g. across the street within GPS range). 4) Stolen car.
5) Similar Plates.
6) 600-700 GIG cars- 100 revel scooters.
7) Officers mistakenly leave their LPR “on” collecting time zone enforcement data, but leave the area being enforced to drive to another location on another assignment, such as a traffic post at a collision scene. These hits are not enforced.

Genetec is the vendor for the ALPR Time Zone enforcement system. A “read” indicates the ALPR system successfully read a license plate. The information that is generated when a plate is viewed by the ALPR camera is the license plate number, state and geographical (GPS) location it was viewed. A “hit” indicates the ALPR system detected a possible violation, which prompts the Parking Enforcement Officer to further assess the vehicle. At “hit” is when the “read” information is recognized as a license plate that matches, or does not match an entry in a list such as permit list or the stolen vehicle “hot list”. In many cases, hits are “rejected” or “not enforced”, meaning no enforcement action is taken, because the Parking Enforcement Officer determines the vehicle has an appropriate placard or permit, or there is other information or assignment which precludes citation.

Summary of ALPR Law Enforcement Investigative Inquiry Data 1 vehicle inquiry from 10/1/22-9/30/23
The sole inquiry was made in conjunction with a BPD criminal investigation in a stabbing case. The query was made with Chief of Police approval in accordance with Policy 1302.3(b). The inquiry did not reveal any hit or read information.

All BPD ALPR data may only be shared with other law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes, or as otherwise permitted by department policy and law. All ALPR data is subject to the provisions of BPD Policy 415 - Immigration Law, and therefore may not be shared with federal immigration enforcement officials.

Geographic
Deployment
Where applicable, non-privileged and non-confidential information about where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically.

Only Parking Enforcement Vehicles are equipped with ALPRs. ALPRs are deployed based on areas where there are parking time restrictions. ALPRs are not deployed based on geographic considerations not related to parking enforcement.

Complaints A summary of each complaint, if any, received by the City about the Surveillance Technology.

There have been no complaints about the deployment and use of Automated License Plate Readers.

ATTACHMENT 4

Audits and
Violations
The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.

There have been no complaints of violations of the ALPR Surveillance Use Policy.

Data
Breaches
Non-privileged and non-confidential information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response.

There have been no known data breaches or other unauthorized access to Automated License Plate Reader data.

Effectiveness Information that helps the community assess whether the Surveillance Technology has been effective in achieving its identified outcomes.

ALPRs have proven effective in parking enforcement for time zone enforcement.

The ALPR’s ability to read and check license plates while being driven greatly increases efficiency, allowing an operator to cover larger areas more quickly without having to stop except to confirm a hit.

An additional benefit of the Parking Enforcement ALPR system is that 221 “hits” indicated a possible stolen vehicle. These hits allow for the timelier recovery of stolen vehicles in the City of Berkeley.

Costs Total annual costs for the Surveillance Technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs.

The annual system maintenance cost for Genetec is $51,720. This cost is borne by the Transportation Division, which covers warranties, support, and cellular connection costs.

Genetec ALPR units are installed on 22 Parking Enforcement vehicles. Parking Enforcement personnel perform a variety of parking enforcement activities, and are not limited solely to time zone enforcement. Therefore, personnel costs specifically attributable to time zone enforcement are not tracked.

ATTACHMENT 05

Surveillance Technology Report: Street Level Imagery Project October 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2023
Description
A description of all non-privileged and non-confidential information about the use of the Surveillance Technology, including but not limited to the quantity of data gathered and sharing of data, if any, with outside entities. If sharing has occurred, the report will include general, non-privileged and non-confidential information about recipient entities, including the names of the entities and purposes for such sharing.

Street level imagery is utilized exclusively by authorized City staff for infrastructure asset management and planning activities. The street level imagery of City infrastructure assets in the Public Right of Way that is provided to the City will not consist of information that is capable of being associated with any individual or group.

Geographic
Deployment
Where applicable, non-privileged and non-confidential information about where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically.

Street level imagery was collected by driving through the entire community over a three week period. It is accessible to the City through a proprietary third-party application, Street SmartTM.

Complaints
A summary of each complaint, if any, received by the City about the Surveillance Technology.

There have been no complaints about the use of Street Smart TM.

Audits and
Violations
The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.

There have been no complaints with regards to violations of the Surveillance Use Policy.

Data
Breaches
Non-privileged and non-confidential information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response.

There have been no known data breaches or other unauthorized access to Cyclomedia Street Level Imagery data.

ATTACHMENT 05

Effectiveness
Information that helps the community assess whether the Surveillance Technology has been effective in achieving its identified outcomes.

Staff considered hiring contractors to use GPS in the field to create and update the infrastructure asset GIS data. This method is costly and time consuming.

Cyclomedia’s unique and patented processing techniques allow positionally- accurate GIS data to be collected in a cost-effective way and over a shorter period of time than a “boots on the ground” GPS field survey.

The Imagery extracted the following Citywide Infrastructure assets to create accurate and current Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data inventories:
• Bus pads / stops • Pavement marking • Maintenance Access Holes • Storm drains • Pavement Striping • Signs • Curb paint color • Street trees • Parking meters • Traffic lights • Pedestrian Signal
The street level imagery captured was also being used to:

Created a street sign GIS layer with condition assessment to support compliance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Code and provide an accurate inventory of City signs. The existing sign inventory is contained in a spreadsheet that does not have accurate location data.

Created a curb color layer with condition assessment to indicate where there are red, yellow, blue, white and green colors. This is critical to support Public Safety.

Created pavement striping and paint symbol layers to support Transportation Planning and Vision Zero.

Benefits Projected:

The data from the street level imagery is being integrated into the City’s work order and asset management system for planning activities and to document repair and maintenance.

Planners can use the street level imagery provided to the City to take measurements remotely, such as sidewalk width and public right of way impacts at proposed development locations.

The data provides a comprehensive snapshot of the City that would be helpful for cost recovery in the event of a major disaster.

ATTACHMENT 05

City staff can use the street level imagery to plan the location of road markings for pedestrian crossings, bike lanes or other striping.

City staff can remotely take accurate measurements of infrastructure assets to adequately plan for repair and replacement.

City staff can use street level imagery to enhance community engagement. The street level imagery can be used to identify and depict the impact of development such as an intersection restriping plan in order to article before and after conditions.

Costs
Total annual costs for the Surveillance Technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs.

The total cost of the system is $232,611 and is itemized below.

Year
No. Description Cost Notes
1 Licenses $48,000 Resolution No: 69,482-N.S. 30JUN20
1 Professional Services
for asset extraction $139,401 Resolution No: 69,482-N.S. 30JUN20 2 Licenses and Support –
One-Time $41,100 Resolution No: 70,487-N.S. 26JUL22
3 License and Support –
Ongoing Annual Costs $4,110 Resolution No: 70,487-N.S. 26JUL22

ATTACHMENT 06

Surveillance Technology Report: Unmanned Aerial Equipment, Drone October 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2023
Description A description of all non-privileged and non-confidential information about use of the Surveillance Technology, including but not limited to the quantity of data gathered and sharing of data, if any, with outside entities. If sharing has occurred, the report shall include general, non-privileged and non-confidential information about recipient entities, including the names of the entities and purposes for such sharing.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) also commonly referred to as a drone are requested pursuant to our Mutual Assistance protocols. If a situation arises wherein the safety to the community, officers, or the offender can be increased through the means of de- escalation (adding time and distance to the situation) a supervisor can make the request.

All requests go to the Chief of Police and then escalate to the City Manager for final approval. During this period, on two occasions the Police Department sought mutual assistance for drones.

What data is captured by this technology:

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are owned and operated by the respective agency. While each piece of equipment is unique, generally UAV’s can both record video and audio, while transmitting the data to the operator, thereby qualifying as a piece of Surveillance Technology pursuant to BMC 2.99.020.

How the data is stored:

During this reporting period Alameda County Sheriff’s Office (ACSO) and Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office (CCCSO) each assisted the Berkeley Police Department by providing drones on one occasion. Per their policy, ACSO and CCCSO retain images captured during a UAV mission if there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. BPD personnel would request that evidence from ACSO or CCCSO if it was needed in support of criminal activity. During this rating period no data was stored by BPD. During this rating period, the Department authored and released Policies 611 and 1303, setting data storage and retention periods for drones.

Retention period of data:

During this reporting period no data was stored by BPD. During this rating period, the Department authored and released Policies 611 and 1303, setting data storage and retention periods for drones.

Summary of Uses of UAV’s
BPD Case 23-02707 (USE OF UAV)
On 01/19/23, the Berkeley Police Department Special Response Team responded to Oakland to serve a search and arrest warrant at a property related to an armed robbery that occurred in Berkeley on 11/23/22.

Four suspects were able to elude capture the day of the robbery and investigating detectives learned the suspects were in possession of an Ak-47 and another rifle in addition to the handguns used in the robbery.

The UAV was requested to search the property in Oakland from

ATTACHMENT 06

overhead and search the property and residence for a suspect believed to be inside the residence with a gun. By sending the UAV in before officers, the risk of a lethal confrontation is significantly reduced.

Subsequently the City Council was notified of the temporary use of surveillance technology in exigent circumstances.

BPD Case 23-11104 (USE OF UAV)
On 03/07/23, two separate armed robberies via gun occurred within 30 minutes of each other in Berkeley. The suspect vehicle was spotted by BPD Officers, pursued and lost in the Richmond area. The investigation led to an address in the City of San Pablo where the suspect vehicle was found in the driveway with the license plates now removed. A search warrant was obtained for the address and a K-9 Unit was requested and approved to locate the suspect. The responding CCCSD K-9 Unit advised BPD that before they send the K-9 into a residence they first clear the house with a UAV. Realizing that CCCSD was going to utilize a UAV to assist in our investigation, BPD officers made a request to utilize the technology per the Surveillance Ordinance. Subsequently the City Council was notified of the temporary use of surveillance technology in exigent circumstances.

Geographic
Deployment
Where applicable, non-privileged and non-confidential information about where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically.

A UAV was used twice during this reporting period; once at an address in Oakland and once at an address in San Pablo. Search warrants were obtained for both addresses prior to use of the UAV.

Complaints A summary of each complaint, if any, received by the City about the Surveillance Technology.

During this reporting period the City received no complaints about the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV).

Audits and
Violations
The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.

An audit of the two uses of UAV during the reporting period found that both uses were within policy.

Data
Breaches
Non-privileged and non-confidential information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response.

There have been no known data breaches or other unauthorized access to any of the data from the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV).

Effectiveness Information that helps the community assess whether the Surveillance Technology has been effective in achieving its identified outcomes.

ATTACHMENT 06

In two instances, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) were used to search properties before officers. This allowed officers to see video from the UAV and confirm a suspect was not waiting inside with a gun. By sending the UAV in before officers, the risk of a confrontation that could result in death or serious injury to the suspect, others inside the house and officers, is significantly reduced.

Costs Total annual costs for the Surveillance Technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs.

The annual cost for the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) is zero as the uses were covered by the responding agencies under the Mutual Assistance agreement. The only costs associated is staff time at each respective incident, however no costs for the use of the technology was incurred. ACSO has indicated an intent to begin charging agencies for use of UAV technology.

ATTACHMENT 7

Surveillance Technology Report: Fixed Surveillance Video Cameras October 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2023
Description A description of all non-privileged and non-confidential information about use of the Surveillance Technology, including but not limited to the quantity of data gathered and sharing of data, if any, with outside entities. If sharing has occurred, the report shall include general, non-privileged and non-confidential information about recipient entities, including the names of the entities and purposes for such sharing.

During this reporting period the Berkeley Police Department collaborated with the Police Accountability Board, Public Safety Policy Committee, and City Attorney’s Office to author a Surveillance Use Policy, Use Policy, and an Acquisition Report related to the Avigilon External Fixed Video Surveillance Cameras. At the time of submission of this report, an additional fixed camera has been installed at the intersection of University Avenue and Sixth Street to assist in criminal investigations. That camera is managed by the Public Works Department but the Police Department has access for criminal investigations.

As of this report, there are Avigilon external fixed surveillance cameras located at San Pablo Park, the Berkeley Marina, and at the intersection of University Avenue and Sixth Street.

What data is captured by this technology:

The Avigilon external fixed surveillance cameras record and capture non-audio activity (data) for the following purposes:
 To address identified areas of criminal activity.
 To respond to critical incidents.
 To assist in identifying, apprehending and prosecuting offenders.  To document officer and offender conduct during interactions to safeguard the rights of the public and officers.
 To monitor pedestrian and vehicle traffic activity in order to assist with traffic related investigations.
 To document employee, employer, and/or customer conduct during interactions to safeguard the employee, employer, and customer from misconduct.

How the data is stored:

The data on the Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras is stored in secure servers that are managed by the City of Berkeley Radio Shop. Each camera system (San Pablo Park, Berkeley Marina, University Avenue and Sixth Street) has its own respective server for data storage.

Retention period of data:

Video surveillance recordings are not government records pursuant to California Government Code 34090 in and of themselves. Except as otherwise permitted in this section, video surveillance recordings shall be purged within one hundred and eighty (180) days of recording.

ATTACHMENT 7

The Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras at University Avenue and Sixth Street were recently installed and were not accessed during this reporting period.

The Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras at San Pablo Park were accessed three times during this reporting period.
 Youth Services Detectives accessed the cameras while investigating an indecent exposure case that involved a 7-year-old victim. The cameras confirmed the timeframe of the crime and allowed detectives to rule-out a potential suspect.  Homicide Detectives accessed the cameras while investigating a shooting that occurred near the park.
 A newly appointed Property Crimes Detective accessed the cameras to ensure he could log in and understand the area of coverage for future investigations.

The Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras at the Berkeley Marina was accessed once during this reporting period.
 Property Crimes Detectives accessed the cameras while investigating an auto burglary in the area. The cameras captured the suspect vehicle and license plate which has helped further the investigation.

Data may be shared with the District Attorney’s Office for use as evidence to aid in prosecution, in accordance with laws governing evidence; other law enforcement personnel as a part of an active criminal investigation; and other third parties, pursuant to a court order.

Geographic
Deployment
Where applicable, non-privileged and non-confidential information about where the surveillance technology was deployed geographically.

The Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras are geographically deployed at San Pablo Park, the Berkeley Marina, and at the intersection of University Avenue and Sixth Street.

Complaints A summary of each complaint, if any, received by the City about the Surveillance Technology.

There were no known complaints associated with the Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras.

Audits and
Violations
The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations or potential violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response.

There were no audits and no known violations relating to the Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras.

Data
Breaches
Non-privileged and non-confidential information about any data breaches or other unauthorized access to the data collected by the surveillance technology, including information about the scope of the breach and the actions taken in response.

There were no known data breaches related to the Avigilon fixed use cameras.

ATTACHMENT 7

Effectiveness Information that helps the community assess whether the Surveillance Technology has been effective in achieving its identified outcomes.

Avigilon external fixed video surveillance cameras monitor pedestrian and vehicle activity and can assist investigators with criminal and traffic related investigations. The cameras are also meant to prevent and deter criminal activity, and augment police resources in a cost-effective manner.

Costs Total annual costs for the Surveillance Technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs.

The initial cost of the San Pablo Park Cameras was $64,829.46 The initial cost of the Marina cameras was $106,620.14
The annual cost for maintenance and other ongoing costs, including compliance and other reporting and oversight requirements is $13, 443.20.

The cost for the camera at University Avenue and Sixth Street was $36,346.30, not including staff time related to the project.

Energy 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

ACTION CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Energy Commission
Submitted by: Bentham Paulos, Chairperson, Energy Commission Subject: Recommendation on Climate, Building Electrification, and Sustainable Transportation Budget Priorities for Fiscal Year 2023 and 2024

RECOMMENDATION
The Energy Commission recommends that the Berkeley City Council prioritize and include in the City’s budget for the Fiscal Years Ending (FYE) 2023 and 2024 several staff positions, pilot projects, investments in electric vehicles and charging infrastructure, and other measures to ensure that the City’s budget is aligned with and provides adequate and needed funding to implement the City’s adopted Climate Action Plan, Electric Mobility Roadmap, Building Emissions Saving Ordinance, 2019 ban on gas in new construction, and the Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On September 14, 2023, the Budget and Finance Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Arreguin/Harrison) to send the item to the City Council with a qualified positive recommendation, and that the Council consider the following:

1. Planning Department’s request to continue funding the position of Green Building Program Manager.

2. Specific recommendations in the item around integrating low carbon mobility into the Street Maintenance budget.

3. For the one-time funded pilot programs and positions, assess their effectiveness and consider on-going funding.

4. Direction to staff to look at grant opportunities, in particular the Federal Inflation Reduction Act, to create charging infrastructure particularly at the Zero Waste Facility as the transfer station is being rebuilt.

Vote: All Ayes.

SUMMARY
In this memo, the Energy Commission (which disbanded March 31, 2022, and was merged with the Community Environmental Advisory Commission in April 2022) provides details on specific budget and funding priorities for: staffing an Electric Mobility Coordinator and the Green Buildings Program Manager; fully funding the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot project (especially to avoid risking loss of state

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
funding); accelerate funding for the City’s delayed fleet replacement with electric vehicles, residential electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and electric bike parking infrastructure; expanding public engagement and outreach; leveraging street maintenance budgets to incorporate and promote low-carbon mobility; and adopting policies and creating incentive programs to advance transportation and building electrification such as using the Transportation Network Company (TNC) User Tax General Fund revenue to fund bike and pedestrian projects and using a portion of the Transfer Tax to create an incentive program for residential building electrification.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The specific fiscal impacts are detailed in the budget recommendations below. At least one of our priority budget recommendations – to fully fund the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot – is urgent and time-sensitive and cannot wait until the June budget process. Any delay risks Berkeley losing access to substantial state funding that could support this pilot.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Berkeley has been a world leader on climate change and building electrification, as well as on zero waste. The City has already adopted an ambitious climate action plan and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals.1 Between our Building Emissions Savings Ordinance2, 2019 ban on gas in new construction, the 100% renewable option with East Bay Community Energy, and the Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy3 (BEBES), approved by the Council last year4, we continue to lead the world with our thoughtfulness and action.
1 In 2006, voters overwhelmingly passed ballot Measure G and established Berkeley’s goal to Reduce our entire community’s greenhouse gas emissions by 80% below 2000 levels by 2050. Since then, the City has adopted a Climate Action Plan (2009).

On June 12, 2018, the Council passed item 30 which adopted a resolution establishing the goal of becoming a Fossil Fuel-Free City. Of the recommendations in the resolution, one was that “All future City government procurements of vehicles should minimize emissions and set a goal of transitioning the city’s vehicle fleet to all electric vehicles.”
Also, on June 12, 2018, the Council passed item 49 “Declaration of a Climate Emergency” which refers “to the Energy Commission to study and report back to Council on a path for Berkeley to become a “Carbon Sink” as quickly as possible, and to propose a deadline for Berkeley to achieve this goal” ideally by 2030.
2 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/BESO/
3 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Berkeley%20Existing%20Bldg%20Elect%20Strategy_Final_102021.pdf 4 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/12_Dec/Documents/2021-12- 14_Item_06_Minutes_for_Approval.aspx

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
However, the task in front of us is daunting. With 60% of the City’s emissions coming from the transportation sector and 36% from the building sector,5 we must redouble our efforts to reduce climate emissions from transportation and buildings through electrification of buildings and transportation, sustainable low- and zero-carbon transportation modes, and other efforts. With the upcoming budget processes, we have ample opportunity to take necessary next steps to reach our zero emissions goals.

The Energy Commission has identified the following priority items related to climate, buildings, and transportation in the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 budget to ensure that the budget aligns with the City’s adopted climate action plan and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals.

At least one of our priority budget recommendations – to fully fund the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot – is urgent and time-sensitive and cannot wait until the June budget process. Any delay risks Berkeley losing access to substantial state funding that could support this pilot.

At its meeting of February 23, 2022, the Energy Commission voted to send this recommendation to the City Council by a vote of 6-0-0-1 [Moved Tahara, Second Paulos. Ayes: Paulos, Wolf, Tahara, Moore, Guliasi, Zuckerman. Noes: None. Abstain:

None. Absent: de Tournay Birkhahn].

Budget Priorities Recommended by the Energy Commission
I. Budget Priorities to Increase Staff Capacity to Implement the City’s Established Climate, Transportation, and Clean Energy Policies and Priorities

1. Fund and Hire Staff to Implement the Electric Mobility Roadmap. The City had previously approved the hiring of an Electric Mobility Coordinator within the Public Works Department6 to assist with implementation of the Berkeley Electric Mobility Roadmap adopted in July 20207; but, at the time of writing, no position has been posted, now a year and a half after approval of the Roadmap. 5 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2022/02_Feb/Documents/2022-02- 08_Presentations_Item_17_Pres_Planning_pdf.aspx
6 Budget Referral from Councilwoman Harrison, March 30, 2021. The Energy Commission’s understanding is that this position was included in the FY21-22 Budget to commence half-way through the fiscal year or as an “unfunded council referral,” which was supposed to be funded via savings from other cuts or delayed expenses.
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/03_Mar/Documents/2021-03- 30_Item_25_Budget_Referral_Allocate_Funding.aspx
7 On July 21, 2020, the Council passed item 1, adopting the Berkeley Electric Mobility Roadmap.

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
The Council has been a leader in adopting resolutions acknowledging the need for a prompt transition away from fossil fuels and strategies for how to do so.8 But, without additional staff capacity, and exacerbated by recent staff departures and necessary pandemic re-assignments, the City has not been able to make adequate progress on implementing initiatives to reduce global warming pollution from the transportation sector, which is the largest emitter of global warming pollution in Berkeley.9 Existing staff’s capacity is simply inadequate to lead implementation of the groundbreaking, transformative Roadmap in addition to their current responsibilities, and relying only on existing staff to implement will continue to cause unacceptable delays. To implement the Electric Mobility Roadmap, it is critical that the City fund and hire additional staff beginning in the FY 2023 budget.10

2. Increase Staff Necessary to Implement the Berkeley Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy, and Ensure Durable Funding for Critical Staff Positions. In addition to the Electric Mobility Coordinator position, the Energy Commission believes it should also be a priority for the City to enhance staff capacity for implementing other climate and clean energy initiatives, such as, but not limited, to the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy11 and Climate Equity Action Fund.12
City staff has and continues to do impressive work with limited staff. However, the scope of the task ahead of us is massive. As laid out by the BEBES, there are no fewer than 57 policy actions (Table 3-5, BEBES) that the City should take in order to 8 Ibid.
9 59% of GHG emissions in Berkeley come from transportation, followed by 39% from buildings.. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/07_Jul/ Documents/2020-07-21_Special_Item_05_Climate_Action_Plan_pdf.aspx (July 21, 2020). 10 This single staff person will have an outsized impact, as they will be responsible for establishing and coordinating the Electric Mobility Roadmap Implementation Working Group as called for in the Roadmap.

This Working Group was supposed to be convened within six months of the Roadmap’s approval, but in the absence of staff capacity, it still has not been done. The Working Group’s mandate includes tracking and evaluating Roadmap implementation progress. Without the Working Group, there is no accountability for the City to deliver against its stated electric mobility plans. 11 On November 30, 2021, the Council passed item 13, adopting the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy. Phase 1 (2021-2025) actions for the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy will lay the groundwork to support wide-spread transition to electrified buildings in Berkeley.

Policies included in Phase 1 will involve continued community engagement, pilot projects, education campaigns to demonstrate the benefits and feasibility of electrification, collaboration with labor and workforce organizations to advance inclusive high road jobs, alignment of existing programs and incentives, and the development of additional incentive programs as well as larger scale funding and financing programs such as tariffed on-bill financing. The City of Berkeley will work with partners such as East Bay Community Energy and Pacific Gas & Electric to develop larger scale Phase 2 projects. There will also be a need to collaborate with regional and State partners to align State policies to support Phase 2 actions. (Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy, p. 95.) 12 The City recently issued an RFP for the Climate Equity Action Fund. but existing staff do not have the capacity to maximize program impact and collect lessons learned from this innovative fund.

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
decarbonize the building sector by 2045, let alone by 2030, which the science demands of comparatively wealthy municipalities such as ours. Many of these actions involve substantial education and regulatory initiatives, which can only be achieved with the addition of dedicated, skilled staff.

Although we defer to staff with respect to the specifics of what additional positions might be most useful, some critical actions include:
● Ensuring durable, long-term funding for the Green Buildings Program Manager.

Although hiring has only recently begun, this role was approved as part of the 2019 gas ban,13 and its extension will be critical in helping to develop future code amendments and help to reduce permitting overhead, improve compliance, and address the myriad other regulatory questions identified in the BEBES. ● Supporting and expanding staffing across the City for programs related to tenant protections and anti-displacement, such as those listed in Appendix C of the BEBES. As we electrify our existing building stock, we will need to evolve and augment our existing policies to protect marginalized communities at risk of displacement (CC-9, BEBES). We cannot afford for these policies to lag behind the pace and scale of electrification measures in the city. ● Supporting and expanding OESD staff to facilitate updates to the 2009 Climate Action Plan as appropriate and programs to facilitate Berkeley's ambitious new greenhouse gas limit goals. For example, last year the Council passed a Resolution establishing a 2030 emission reduction target that reflects Berkeley’s fair share of the 50% global reduction in CO2e – 60.5% from 2018 levels by 2030.14 Council is also actively considering more stringent and binding targets across its sector-based and consumption inventories. These new initiatives will have significant implications for the City’s approach to building decarbonization.

While we fully support these ambitious targets, efforts to implement them have been largely unfunded and understaffed. Achieving these targets will require a significant expansion of the City's climate staff capacity.

II. Budget Priorities to Advance Clean Transportation in Berkeley

1. Fund City Fleet Electrification and Charging. On June 29, 2021, the City adopted item 25 approving the recommendations in the City Auditor’s report “Fleet Replacement Fund Short Millions”15, which directed staff to adjust the fleet 13 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2019/12_Dec/Documents/2019-12- 03_Supp_2_Reports_Item_24_Supp_Arreguin_pdf.aspx
14https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/11_Nov/Documents/2021-11- 30_Item_14_Cities_Race_to_Zero_Campaign__2030_emission_reduction_target.aspx 15 Fleet Replacement Fund Short Millions, Berkeley City Auditor, June 29, 2021. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/06_June/Documents/2021-06- 29_Supp_2_Reports_Item_25_Supp_Auditor_pdf.aspx.

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
replacement funding model and budget, ensuring that the City’s transition to electric vehicles (EVs) aligns with its adopted GHG emissions goals. On September 14, 2021, the Council adopted the recommendation from item 27 “Recommendations for Fleet Electrification Policy and Financing”,16 made by the Energy Commission, which referred to the City Manager to update the Municipal Fleet Electrification Assessment and EV charging funding priorities to respond to the City Auditor’s Report and align with the objectives stated in the Electric Mobility Roadmap and prioritize municipal fleet modal shift to electric bicycles and other forms of zero- emissions mobility where feasible.

The Fleet EV Plan identified 32 vehicles to replace with EVs in FY 2021, requiring an estimated $1.16 million; but, as of June 2021, Public Works had only $747,000 to replace 29 vehicles scheduled to be replaced with EVs in FY 2021. The Energy Commission’s recommendation noted that delaying replacement of these vehicles in 2021 would result in greater GHG emissions:
“For example, per the Fleet EV Plan, if the City does not replace light-duty internal combustion cars with EVs as scheduled in 2021, it will produce an estimated additional 10.6 MT of GHG emissions in 2021; if not replaced as planned in 2022 an additional 19.5 MT of GHGs would be emitted in 2022; and so on.” (page 4).

It is the Energy Commission’s understanding that East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) has offered to provide substantial investments in the City of Berkeley for EV charging infrastructure, which would support progress on the City’s fleet electrification and free up City funds that would otherwise have been spent on EV charging infrastructure. The Energy Commission urges the Council to resolve the budget gaps identified in the Auditor’s report and explore additional funding sources so that the City can accelerate its purchases of EVs and the associated EV charging infrastructure in FY 2023.

A global microchip shortage resulting in prolonged supply chain delays and long wait times for the delivery of EVs is compounding the necessity for the City to take immediate action on fleet replacement. These delays are being exacerbated by the recent surge in demand for EVs. As more municipalities similarly pass electrification plans, Berkeley will see increasing competition for the same vehicles. The City must thus plan and order ahead if it wants to have a smooth fleet transition. The City should also commence its purchase of e-bikes for the years ahead, as replacements to existing City vehicles where appropriate. E-bikes are both highly cost effective and may not face the same supply chain delays as electric cars and trucks. The 16 Recommendations for Fleet Electrification Policy and Financing, From Energy Commission, Sept 14, 2021. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/09_Sep/City_Council__09-14-2021_- _Regular_Meeting_Agenda.aspx - Item 27

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
Energy Commission recommends that the Council prioritize these municipal fleet EV replacements, along with the associated EV charging infrastructure, in the FY 2023 budget.

2. Expand Infrastructure for Residential EV Charging and E-Bike Parking. The City should prioritize funds to address solutions for residential curbside EV charging.

The City’s Residential Curbside EV Charging Pilot Program17 sunset in 2020. The development model the pilot used – private ownership of a charger on the side of a public street – was not successful. While 62 residents applied for the program, only four on-site and seven curbside chargers were installed - high permitting fees, restrictive engineering requirements, lack of control of the parking space adjacent to the charger, and poor access to electrical supply resulted in high costs.18 Given the number of Berkeley residents who do not have access to a driveway or garage, the Electric Mobility Roadmap identified as a high priority the need to deploy curbside charging for electric cars, particularly in neighborhoods with high rates of multifamily and rental housing. The next phase of curbside charging will incorporate lessons learned from the Pilot, investigate alternative strategies, identify state and federal funding sources, and explore partnerships with EBCE and EV charging companies.

The City should also investigate the potential to provide public secure parking for other types of fossil fuel-free vehicles, namely e-bikes and cargo bikes, for apartment dwellers. E-bikes and cargo bikes tend to be larger and heavier than regular bicycles, making them difficult to carry up steps. A paid, public parking system, such as the BikeLink lockers at BART stations, may be adapted to street parking near apartment buildings.

The Council should allocate funds in the budget for an electric mobility staff person who would oversee new projects — research other cities’ approaches, evaluate Berkeley's codes, standards, and permitting processes, and conduct feasibility studies — along with funds for the pilot projects themselves.

3. Incorporate Low-Carbon Mobility into Street Maintenance Budget. While Council is considering a bond measure that would make capital investments in our transportation system, the City should also revisit how the maintenance budget can be used to promote low-carbon mobility.

The Council has approved multiple plans to promote safe, equitable, and low-carbon mobility for all. These “complete streets” concepts are captured in the Bicycle Plan, 17 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/Manual%20with%20attachments%2012-1-14.pdf 18 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2018/02_Feb/Documents/2018-02- 27_Item_16_Residential_Curbside_Electric.aspx

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
Pedestrian Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, and analysis of Safe Routes to School.19 But many of the measures in these plans have been implemented slowly, if at all.

The Council should direct the Public Works Department to follow these plans to the letter, and integrate all low-cost and rapidly deployable concepts from the plans into their ongoing maintenance. The timing of deploying higher cost measures may necessarily depend on funding.20
On January 18, 2022, the Council adopted item 19, referring a budget item to use Transportation Network Company (TNC) User Tax General Fund revenue to build and maintain protected bicycle lanes and crossings, pedestrian street crossings, and quick-build public transit projects under the Street Repair Program. The Energy Commission recommends that the Council follow through on its plan to use this revenue to benefit transportation projects in Berkeley.

III. Budget Priorities and Financial Incentives to Advance Building Decarbonization in Berkeley

1. Fully Fund the Building Electrification and Just Transition Pilot Project. In the December 2021 Annual Adjustment Ordinance (AAO) budget process, the Mayor declared, and the Council approved, that the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot (“the pilot”)21 be a first priority to be funded in the May 2022 AAO.22 Consistent with the City’s “targeted universalism” approach to building electrification,23 the pilot intends to kick-start electrification among affordable housing and low income (LMI) communities through incentives, and develop high-road jobs through labor standards and contractor prequalification. 19 See Bicycle Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, Safe Routes to School. 20 A related concept is that the Council should consider giving a more formal policy status to Bicycle Boulevards. While the Boulevards serve as a useful wayfinding tool for cyclists, their designation does not give the streets a meaningful status, and no prioritization when it comes to City planning or operations.

For example, places where Bicycle Boulevards cross busy streets, such as at California/Dwight or Channing/San Pablo, face years of delay before safe crossing solutions can be implemented. Numerous Bicycle Boulevards suffer from extremely poor pavement condition. Stop signs often favor cars instead of the Boulevards, and lighting can often be sub-standard. All of these factors undermine achievement of City plans, threaten public safety, and lock in carbon pollution. Direction from the Council to staff could take the form of a formal designation of the Boulevards as a category of street, just as Public Works delineates “arterials” and “collectors” when it comes to planning and operations. 21 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/11_Nov/City_Council__11-30-2021_- _Regular_Meeting_Agenda.aspx
22 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2021/12_Dec/Documents/2021-12- 14_Supp_2_Reports_Item_44_Supp_Mayor_pdf.aspx
23 According to the BEBES: “Targeted Universalism is the practice of setting a universal policy goal...while identifying targeted strategies and actions specifically for marginalized communities to ensure that those communities can benefit from the policy goal.”

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
Funding for this item in the May AAO is critical, and cannot wait until the June budget process. Any delay risks losing access to substantial state funding that could multiply the reach and impact of the pilot. The California TECH initiative, an $120 million initiative established by SB 1477, recently began offering incentives for heat pump space and water heating that can defray nearly $10,000 of cost per home,24 including the cost of an electric panel upgrade. These incentives are accessible to contractors via the BayREN Home+ programs, which will simplify administration of the pilot due to its use of pre-qualified contractors.

There is additional urgency as well. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is looking at phasing out the sale of NOx-emitting appliances by the end of the decade,25 which will significantly affect the availability of non-electric space and water heating. However, BAAQMD recognizes that such a rule can only be effective if there is sufficient financial support for disadvantaged communities and a robust installer network (things the BEBES also calls out) so that everyone can reap the benefits of zero-pollution appliances without facing substantial costs. These costs cannot be borne by cities alone, but Berkeley can lay the groundwork to leverage state and federal money with its pilot and thus significantly contribute to the regional effort to improve air quality and GHG emissions.

2. Use Transfer Tax Revenues to Provide Incentives for Electrification. With soaring home prices, the transfer tax represents a durable source of funds that the City should leverage to accelerate our building electrification goals. There are two potential models to consider.

First, would be to model a rebate program after the Seismic Retrofit Refund Program26 that would rebate a percentage of the transfer tax with a value up to the cost of a typical electrification package for electrification measures completed within one year of transfer. This would incentivize electrification at a time when there is large access to capital, and could lay the groundwork for an ultimate requirement to retrofit at time of sale. OESD staff have already provided Council with a draft ordinance and indicate that each year on average 800 units would qualify through this mechanism.27
The Energy Commission recommends that Council move forward with this ordinance but with a cap on the amount of eligible homeowner rebates per year. These rebates 24 For single-family homes (up to 4 units), including “enhanced” incentives for HPWH. See: https://energy- solution.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/TECH-Single-and-Multifamily-Incentives.pdf 25 https://www.baaqmd.gov/rules-and-compliance/rule-development/building-appliances 26 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Finance/Home/Real_Property__Transfer_Tax_Seismic_Refunds.aspx 27 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/07_Jul/Documents/2020-07- 21_Special_Item_03_Referral_Response_Ordinance_pdf.aspx

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
are critical to the City’s long-term strategy of phasing in potential electrification mandates as feasible.

At the same time, as a diverse and majority renter city, it is critical that electrification subsidies are also available for units occupied by rent controlled or below market rate tenants. As a second model option, a percentage of the transfer tax refund program (for example, the difference between the reserved and actual rebate amounts) might be simultaneously allocated to expand electrification work among those LMI and minority communities most affected by inequality, pollution, climate change, or at risk of displacement. This could come in the form of expanding the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot and Climate Equity Fund to reach more households, or other incentive programs targeted at those same communities.

3. Adopt Policies to Promote Implementation of Low-cost, Partial Electrification measures. In addition to enacting full retrofit programs, we recommend that the Council consider low-cost, partial electrification measures to maximize the immediate climate and health impacts of electrification measures. For example, a requirement that any AC installation instead be a heat pump (TR-7, BEBES) could be coupled with a subsidy for LMI communities to pay for the cost difference between an AC and an equivalent heat pump model, which is estimated to be between just $200 and $500 wholesale.28 An installer subsidy of $676 alone could be enough to nearly double heat pump market share even absent a mandate29.

Other low-cost measures might include the purchasing and distribution of portable heat pumps to provide cooling to households on our increasing number of hot days (newer inverter models offer substantial energy savings over traditional portable ACs30), portable induction units as both a gateway into electric cooking and a mechanism to reduce indoor NOx pollution that has been demonstrated to cause asthma in small children,31 as well as weatherization work to make homes safer, more comfortable, and to reduce energy use. Council might also consider rebates for electrification at time of replacement, or provide access to equipment purchased under bulk purchasing agreements as part of the Building Electrification and Just Transition pilot program.

IV. Budget Priorities to Educate and Engage Berkeley Residents in Implementing Transportation and Building Electrification

1. Expand Sustainability Outreach Events. In conjunction with implementation of the Electric Mobility Roadmap and Existing Building Electrification Strategy, it is 28 https://www.clasp.ngo/research/all/3h-hybrid-heat-homes-an-incentive-program-to-electrify-space-heating-and- reduce-energy-bills-in-american-homes/
29 ibid
30 https://www.midea.com/us/air-conditioners/portable-air-conditioners/midea-duo-smart-inverter-portable-air- conditioner-map12s1tbl
31 https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=310879

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023
appropriate for the City to continue and expand public engagement on alternative transportation and green building solutions.

Increasing electric mobility awareness and education is a key strategy in the Electric Mobility Roadmap for achieving the City’s zero net carbon goals. Berkeley has already organized four highly successful annual Ride Electric events, which brought the public together to learn about and, in certain cases, test drive EVs and e-bikes.

The City has also partnered successfully with other local groups to organize in- person and virtual green building tours that feature clean energy, energy and water conservation, gray water, electric appliances, and garden features.

As technologies and incentives evolve, more members of the public consider adopting electric mobility and building electrification technologies, and as the City increases its e-mobility expertise through additional staffing, these events can and should continue to play an important role in getting Berkeley residents to transition away from fossil fuels. The Roadmap states that the City will expand electric mobility education and outreach activities, with a goal of increasing awareness of electric mobility options and incentives.32 To deliver on this commitment, the City must allocate funds for these events in its next budget.

With its recent adoption of the Existing Building Electrification Strategy, the Council must expand funding for sustainability outreach events to also address needs identified in the Strategy. For example, the Strategy identified a need for education to address the steep learning curve and cultural sensitivity around cooking with electric stoves, as cooking is a cultural asset and many feel strongly about cooking with gas stoves.33 While the City has hosted building electrification events, including loan programs for residents to try out electric induction cooktops, it will need to do more to engage residents in adopting electric heat pumps, induction stoves, and other technologies.

BACKGROUND
The City has existing mandated climate goals and emissions reductions commitments, and already-adopted strategies, such as the Electric Mobility Roadmap and the Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy. Furthermore, the City has already approved certain staff positions and investments, such as an Electric Mobility Coordinator position and commitments to replace the City’s vehicle fleet with electric vehicles on a schedule. The City is falling behind in hiring and filling needed positions and in executing on needed investments. The budget recommendations proposed by the Energy Commission in this memo seek to ensure the City stays on track to meet its goals. 32 Berkeley Electric Mobility Roadmap, p. 43.
33 Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy, p. 42.

Energy Commission Recommendation FYE 23 and 24 Budget Priorities Action Calendar November 7, 2023

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
If the Council further delays investments or doesn’t include our recommended priorities in the upcoming budget, it puts at risk the health and safety of Berkeley’s residents, the City’s achievement of its adopted and mandated climate, clean energy, and transportation goals, and its national and global leadership on addressing climate change in innovative ways.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Energy Commission commends the Council for its many years of leadership to reduce Berkeley’s global warming pollution and to advance clean energy solutions for the transportation and building sectors. Our budget is a declaration of our values. We have a tremendous opportunity to accelerate building decarbonization while improving equity through targeted universalism, and we must seize the moment to secure a safer, healthier, more resilient future.

However, if the Council further delays investments in staffing, fleet electrification and electric vehicle charging infrastructure, building maintenance and retrofits, and public education in the FYE 2023 and 2024 budget, it puts at risk the health and safety of Berkeley’s residents, the City’s achievement of its adopted and mandated climate, clean energy, and transportation goals, and its national and global leadership on addressing climate change in innovative ways. The Energy Commission thus urges the City Council to incorporate the above stated priorities into its FYE 2023 and 2024 budget.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
We did not consider excluding these items from the budget.

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager recommends that the content and recommendations of the Commission’s Report be referred to the budget process.

CONTACT PERSON
Billi Romain, Energy Commission Secretary, 510-981-7432

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

ACTION CALENDAR
NOVEMBER 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Peace and Justice Commission
Submitted by: George Lippman, Chairperson, Peace and Justice Commission Subject: Referral of two health educator positions to the COB FY 2024 budget process
RECOMMENDATION:

Refer to the budget process a request for estimated $150,000 annually, beginning in FY 2024 or as early as the AAO #2 process in spring 2023, for staffing, materials, and supplies to be able to more broadly and flexibly conduct health education, prevention, and outreach to reduce health disparities, as proposed by the Peace and Justice Commission.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On September 14, 2023, the Budget and Finance Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Harrison/Kesarwani) to send the commission item and companion report to the City Council with a negative recommendation, express thanks to the Peace and Justice Commission for their work, and recognize that there is a need for community- and school-based public health outreach, and that the City should consider the recommendation after the completion of the community health assessment. Vote: All Ayes.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Estimated annual cost: $150,000. This estimate was given by Dr. Lisa Warhuus, HHCS Director, for staffing, materials, and supplies to be able to more broadly and flexibly conduct health education, prevention, and outreach to reduce health disparities.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS:

According to HHCS Director Dr. Lisa Warhuus, “the overriding health challenge in Berkeley are health disparities....For many years, we have seen significant disparities between the health status of our white community members (generally well above national averages), and our BIPOC community members. Geographically, this shows up with generally excellent health outcomes for people living in the hills, with less ideal outcomes in zip codes in South and West Berkeley (although this is shifting somewhat with gentrification). In recent years, other high-risk populations would include people

Referral of two health educator positions to the COB FY 2024 budget process ACTION CALENDAR November 7, 2023
experiencing homelessness and, to some extent, the LGBTQ+ community (though we need more research on the latter as it can very dependent upon circumstances). “One of the biggest challenges we have in addressing health disparities is in the communications and outreach (prevention) component of the work. We need to do more culturally responsive outreach to those most negatively impacted by disparities, engage and listen to what people feel is most needed, and work with them to fill that gap. In doing so over the years, our Public Health division has often found that what is most missing is trust in the system, information and education done in a culturally responsive way, and clear access points for medical insurance, coverage, and a medical home. “For instance, in a health assessment conducted by the Public Health Division in 2018, the highest priority identified by Berkeley participants to achieve a healthy community was communities that had access to basic needs and services (i.e. healthcare, housing, healthy food, transportation, etc.), felt connected and was treated with openness, tolerance, and inclusion, and had resources and up to date information on services. “The greatest threats to optimal health that community members identified were high costs of living, food security, and stress/mental wellness with recurring barriers being lack of or limited information and resources available to community members.” At its regular meeting January 9, 2023, the Peace and Justice Commission adopted the following recommendation proposing the hiring of two health educator positions for the next fiscal year.

M/S/C: Bohn, Jaqulin.

Ayes: Lippman, Jacqulin, Bohn, Lee, Morizawa, Gussmann.

Noes: None.

Abstain: Maran.

Absent: Leon-Maldonado.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
N/A

BACKGROUND
Peace and Justice commissioners, along with members of the Commission on the Status of Women and the Community Health Commission, recently met with HHCS Director Dr. Lisa Warhuus and Public Health Manager Janice Chin, at Council’s request, to discuss resources for and obstacles to reproductive health services and education.

Dr. Warhuus clarified that “from the lens of HHCS, the work in Berkeley needs to be centered on health disparities in the larger context first,” and to “ensure that our Public

Referral of two health educator positions to the COB FY 2024 budget process ACTION CALENDAR November 7, 2023
Health Division continuously includes Reproductive and Sexual Health (RSH) work as a part of their broader health education, prevention, and outreach strategy.” HHCS is bringing on a consultant who will organize and engage community members and other stakeholders to create a Community Health Assessment and a Community Health Improvement Plan, including a pilot program to create a health innovation zone to work toward remedying severe health inequities. Performance measures will be tracked through a new web-based population data health platform that will be rolled out as part of this process.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
HHCS would benefit from hiring staff and paying for materials and supplies out of general fund to be able to more broadly and flexibly conduct health education, prevention, and outreach to reduce health disparities.

The department is facing the lack of sufficient resources to do culturally responsive outreach, engagement, and prevention on an unconstrained basis. Engagement of these educators would assist with Reproductive and Sexual Health (RSH) outreach as part of the larger health outreach program.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None

CITY MANAGER
See companion report.

CONTACT PERSON
George Lippman, Chairperson, Peace and Justice Commission Okeya Vance-Dozier, Commission Secretary, (510) 684-0503

Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.cityofberkeley.info/manager

ACTION CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Peter Radu, Assistant to the City Manager Subject: Companion Report: Referral of two health educator positions to the COB FY 2024 budget process
RECOMMENDATION:

Refer to the Peace and Justice Commission’s request for $150,000 annually for staffing, materials, and supplies for health education and outreach to the Budget and Finance Policy Committee for further deliberation.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On September 14, 2023, the Budget and Finance Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Harrison/Kesarwani) to send the commission item and companion report to the City Council with a negative recommendation, express thanks to the Peace and Justice Commission for their work, and recognize that there is a need for community- and school-based public health outreach, and that the City should consider the recommendation after the completion of the community health assessment. Vote: All Ayes.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this recommendation.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS:

The Peace and Justice Commission has requested $150,000 annually to fund two health educator positions. The City Manager does not disagree with the potential merit of this request, but rather recommends that Council clearly identify concrete impacts and outcomes for the positions, as well as a budget source, before referring them for funding.

Moreover, further deliberation allows Council to work with staff to identify any existing baseline services that could be supplemented, which may provide a more cost-efficient means of meeting outstanding needs than hiring new staff.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no environmental benefits nor challenges associated with this recommendation.

Companion Report: Referral of two health educator positions to the ACTION CALENDAR COB FY 2024 budget process November 7, 2023

BACKGROUND
At its regular meeting January 9, 2023, the Peace and Justice Commission adopted the following recommendation proposing the hiring of two health educator positions for the next fiscal year.

M/S/C: Bohn, Jaqulin.

Ayes: Lippman, Jacqulin, Bohn, Lee, Morizawa, Gussmann.

Noes: None.

Abstain: Maran.

Absent: Leon-Maldonado.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
A clearer picture of desired impacts and outcomes associated with this request compared to baseline services, as well as financial implications, should be identified at the Committee level before recommending them to the full Council for funding.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Council could refer this request directly to the budget process.

CONTACT PERSON
Peter Radu, Assistant to the City Manager, (510) 981-7045.

Office of the City Manager

INFORMATION CALENDAR
November 7, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Louis, Chief of Police
Subject: Audit Recommendation Status - Berkeley Police: Improvements Needed to Manage Overtime and Security Work for Outside Entities

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Auditor’s report included 12 recommendations. Ten of the recommendations have been implemented and 2 of the recommendations are in progress. We anticipate the next status update report to be on May 21, 2024.

Included in this is the completion of 5 additional recommendations since the last update.

This includes Policy 1015 being updated to add a restriction on working no more than 7 consecutive days and we have completed our first formal written agreement for doing work for outside entities. Internal directives have been distributed formalizing both a staffing assessment protocol and a process for monitoring how often compensatory time leads to backfill overtime. Additionally, a process was formalized for an Outside Entity Billing Process.

BACKGROUND
On March 3, 2022, the City Auditor’s Office issued its audit, Berkeley Police:

Improvements Needed to Manage Overtime and Security Work for Outside Entities1 This audit report included 12 recommendations. The purpose of this report is to update the City Council on the Police Department’s progress on implementing the City Auditor’s recommendations. This is the third status report for this audit, the first being in November 2022 and the second in May 2023. There was also an update to the Budget and Finance committee in September 2023.
1 City Auditor’s Office Overtime Audit (3/3/2022)
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-04/Berkeley%20Police%20- %20Improvements%20Needed%20to%20Manage%20Overtime%20and%20Security% 20Work%20for%20Outside%20Entities.pdf

November 7, 2023

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff time in addition to the contract costs. The contract for CareWare, approved in 2022 is $191,740 (5-year contract). This software is being utilized throughout the whole Police Department.

CONTACT PERSON
Captain Kevin Schofield, Police Department, (510) 981-5815

ATTACHMENTS

1. Police Overtime Recommendation Table

Internal
Finding Department Expected or
Actual
Implementation
Date
Status of Audit Recommendations, Corrective Plan,
and Progress Summary
Last Period:

Status
Overtime is used
to maintain
minimum patrol
staffing set by
BPD.

1.1 Collect and monitor data on how
often compensatory time leads to
additional backfill overtime and
develop a plan to monitor it.

Police 9/1/2023 Implemented:

BPD now has a formal process to monitor how often
compensatory time leads to backfill overtime with
data from the electronic staffing software. The
Police Technology Unit will create a biannual report
on this data to be reviewed by the Captain of the
Support Services Division and the Office of the Chief.

Started
Overtime is used
to maintain
minimum patrol
staffing set by
BPD.

1.2 Fill vacancies deemed necessary
and/or reallocate staff pending
the reimagining process and a
determination of appropriate
staffing levels.

Police Spring 2023 Started:

The City of Berkeley released an RFP for a "Berkeley
Police Department Workload Organizational Study".

The vendor CityGate was awarded the contract for
this item, with a contract start date of 8/21/23. The
process of providing the vendor with all the
requested materials and documents is nearly
complete. BPD anticipates this project will be
completed in 8-9 months.

Started
Recommendation
Audit Title: Berkeley Police: Improvements Needed to Manage Overtime and Security Work for Outside Entities

Internal
Minimum staffing
levels in BPD’s
Patrol Unit could
cause unnecessary
overtime if not
regularly updated.

2.1 Establish a procedure to regularly
assess minimum staffing and
overall staffing needs of the
department. This process should
document and incorporate criteria
to assess staffing levels, such as
calls for service, other workload,
community input, and other
relevant factors. As BPD prepares
for the rollout of a new software
system, BPD should consider how
to best align the program’s
capabilities with this assessment
process.

Police 9/29/2023 Implemented:

BPD has created a written protocol to assess
minimum staffing and department staffing needs
biannually. The protocol incorporates criteria such
as calls for service and shift availability. The protocol also considers allocation of police resources
geographically, i.e. beat alignment.

Started
Minimum staffing
levels in BPD’s
Patrol Unit could
cause unnecessary
overtime if not
regularly updated.

2.2 Document and define the Patrol
Unit’s minimum staffing levels in a
publicly assessible format.

Police 9/2/2022 Implemented
Minimum staffing
levels in BPD’s
Patrol Unit could
cause unnecessary
overtime if not
regularly updated.

2.3 Document the results of staffing
assessments along with the
assessment criteria. Incorporate
results into staffing projections for
budgetary decision making,
including establishing a sufficient
and appropriate overtime budget.

Police Spring 2023 Started:

A vendor for the organization's workload study has
been selected and BPD is entering into the
contracting process. Once complete, the selected
vendor, CityGate, will provide a final report
documenting the results of the staffing assessment
along with the assessment criteria.

Started

Internal
Officers work
excessive
overtime,
increasing health
and safety risks.

3.1 Update the department overtime
policy to address the fact that
there currently is no limit to the
number of consecutive days
worked and determine the
appropriate limit for overtime
that is enforceable with the goal
of avoiding officer fatigue. The
department may examine other
jurisdictions’ overtime limits as
possible criteria.

Police 8/23/2023 Implemented:

BPD policy 1015 has been updated to include a limit
on the number of consecutive days worked. The
policy also includes limitations on hours worked.

This updated policy was issued on 8/23/23.

Started
Officers work
excessive
overtime,
increasing health
and safety risks.

3.2 Work to implement a staffing
software solution that integrates
overtime management and
scheduling software. Develop
management reports that provide
timely, accurate, and complete
information on overtime usage.

Develop a process for filling
overtime shifts on a voluntary and
mandatory basis, including
supervisor approval. Build in
warnings for when an individual is
approaching overtime limits and
an approval process for allowing
individuals to exceed limits when
deemed necessary according to
the policy.

Police 3/8/2023 Implemented

Internal
BPD has no
contracts for
overtime security
with outside
entities.

4.1 Update A.R. 2.10 and other
department policies to explicitly
include guidance around
department agreements for work
for outside entities, which is paid
for by reimbursements to the City
from the outside entities. Internal
procedures should include
appropriate criteria to identify
and document the benefit to the
City gained by work for outside
entity agreements, and to allocate
resources in a way that does not
negatively impact City operations.

Additionally, BPD should
document their criteria for when
officers are not available or
eligible for work for outside
entities.

Police 5/4/2023 Implemented
BPD has no
contracts for
overtime security
with outside
entities.

4.2 In consultation with the City
Attorney, create contracts with
outside entities in compliance
with City policies and applicable
laws.

Police 8/31/2023 Implemented:

Service agreements for work with outside entities
are being executed and are available on the Police
Department's website:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/document
s/BPD%20Service%20Agreement-final.pdf
Partly Implemented

Internal
BPD has no
contracts for
overtime security
with outside
entities.

4.3 Develop an application for BPD’s
services that is publicly available
and accessible online to any
interested party. Set pay
uniformly according to rank and
hourly rate and include a
reasonable fee that covers the
expenses of administering work
for outside entities including
workers compensation, fuel, use
of equipment, and any other
actual or potentialcosts to the
City.

Police 3/30/2023 Implemented
BPD has no
contracts for
overtime security
with outside
entities.

4.4 BPD should reconcile invoices
with the amounts received for
work with outside entities at
regular intervals. BPD should also
implement procedures to check
invoices for errors prior to billing
outside entities.

Police 3/7/2023 Implemented
BPD has no
contracts for
overtime security
with outside
entities.

4.5 Explore ways to clearly account
for different funds to track
revenues and expenses.

Police 9/29/2023 Implemented:

BPD has formalized a written protocol for an Outside
Entity Billing Process. This document reflects eleven
needed steps from billing through the depositing of
funds with the Finance Department and clearly
identifies a method to track revenues and expenses.

Started

Partly Implemented

Internal

Communications

All communications submitted to the City Council are
public record. Communications are not published directly to the City’s website. Copies of individual communications are available for viewing at the City Clerk Department and through Records Online.

City Clerk Department
2180 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 981-6900

Records Online
https://records.cityofberkeley.info/

To search for communications associated with a particular City Council meeting using Records Online:

1. Select Search Type = “Public – Communication Query (Keywords)”

2. From Date: Enter the date of the Council meeting

3. To Date: Enter the date of the Council meeting (this may match the From Date field)

4. Click the “Search” button

5. Communication packets matching the entered criteria will be returned

6. Click the desired file in the Results column to view the document as a PDF