Berkeley City Council
January 16, 2024

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
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Ferris, Director, Parks Recreation & Waterfront Subject: Contracts: As-needed Derelict Vessel and Debris Removal and Disposal Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt three (3) Resolutions authorizing the City Manager to execute the following contracts, and any amendments, extensions, or other change orders for derelict vessel and debris removal and disposal services as-needed, each for a period of January 17, 2024 to January 16, 2026:

1. Lind Marine, for an amount not to exceed $162,000.

2. Power Engineering Construction, for an amount not to exceed $162,000.

3. Silverado Contractors, for an amount not to exceed $162,000.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Funding is available in the FY 2024 budget for the California Division of Boating and Waterways SAVE 2022 Grant (Fund 607) and in the Marina Minor Maintenance Fund (Fund 608). Additional FY 2024 SAVE 2023 Grant funding will be recommended for appropriation through the second amendment to the appropriations ordinance in Fund 607.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Berkeley Marina requires regular removal of abandoned boats and marine debris from the harbor waters. Each year, approximately five to ten vessels get abandoned by their owners at the Berkeley Marina. These vessels occupy slips in the Berkeley Marina that could otherwise be used to generate dockage revenue for the City. They are a visual blight on our Marina and harm our reputation. Most often, vessels are abandoned because the owners because they lack funds needed for repairs, for dockage fees, or both. Due to the age and neglect of the vessels, they have no value, are not sea-worthy, and are likely to sink. There are also times when large marine debris such as broken dock sections need to be removed from the Marina. Upon execution of these contracts and subsequent task orders, the contractor will be able to safely remove vessels or debris from the Marina, take them back to their shipyard, and properly dispose of them in accordance with federal and state regulations.

As-needed Derelict Vessel Removal contracts CONSENT CALENDAR January 16, 2024

BACKGROUND
Responsibility for derelict and abandoned vessels, unfortunately, often falls on public agencies. For the past 20 years, the Division of Boating and Waterways has provided grant funding assistance to public agencies to properly remove, store, and dispose of abandoned, wrecked, or dismantled vessels or any other partially submerged objects that pose a substantial hazard to navigation, from navigable waterways or adjacent public property, or private property with the landowner’s consent.

In 2022, the City received a SAVE grant (SAVE 2023) from the California Division of Boating and Waterways in the amount of $60,000. In 2023, the City received an additional SAVE grant (SAVE 2024) in the amount of $60,000.

On October 27, 2023, the City published a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) seeking qualified firms or individuals to provide Derelict Vessel/Debris Removal & Disposal services on an as-needed basis (Specification No. 24-11618-C). On November 21, 2023, the City received Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from three (3) marine construction firms. A panel of City staff reviewed the SOQs and selected Lind Marine, Power Engineering Construction, and Silverado Contractors as the best qualified firms to meet the City’s needs.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Derelict, abandoned, and sunken vessels pose a navigational and environmental hazard to the Bay waters at the waters and shoreline of the Berkeley Marina. Removal and proper disposal of these vessels contributes to the improvement of water quality of the waters of the Bay.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront Department has the primary responsibility for removing derelict and abandoned vessels from local waters. This contract will allow the City to safely remove these potential environmental and navigational hazards from the Berkeley Marina.

CONTACT PERSON
Alexandra Endress, Waterfront Manager, 981-6737
Sean Crothers, Waterfront Supervisor, 981-6744
Attachments:

1. Resolution: Contract with Lind Marine

2. Resolution: Contract with Power Engineering Construction

3. Resolution: Contract with Silverado Contractors

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

CONTRACT: LIND MARINE FOR AS-NEEDED DERELICT VESSEL/DEBRIS

REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
WHEREAS, each year, approximately five to ten vessels get abandoned by their owners at the Berkeley Marina because they lack funds to repair the vessels or they lack funds to pay for their dockage fees. Due to the age and neglect of the vessels, they have no value, are not sea-worthy, and are likely to sink. These vessels occupy slips in the Berkeley Marina that could otherwise be used to generate dockage revenue for the City, and these vessels are a visual blight on our Marina and harm our reputation; and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2023, the City published a Request for Qualifications seeking firms or individuals to provide As-needed Derelict Vessel/Debris services (Specification No. 24-11618-C ); and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2023, the City received three (3) submissions, which were reviewed and rated; and
WHEREAS, Lind Marine was determined to be fully qualified and responsive to the City’s request; and
WHEREAS, the desired marine construction firms will be available on an as-needed basis over a two-year period for an amount not to exceed $162,000; and WHEREAS, funding is available in the FY 2024 budget in the California Division of Boating and Waterways SAVE 2022 Grant (Fund 607) and the Marina Minor Maintenance Fund (Fund 608). Additional FY 2024 SAVE 2023 Grant funding will be recommended for appropriation through the second amendment to the appropriations ordinance in Fund 607.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments, extensions, or change orders with Lind Marine for as-needed Derelict Vessel/Debris services for the contract period of January 17, 2024 to January 16, 2026 in an amount not to exceed $162,000. A record signature copy of the agreement and any amendments to be on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

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

CONTRACT: POWER ENGINEERING FOR AS-NEEDED DERELICT

VESSEL/DEBRIS REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
WHEREAS, each year, approximately five to ten vessels get abandoned by their owners at the Berkeley Marina because they lack funds to repair the vessels or they lack funds to pay for their dockage fees. Due to the age and neglect of the vessels, they have no value, are not sea-worthy, and are likely to sink. These vessels occupy slips in the Berkeley Marina that could otherwise be used to generate dockage revenue for the City, and these vessels are a visual blight on our Marina and harm our reputation; and WHEREAS, on October 27, 2023, the City published a Request for Qualifications seeking firms or individuals to provide As-needed Derelict Vessel/Debris services (Specification No. 24-11618-C ); and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2023, the City received three (3) submissions, which were reviewed and rated; and
WHEREAS, Power Engineering was determined to be fully qualified and responsive to the City’s request; and
WHEREAS, the desired marine construction firms will be available on an as-needed basis over a two-year period for an amount not to exceed $162,000; and WHEREAS, funding is available in the FY 2024 budget in the California Division of Boating and Waterways SAVE 2022 Grant (Fund 607) and the Marina Minor Maintenance Fund (Fund 608). Additional FY 2024 SAVE 2023 Grant funding will be recommended for appropriation through the second amendment to the appropriations ordinance in Fund 607.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments, extensions, or change orders with Power Engineering for as-needed Derelict Vessel/Debris services for the contract period of January 17, 2024 to January 16, 2026 in an amount not to exceed $162,000. A record signature copy of the agreement and any amendments to be on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

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

CONTRACT: SILVERADO CONTRACTORS FOR AS-NEEDED DERELICT

VESSEL/DEBRISREMOVAL AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
WHEREAS, each year, approximately five to ten vessels get abandoned by their owners at the Berkeley Marina because they lack funds to repair the vessels or they lack funds to pay for their dockage fees. Due to the age and neglect of the vessels, they have no value, are not sea-worthy, and are likely to sink. These vessels occupy slips in the Berkeley Marina that could otherwise be used to generate dockage revenue for the City, and these vessels are a visual blight on our Marina and harm our reputation; and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2023, the City published a Request for Qualifications seeking firms or individuals to provide As-needed Derelict Vessel/Debris services (Specification No. 24-11618-C ); and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2023, the City received three (3) submissions, which were reviewed and rated; and
WHEREAS, Silverado Contractors was determined to be fully qualified and responsive to the City’s request; and
WHEREAS, the desired marine construction firms will be available on an as-needed basis over a two-year period for an amount not to exceed $162,000; and WHEREAS, funding is available in the FY 2024 budget in the California Division of Boating and Waterways SAVE 2022 Grant (Fund 607) and the Marina Minor Maintenance Fund (Fund 608). Additional FY 2024 SAVE 2023 Grant funding will be recommended for appropriation through the second amendment to the appropriations ordinance in Fund 607.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments, extensions, or change orders with Silverado Contractors for as-needed Derelict Vessel/Debris services for the contract period of January 17, 2024 to January 16, 2026 in an amount not to exceed $162,000. A record signature copy of the agreement and any amendments to be on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jordan Klein, Director, Planning and Development Department Subject: Prevailing Wage Requirements in the Southside Plan Area; Adding Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 13.108

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt first reading of an Ordinance amending Berkeley Municipal Code Title 13 to add Chapter 13.108 --Prevailing Wage Requirements in the Southside Plan Area to establish prevailing wage requirements for projects exceeding 50 units or 50,000 square feet in the Southside Plan Area.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The prevailing wage requirements included in the proposed ordinance would be enforced through project sponsor attestation and private right of action. Therefore, the proposed ordinance would not require additional staff resources to administer.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On November 21, 2023 the City Council adopted zoning changes to increase residential development within the Southside Plan Area.1 The materials considered with the item included a letter from the Planning Commission encouraging the Council to consider the feasibility of prevailing wage requirements.

At its November 21, 2023 meeting, the City Council adopted a motion that included the following language regarding prevailing wage requirements in the Southside:

A development project having 50 or more units, or having 50,000 square feet or more of floor area, that is located in either the C-T District, R-S District, or R- SMU District, is subject to the following prevailing wage requirements:

1. Contractors shall pay all construction workers employed in the execution of the development at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages as set forth in Section 1771 of the California Labor Code, 1 Staff Report regarding Southside Zoning Changes (Council meeting of November 21, 2023). (https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2023-11- 21%20Item%2013%20Amendments%20to%20Berkeley%20Municipal.pdf)

Southside Prevailing Wage Requirements CONSENT CALENDAR January 16, 2024

except that apprentices registered in programs approved by the California Division of Apprenticeship Standards may be paid at least the applicable apprentice prevailing rate.

2. Contractors shall maintain and verify payroll records pursuant to Section 1776 of the Labor Code and make those records available for inspection and copying as provided in that section.

3. Subsections (1) and (2) above do not apply if all contractors are subject to a project labor agreement (or community workforce agreement or similar labor agreement) with the local Building and Construction Trades Council.

The motion included direction to staff to determine the most appropriate location in the Berkeley Municipal Code to include the language. The motion also stipulated that enforcement of the ordinance would be through project sponsor attestation and private right of action.

The proposed ordinance (Attachment 1) includes language to effectuate the direction in the City Council’s motion.

BACKGROUND
The Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) currently includes a single reference to prevailing wage for private development projects in the Downtown Mixed Use (C-DMU) District, including hotels, a building over 75 feet in height, or a building with more than 100 units of housing. Pursuant to BMC Chapter 23.408.060 (Green Pathway—Requirements for Large Buildings and Hotels), applicants that apply for the streamlining provisions of Chapter 23.408 must pay prevailing wage, among other requirements. However, no projects have ever been subject to these provisions. Additionally, the Green Pathways streamlining benefits have been superseded by changes to the BMC and State law that provide more streamlining benefits with fewer requirements.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
California Public Resource Code Section 21065 defines a “project” under CEQA as “an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” The proposed ordinance pertains to the terms of employment for workers on development projects, and would not result in any changes to the physical environment. The proposed ordinance does not consist of a discretionary action that would permit or cause any direct or indirect change in the environment. The proposed ordinance is therefore not a project under CEQA, and further environmental review is not required.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposed ordinance reflects direction from the City Council at its November 21, 2023 meeting.

Southside Prevailing Wage Requirements CONSENT CALENDAR January 16, 2024

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Staff considered including the proposed language in Title 23 (Zoning), as the motion accompanied the Southside zoning provisions that are found in that title. However, staff determined that the proposed ordinance, which pertains to working conditions, was more appropriately located in Title 13 (Public Peace, Morals and Welfare), where similar employment-related regulations are included, such as the Wage Theft Prevention Ordinance and the Helping Achieve Responsible Development with Healthcare and Apprenticeship Training Standards (“HARD HATS”) Ordinance.

CONTACT PERSON
Justin Horner, Associate Planner, Land Use and Development, 510-981-7476 Attachments:
1: Ordinance

1 ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

ADOPTING CHAPTER 13.108 OF THE BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE

PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. Chapter 13.108 is hereby added to the Berkeley Municipal Code to read as follows:

Chapter 13.108

PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS IN SOUTHSIDE PLAN AREA

13.108.010 Title and Purpose

13.108.020 Definitions

13.108.030 Prevailing Wage Requirements

13.108.040 Enforceability

13.108.050 Severability

13.108.010 Title and Purpose.

A. This Chapter shall be referred to as the Prevailing Wage Requirements Ordinance.

B. The purpose of this Chapter is to ensure that developers or contractors involved in the construction of large projects in the Southside Plan area pay workers at least the general prevailing rate set forth in the California Labor Code.

13.108.020 Definitions.

A. “Contractor” shall mean a contractor or subcontractor of any tier that has contracted to perform work on the Covered Project.

B. “Covered Project” shall mean a private development project located in the C-T, R- S, or R-SMU zoning districts that consists of construction or alteration of at least 50 units or 50,000 square feet or more of floor area and which has not received its final approvals (whether in the form of permits, variances, or other entitlements) by the effective date of this Ordinance.

C. “Covered Construction Worker” shall mean any construction worker employed by a Contractor at any time over the duration of the Covered Project.

D. “Registered Apprenticeship Program” shall mean an apprenticeship program jointly managed and administered by both a union and contractor or contractor association, and (i) approved by the State of California’s Division of Apprenticeship

2 Standards; (ii) registered with the U.S. Department of Labor; or (iii) registered with a state apprenticeship agency granted authority by the U.S. Department of Labor to register apprenticeship programs for federal purposes, pursuant to 29 CFR Part 29.

13.108.030 Prevailing Wage Requirements.

A. A Covered Project is subject to the following requirements:

1. Each Contractor shall pay all Covered Construction Workers at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages as set forth in Section 1771 of the California Labor Code, except that apprentices participating in a Registered Apprenticeship Program may be paid at least the applicable apprentice prevailing rate.

2. Each Contractor shall maintain and verify payroll records pursuant to Section 1776 of the Labor Code and make those records available for inspection and copying as provided in that section.

B. Subsections A(1) and A(2) above do not apply if all Contractors are subject to a project labor agreement (or community workforce agreement or similar agreement) with the local Building and Construction Trades Council.

13.108.040 Enforcement
A. Each Contractor must sign a declaration attesting to compliance with this Chapter under penalty of perjury at the time of permit issuance for the Covered Project.

B. Private Right of Action. A Covered Construction Worker, or a joint labor- management committee established pursuant to the federal Labor Management Cooperation Act of 1978 (29 U.S.C. sec. 175a) on a Covered Construction Worker’s behalf, may bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against any Contractor that violates this Chapter and, upon prevailing, shall be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and shall be entitled to such legal or equitable relief as may be appropriate to remedy the violation. Nothing in this Chapter creates a private right of action or otherwise authorizes legal action against the City, its officers, agents, or employees.

13.108.050 Severability
If any part or provision of this Chapter, or the application of this Chapter to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Chapter, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected by such a holding and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the provisions of this Chapter are severable.

Section 2. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be

3 filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-6750 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-audits

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Jenny Wong, City Auditor
Subject: Contract: Ethico for Whistleblower Hotline and Case Management Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Ethico for whistleblower hotline and case management software services for a total amount not to exceed $100,000 for the contract period of February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Funding is available for the FY 2024 budget in the General Fund budget code 011-12-122- 000-0000-000-411-612-990.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Auditor’s Office needs a qualified, third-party vendor to provide whistleblower hotline services for the general public, employees, contractors, and other interested parties to report any activities of fraud, waste, or abuse perpetrated by an employee or agent of the City which activities directly or indirectly have a detrimental effect on the City. The whistleblower hotline will serve as an avenue for interested parties to voice their concerns via a web-based platform or directly to a live person via phone in a confidential and if desired, anonymous manner. Additionally, authorization of this contract will support the ongoing management of the Whistleblower Program by providing a central and secure case management platform.

Contract: Ethico for Whistleblower Hotline CONSENT CALENDAR and Case Management Services January 16, 2024
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-6750 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-audits

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

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The City conducted a competitive procurement process and selected the most responsive and responsible vendor. The City Auditor’s Office has a critical business and operational need for hotline and case management software services as part of implementing the Whistleblower Program.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Jenny Wong, City Auditor, 510-981-6750
Attachment:
1: Resolution

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-6750 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-audits RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

CONTRACT: ETHICO FOR WHISTLEBLOWER HOTLINE AND CASE

MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City released Specification No. 24-11630-C on October 13, 2023 for Whistleblower Hotline;
WHEREAS, two vendors responded, and Ethico was found to be the most responsive and responsible bidder; and
WHEREAS, the City Auditor requires hotline and case management software services to implement the Whistleblower Program;
WHEREAS, funding for FY 2024 is available in budget code 011-12-122-000-0000-000- 411-612-990.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized execute a contract and any amendments with Ethico to provide whistleblower hotline and case management software services from February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027 in an amount not to exceed $100,000.

Office of the Mayor

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Members of the City Council From: Mayor Jesse Arreguin, Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember Sophie Hahn, and Councilmember Susan Wengraf Subject: RFP for Development of West Berkeley Service Center

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the development of the city-owned West Berkeley Service Center, (1900 Sixth Street), to permit site acquisition and construction of a 100-percent affordable housing project with the following key features:
● Space on the ground floor of the building for administrative offices, community space and supportive services as currently provided by the City;
● Maximizing the number of units under the existing zoning Mixed Use- Residential (MU-R) in conjunction with state law AB 1763 (2019); ● A mix of unit sizes, including studios, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom units;
● Require RFP applicants to include a plan for services provision and integration for the population(s) they propose to serve; ● A preference for serving seniors and adults with mental health conditions while maintaining flexibility to serve other populations based on availability of funding.

The City Manager should also consider the feasibility of the following elements in the program design:
● Universally designed housing for older adults with a portion of the units for assisted living and memory care;
● A board and care facility with a minimum of 20 beds including space for staff and services;
● Explore available federal, state, regional, local and private funding sources to finance the construction of a housing project, including with the potential target populations.

CONSENT CALENDAR RFP for Development of West Berkeley Service Center January 16, 2024 Page 2
The issuance of an RFP should be timed to happen soon after funding for the development has been identified.

BACKGROUND
Berkeley General Plan Policy H-18 encourages the use of city-owned sites, including parking lots for affordable housing or mixed-use projects: “When appropriate and feasible, use City-owned or controlled sites for affordable housing and/or mixed-use residential projects with a substantial portion of affordable units.” On May 28, 2019, (Attachment #1), the City Council stated the intent for the use of the West Berkeley Service Center property, 1900 6 th Street, would be used for senior housing with on-site services consistent with Age Friendly Berkeley Plan recommendations and maximizing the number of affordable units on site. They further referred to the City Manager to conduct a basic analysis of the development potential for the site, including build-out scenarios for a three to seven story building on the site that would include amenities, supportive social services, and community space.

Staff returned “Referral Response: Analysis of the Development Potential for the West Berkeley Service Center Site” to Council as a comprehensive Information Report on the September 7, 2023 City Council Agenda. In the report, staff analyzed Zoning Designation, State Streamlining Laws and State Density Bonus to provide considerations for development potential. Current zoning of the site is MU-R. Given staff assumptions as provided in the report (Attachment #2), it could be possible to build 190 units in six stories with AB1763. AB1763 (2019) expands State Density Bonus Laws to housing projects that are 100 percent to low-income households (excluding manager units) with up to 20 percent of units for moderate-income households. Also, projects near transit, such as the West Berkeley Service Center site, are not subject to density limits, may raise height limits by three stories or 33 feet, and are allowed up to four concessions.

Recommendations for Council action included rezoning the site to C-W and allocating funding for environmental review, or referral to the City Manager to develop recommendations to Council that would inform a RFP to develop senior housing on the site under the current MU-R zoning.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The population of Berkeley residents 65 and older has steadily increased in recent years. Projections from multiple sources, including the Alameda County Plan for Older Adults, show that by 2030 over 20% of Berkeley residents will be over 65. Based on surveys completed by the Age Friendly Berkeley Initiative (2018) older adults increasingly prefer to age in their communities with housing affordability and availability, along with transit access, noted as major areas of concern, especially for

CONSENT CALENDAR RFP for Development of West Berkeley Service Center January 16, 2024 Page 3
low-income respondents. Wait lists for affordable senior housing units are as long as 8 years.1
Board and Care facilities operate under the supervision of the Department of Social Services through a Community Care License and are staffed 24 hours per day, seven days per week. They provide residential care for seniors and/or people with disabilities who need assistance in their daily lives including room and board, meals, a supportive living environment with daily activities for participation and entertainment, and assistance with personal care. There is a critical lack of Board and Care facilities in the state. In recent years, the number of licensed board and care facilities, including Adult Residential Facilities and Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly has been declining largely due to inadequate funding and rising housing construction costs. 2 San Francisco has lost more than a third of its facilities that serve seriously mentally ill people under the age of 60 which is consistent with what other counties report, anecdotally, up and down the state. 3 More housing and mental health resources are critical to address the needs of our most vulnerable low-income adults who are most at-risk of homelessness: older adults, persons with disabilities, and persons with severe mental illness.

Currently, the City’s Health, Housing and Community Services Department is utilizing the West Berkeley Service Center to house the West Berkeley Family Wellness Center that provides services such as Women, Infants and Children’s (WIC) program, immunization programs, programs offering nursing support, Berkeley Black Infant Health and free yoga classes. Community Development Block Grant ( (CDBG) funds have been identified for improvements to the facility and have a five-year requirement for use, once all the funds are drawn down, without a pro-rata repayment. These improvements are scheduled to begin during the first quarter of 2024. During that time, a temporary facility will be needed to accommodate the temporary relocation of these programs to ensure continuation of services and activities during the construction period of any new housing project.

It is, currently, uncertain how this proposed development could be funded. The City of Berkeley Housing Trust Fund and funds from the 2018 Bond Measure O are in short supply or already dedicated to other projects. However, additional resources may become available through a proposed regional housing bond measure4 or earmarked 1 Age Friendly Berkeley Action Plan, 2018: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Age- Friendly-Berkeley-Action-Plan.pdf
2White Paper: County Behavioral Health Directors Association, February 28, 2020: Loss of Board and Care Facilities Is at Crisis Level: https://namisantaclara.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Loss-of- Board-and-Care-Facilities-is-at-Crisis-Level-2.28.20.pdf 3 San Francisco Chronicle article: SF Board-and-Care homes for Seriously Mentally Ill Shuttering as Costs Soar, April 16, 2019: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-board-and-care-homes- for-seriously-mentally-13766754.php
4 Bay Area Housing for All website: https://bayareahousingforall.org/

CONSENT CALENDAR RFP for Development of West Berkeley Service Center January 16, 2024 Page 4
funding. Preparing an RFP that would be ready for issuance at the time resources have been identified would expedite development of the West Berkeley Service Center, ensuring critical resources can be provided for the community.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Staff time required for developing recommendations for an RFP. In addition, a budget will need to be developed for the temporary relocation of the West Berkeley Family Wellness Center services and possibly any pro-rata CDBG repayment.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY:

Aligns with environmental sustainability goals by providing housing densification along transit corridors.

CONTACT PERSON:

Mayor Jesse Arreguin (510) 981-7100
Attachments:

1. May 28, 2019 Council referral: Development of the West Berkeley Service Center, 1900 6th Street, for Senior Housing with Supportive Services

2. September 7, 2023, Referral Response: Analysis of the Development Potential of the West Berkeley Service Center Site

ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 1 CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett (Author), Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Co- Sponsor)
Subject: Black History Month Event Berkeley Juneteenth Association, Inc. 501(c)3:

Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to General Fund and Grant of Such Funds
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution approving the expenditure of funds, including $1,500 from the discretionary Council office budget of Vice Mayor Ben Bartlett, to the Berkeley Juneteenth Association, Inc. 501(c)3 for the Black History Month Event. The funds will be relinquished to the City’s General Fund from the discretionary council office budget of Councilmember Ben Bartlett and the discretionary council office budgets of any other Councilmembers who wish to contribute.

BACKGROUND:

Every year, during the month of February, our Berkeley Community honors the Black community by declaring Black History Month. Throughout this month, the goal is to recognize and encourage members of our society to enhance their own knowledge about the impact and influence of Black people in shaping our society, culture, and communities. Black people have made significant contributions in various fields such as science, art, literature, music, and politics. But most importantly, this month is a platform to reduce racial bias as we collectively uplift and celebrate Black voices and perspectives.

To ensure that the funds are properly disbursed and provided to the student participants in this celebration, the proposal is for Berkeley Juneteenth Association, Inc. 501(c)3 to hold their annual event. This organization has been a reliable resource for community members interested in supporting the Berkeley cultural, arts, and history community.

The donation of $1,000 will ultimately fund various vendors for music, food, arts, and other important needs.

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

No negative impact.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
No General Fund impact; $1,000 is available from the discretionary council office budget of Councilmember Ben Bartlett.

The cost is as follows: Berkeley Juneteenth Association, Inc. 501(c)3 Fund: Black History Month Event
CONTACT PERSON:

Councilmember Ben Bartlett [email protected] James Chang [email protected]
ATTACHMENT:

1. Resolution

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, Floor 5, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7130 ● E-Mail: [email protected] 3 RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF SURPLUS FUNDS FROM THE OFFICE

EXPENSE ACCOUNTS OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR A DONATION TO THE BERKELEY JUNETEENTH ASSOCIATION, INC. TO SUPPORT THEIR ANNUAL BLACK HISTORY MONTH EVENT.

WHEREAS, Councilmember Ben Bartlett has surplus funds in his office expenditure account; and
WHEREAS, Berkeley Juneteenth Association, Inc., a California non-profit organization, will receive funds in the amount of $1,500 from Councilmember Ben Bartlett’s office expenditure account; and
WHEREAS, the Berkeley Juneteenth Association, Inc. educates community members about the history and accomplishments of African Americans and creates programming that highlights Black music and culture; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of such an event would fulfill the municipal public purpose of providing community members with educational programs and activities to encourage them to learn and embrace cultural diversity;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that funds relinquished by the Mayor and Councilmembers from their office budgets, of an amount to be determined by each Councilmember, shall be granted to Berkeley Juneteenth Association Inc. for this purpose of supporting their event during Black History Month.

CONSENT CALENDAR
JANUARY 16, 2024
1 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmembers Sophie Hahn (Author) and Rigel Robinson (Co-Sponsor) Subject: Supporting the Installation of Permanent Chess/Games Tables on Telegraph Avenue and Proposing Resolution of Concerns at 2454 Telegraph Avenue

RECOMMENDATION

1. Refer to the FY2025 Budget Process $50,000 to support the installation of fixed or purchase of portable public chess/game tables on Telegraph Avenue, including at or near the intersection of Telegraph and Haste Streets, and potentially elsewhere in Berkeley to support development of a citywide chess & games facility.

2. Refer to the City Manager to explore the potential development of a parklet at or near the Telegraph/Haste intersection, potentially near the South/West corner (beyond the yellow loading area on Haste Street) and other potential locations for a parklet that could accommodate chess/game tables and the volume of community participation this activity generates. Staff should consider who is the appropriate entity to finance such an improvement.

3. Refer to the City Manager the development of a city-wide chess and game facilities program to integrate permanent chess/game nodes into park, curtilage, and/or sidewalk areas throughout Berkeley in a manner that encourages broad participation in and enjoyment of games and supports the building of community around these activities.

Consider appropriate locations for nodes, installation of City-owned facilities, rules and regulations for use, and maintenance.

4. Direct the City Manager to explore entering into negotiations with the property owner at 2454 Telegraph Avenue to achieve an agreement that would result in upgrades and improvements to the building exterior/facade, create a landscaped perimeter around the exposed entry area, improve maintenance, and/or similar terms, in exchange for a reduction/waiver of accumulated fees.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On December 11, 2023, the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity, & Community Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Hahn/Bartlett) to send Item 2 and Item 3 on the Committee’s agenda to the City Council as revised with a positive recommendation. Proposed revisions include consideration of: financing of improvements; negotiations with property

2 owner(s); rules relating to the public right-of-way; and support of city-wide program(s). Vote: All Ayes.

This proposal was discussed at the December 12th meeting of the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity & Community policy committee. The Item was advanced with a Positive Recommendation alongside a separate, complementary item submitted by Councilmember Robinson: M/S/C (Hahn/Bartlett)
Vote: Ayes – Hahn, Bartlett, Humbert; Noes – None; Abstain – None

SUMMARY STATEMENT
In September, Telegraph Avenue’s chess tables were shut down for the second time in two years. Tables were removed after the property owner at 2454 Telegraph received a violation notice for “obstructing the public right of way and violating a use permit.” The result has been very negative for the diverse community of chess players and presents logistical and other challenges for the property owner whose relatively large entry plaza is contiguous with and open to sidewalks on both Telegraph and Haste streets.

Councilmembers have publicly voiced support for the City to resolve all related challenges in a manner that supports the continuation of chess on Telegraph Avenue – and potentially throughout the City of Berkeley – and improves conditions at the corner of Telegraph and Haste streets. This item proposes a path forward on all of these considerations.

BACKGROUND
Chess is one of the oldest games in the word and has become increasingly popular in recent years. It is a cross-generational and cross-cultural activity that doesn’t even require players to speak the same language – offering an exceptional bridge to friendships and camaraderie.

The chess club that has been operating informally at and around the corner of Telegraph and Haste, on both public and private property, has faced challenges in finding appropriate space and facilities to engage in this very positive activity, without infringing on private property or impeding sidewalk access.

The City should encourage and support activities that build community and bring liveliness to our public realm, all while supporting our sidewalk policies and removing undue pressure from private property owners. The City can balance these needs and relieve pressure on sidewalks and private property by installing a permanent cluster of chess tables at or near the Telegraph/Haste intersection, and in City-designated locations across Berkeley, signaling its support for this important play and community building activity.

New York City’s chess tables in Washington Square Park, for example, have been operational for decades, and have attracted chess enthusiasts from all over the city and world, including many legendary grandmasters. Washington Square Park, as well as Union Square and Bryant Park, are regular sites of exhibitions that turn out hundreds of players and spectators. Day-to-

3 day, these spaces are meeting places for diverse individuals and groups, and create vibrant and important community connections.

These proposed measures will allow the City to create, manage, and maintain facilities that encourage games and community building in a manner that supports both players and other users of the City’s public parks and spaces. In addition, the City Council should seek resolution of imposition of fines on the property owner at 2454 Telegraph and improved management of the property, including the publicly-accessible entry plaza – for the benefit of all.

FISCAL IMPACTS
$50,000 to cover the cost of purchasing and installing permanent or portable chess/game tables for Telegraph and possibly other locations. Potential loss of imposed fines and savings in staff and City Attorney resources.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
None.

CONTACT: Councilmember Sophie Hahn - 510-981-7150

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Sophie Hahn (Author), Councilmember Mark Humbert (Co- Sponsor), Mayor Jesse Arreguin (Co-Sponsor), and Councilmember Ben Bartlett (Co-Sponsor)
Subject: Installation of a 3-way Stop at the Intersection of Hopkins and McGee

RECOMMENDATION
Direct the City Manager to install two additional stop signs at the intersection of Hopkins and McGee Streets, transforming the ‘T’ intersection into a 3-way stop, to be installed as soon as possible, and no later than July 31, 2024.

BACKGROUND
The intersection of Hopkins and McGee is located in a busy neighborhood commercial district surrounded by residential areas and schools with significant pedestrian traffic. The three-way intersection of Hopkins and McGee makes a “T” directly in front of a preschool and is an important crossing leading to and from a small strip of popular food shops and restaurants.

Currently, there is only one stop sign at the intersection, at the end of McGee; traffic on Hopkins Street does not stop in either direction (traveling east or west).

Berkeley Little School, directly across from McGee, is one of three preschools located within a few blocks of McGee and Hopkins, the other two being Mustard Seed School on Carlotta Avenue at Hopkins and Hopkins Preschool on Hopkins between Beverly Place and Josephine Streets. In addition to the large number of toddlers and young children and parents crossing Hopkins at McGee, the intersection is located at the eastern end of one of the busiest shopping blocks in North Berkeley. Families and seniors walk from nearby neighborhoods and drive to the area from throughout North Berkeley - and the entire City and region - to shop at the Monterey Market and other food purveyors including one of the most renown fish markets in the East Bay, as well as a bakery, butcher shop, cheese and coffee shop, wine and liquor store, and a popular pizza restaurant. The century-old Berkeley Horticultural Nursery is around the corner on McGee, also drawing large numbers of patrons as well as semi-trailer delivery trucks and vehicles picking up heavy loads.

Two large schools bring more than 1,500 teen-aged students to the area on a daily basis: Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School, with over 900 students, and St. Mary’s High School, with over 600. King Middle School’s campus includes a pool, tennis courts, and track that are used both by students and by members of the public of all ages who flock to the area after school hours and on weekends to use the recreational facilities. Ruth Acty Elementary and the Crowden Music Center are also located 3 blocks away, bringing hundreds more students and families to the area.

While there is a pedestrian crosswalk on Hopkins at McGee, residents of the area have long expressed feeling unsafe crossing the street, and described many near-misses. The area is home to many elderly residents, as well as residents who are visually impaired and/or have limited mobility. Residents report that they routinely step out to help neighbors who are elderly or have mobility issues cross the street safely. Residents of the neighborhood have reached out repeatedly over more than fifteen years - the first written communication shared with us is from 2008 - expressing concern for drivers barreling down Hopkins without regard for the existing crosswalk, and the potential of serious injuries.

More recently, in the course of planning for a larger project that has since been put on hold, a crosswalk was programmed for this location, and shown on staff-generated plans. In years leading up to the design of a larger project, verbal representations were made to the Council Member representing the District that stop signs were warranted on Hopkins at McGee; installation was delayed to coincide with an expected larger project. With the larger project now on hold, the previously-promised and independently warranted stop signs still should go forward.

In light of all of the above, this item directs the City Manager to install two additional stop signs on Hopkins at McGee Avenue, to stop vehicles traveling both east and west on Hopkins and allow pedestrians – in particular the many children, youth, and seniors who frequent this location – to cross safely. Simultaneous with installation of stop signs, the City Manager is requested to undertake routine intersection daylighting measures, per the City of Berkeley’s existing policy, to further support pedestrian safety.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Limited costs and staff time associated with installation of two stop signs; to be accommodated using existing street safety funds, or, if none are available, T1 or other funds previously allocated for improvements to the Hopkins Corridor.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
No impacts.

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

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Vice Mayor Susan Wengraf, Councilmember Sophie Hahn, Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani
Subject: City of Berkeley Support for Proposition 1 on March 5, 2024 Ballot

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution in Support of California State Proposition 1 and request that the City Manager issue a press release indicating the City’s support.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None

BACKGROUND
Proposition 1 is a combination of two bills Governor Newsom signed on October 12, 2023. SB-326 (Eggman) and AB-531(Irwin) are aimed at addressing the State’s mental health crisis. The bills are packaged together into Proposition 1 for voters to approve in the Primary Election on March 5, 2024.

The extreme housing shortage coupled with the exorbitant cost of living throughout the State of California has led to our prevailing crisis of homelessness and housing insecurity. California State Proposition 1 will transform our state’s mental health system and help to house those suffering with mental and behavioral health issues. This landmark proposition will reallocate billions of dollars to Californians with the most severe mental health needs and addiction issues, including those living in encampments.

In fact, this investment would be the single largest expansion of California’s behavioral health treatment and residential settings in our state’s history – creating new, dedicated housing for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness who have behavioral health needs. Through a $6.38 billion bond, tens of thousands of Californians annually will receive mental health and addiction services, more than 11,000 housing settings will be created for residents with the most severe needs, and $1 billion will be allocated to veterans experiencing homelessness.

City of Berkeley Support for Proposition 1 on March 5, 2024 Ballot CONSENT CALENDAR January 16, 2024

The state funding granted by Proposition 1 will directly support Berkeley’s work to solve our homeless and behavioral health crisis. Berkeley has dedicated unprecedented City resources to combating homelessness and providing mental health services. However, Berkeley must ensure our State likewise provides treatment and long-term housing for people with acute mental illness and substance use disorder if we are to reduce homelessness. Therefore, we are requesting that the City Council support California Proposition 1 appearing on the March 5, 2024 California primary election ballot to continue working toward a sustainable solution to the mental health and homelessness crises across the State of California, and request that the City Manager issue a press release indicating the City Council’s support for Proposition 1: Treatment not Tents.

This historic mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment system transformation comes after months of engagement with stakeholders across the state:
people and families with lived experience, health care professionals, children and youth groups, veteran’s organizations, schools and school administrators, businesses, labor leaders, mental health and equity advocates, first responders, and local officials.

Senate Bill 326 modernizes the Mental Health Services Act to address today’s behavioral health system and demand for services. These reforms expand services to include treatment for those with substance use disorders, prioritize care for those with the most serious mental illness, provide ongoing resources for housing and workforce, and continue investments in prevention, early intervention, and innovative pilot programs. This bill reforms our system of care to prioritize what Californians need today with new and increased accountability for real results for all families and communities.

Assembly Bill 531 includes a $6.38 billion general obligation bond to build 11,150 new treatment beds and supportive housing units as well as outpatient capacity to help serve tens of thousands of people annually – from intensive services for homeless people with severe mental illness, to counseling for kids suffering from depression, and everyone in between. This investment would be the single largest expansion of California’s behavioral health treatment and residential settings in our state’s history – creating new, dedicated housing for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness who have behavioral health needs, with a dedicated investment to serve veterans. These settings will provide Californians experiencing behavioral health conditions a place to stay while safely stabilizing, healing, and receiving ongoing support. Included in the bond is a $1 billion set aside specifically for veterans’ housing.
87 percent of Californians say there is a mental health crisis in the United States.  One in 20 adults in California is living with a serious mental illness.  One in 13 children in California has a serious emotional disturbance and 30 percent of youth 12 to 24 years of age experience serious psychological distress.  One in 10 Californians meet the criteria for a substance use disorder.

City of Berkeley Support for Proposition 1 on March 5, 2024 Ballot CONSENT CALENDAR January 16, 2024

On February 23rd, 2022, 500 volunteers counted nearly 10,000 unhoused residents living in Alameda County. 1,057 reside in the City of Berkeley and of those, 43% reported suffering from mental health issues.

Research shows that incarcerating the mentally ill is counterproductive to rehabilitation and long-term public safety due to recidivism. It costs $100,000 per person to incarcerate an estimated 150,000 people who are mentally ill; treatment provides far better outcomes at far less cost.

It is in the best interest of the City of Berkeley, and all of its residents, to support California’s State Proposition 1.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The environment is not directly impacted by this item.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Wengraf Council District 6 510-981-7160
Attachments:
1: Resolution
2: Yes on 1 – Treatment Not Tents Fact Sheet

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

BERKELEY SUPPORTS PROPOSITION 1
WHEREAS, the very high cost of living coupled with an extreme shortage of affordable housing has produced a crisis in the State of California; and WHEREAS, Proposition 1 will transform the State’s approach to addressing homelessness and the prevalence of mental health illness; and WHEREAS, 87% of Californians say there is a mental health crisis in the United States; and
WHEREAS, one in 20 adults in California is living with a serious mental illness. One in 13 children in California has a serious emotional disturbance and 30 percent of youth 12 to 24 years of age experience serious psychological distress; and WHEREAS, one in 10 Californians meet the criteria for a substance use disorder; and WHEREAS, the 2022 Point-In-Time Count found that 43% of Berkeley’s unhoused residents suffer from mental health issues; and
WHEREAS, research shows that incarcerating the mentally ill is counterproductive to rehabilitation and long-term public safety due to recidivism; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 326 modernizes the Mental Health Services Act into the Behavioral Health Services Act, to address today’s behavioral health system. Services would expand to include treatment for those with substance use disorders and prioritized care for those with the most serious mental illnesses; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 531 includes a $6.38 billion general obligation bond to build 11,150 new treatment beds and supportive housing units as well as outpatient capacity to help serve tens of thousands of people annually – from intensive services for homeless people with severe mental illness, to counseling for kids suffering from depression, and everyone in between; and
WHEREAS, Californians will have the ability to transform the state’s mental health system by voting yes on March 5th, 2024 on Proposition 1.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City of Berkeley applauds and wholeheartedly supports Proposition 1.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Berkeley City Council encourages all Berkeley voters to support Proposition One (1) on March 5th, 2024 with a YES vote.

City of Berkeley Support for Proposition 1 on March 5, 2024 Ballot CONSENT CALENDAR January 16, 2024

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7170 ● E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Rigel Robinson (Author), Councilmember Harrison (Co- Author), Councilmember Hahn (Co-Sponsor)
Subject: Referral: Policies to Accommodate Chess

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to explore legislative and policy alternatives for accommodating chess and games in the public right-of-way. Consideration should be given to ensure that use of tables and chairs does not unduly obstruct public sidewalks or complicate existing enforcement of rules relating to the public right-of-way.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On December 11, 2023, the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity, & Community Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Hahn/Bartlett) to send Item 2 and Item 3 on the Committee’s agenda to the City Council as revised with a positive recommendation.

Proposed revisions include consideration of: financing of improvements; negotiations with property owner(s); rules relating to the public right-of-way; and support of city-wide program(s). Vote: All Ayes.

This proposal was discussed at the December 12th meeting of the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity & Community policy committee. The proposal was advanced with a positive recommendation alongside a separate, complementary item submitted by Councilmember Hahn: M/S/C (Hahn/Bartlett).

Vote: Ayes – Hahn, Bartlett, Humbert; Noes – None; Abstain – None.

BACKGROUND
Community members have gathered to play chess and socialize on the 2400 block of Telegraph Avenue since 2021. The informal “chess club” that has met on the block is a cherished community space that embodies Berkeley values of non-commercial, organic interactions between people of all ages and backgrounds on one of the most historic and storied blocks in the City. The chess club serves as a space for all to interact in a transaction-free, non-commercialized environment that does not exclude those who are unable to pay.

The chess club has recently been situated on private property, which has created conflicts with the property owner. These activities, however, are not permitted in the public right-of-way. There are steps that the property owner could have taken and could

Referral: Use of Sidewalks for Recreation, Such as Chess CONSENT CALENDAR 01/16/2024

take now to welcome the chess club’s activities at their current location if that is desired, including but not limited to building a parklet or seeking to modify the use permit for the property. And there are steps the city can take to expand space for public recreation, including reactivating the Dwight Triangle and pursuing reforms to the municipal code to enable these activities in the public right-of-way. It is in the public interest to explore all options.

The chess club has revealed some fundamental legal limitations that the Berkeley Municipal Code places on these organic activities — namely, on residents setting up tables, chairs, and other objects on sidewalks to utilize public space for purposes of recreation. In an increasingly commercialized and consumerist environment, free and communal activities such as gathering to play chess are a welcome and necessary use of public space. Moreover, they can serve to connect people of all backgrounds by enabling new “third spaces,” or places other than work and school to socialize. It is clear that there is a public interest in encouraging these uses of public space, so long as participants act and operate with respect for their neighbors and surroundings.

There is a notable dearth of public seating available on Telegraph Avenue. Much of the seating in the Telegraph commercial district is behind paywalls, located at businesses and restaurants. There are limited spaces for relaxation and social gathering on Telegraph Avenue. A shortage of publicly available seating creates a particularly hostile environment for the elderly and disabled. The city council has embraced a radical vision for the future of Telegraph Avenue, one of widened sidewalks and beautiful placemaking where the avenue can be transformed into a plaza and embraced as a place for gathering, more so than a thoroughfare. That vision, however, will take time and significant resources. There are strategies, such as allowing chairs and tables provided by community members, that can be welcomed right now to embrace gathering and recreation on Telegraph.

At present, one additional bench has been ordered by city staff to provide for seating at a bus stop on Telegraph Avenue, and the city council has provided direction and referred funding to the budget process to reactivate the Dwight Triangle as an area for recreation and gathering with new seating. All the same, given the severe shortage of publicly available seating and space for resting currently, it is in the public interest to welcome efforts from community members to create additional space for gathering.

Chess club organizers have presented options to our offices proposing Berkeley Municipal Code edits that would loosen limitations on setting up movable tables and chairs on sidewalks. It is our intent, with this legislation, to give staff direction to study and recommend policy options for allowing activities like chess at movable tables and chairs to be set up organically on our sidewalks — so long as an ADA-accessible open sidewalk width is maintained — without applying for a city permit, reducing barriers to creating precisely the organic, transaction-free public spaces we want to see in our city.

Referral: Use of Sidewalks for Recreation, Such as Chess CONSENT CALENDAR 01/16/2024

Staff are encouraged to review and consider the proposed language submitted by community members in their analysis and preparation of recommendations and legislative alternatives. They are as follows:

Proposal 1:

In Proposal 1, a new section (H) is added to code section 16.18.040 Exemptions from permit requirements.

16.18.040 Exemptions from permit requirements.

The following encroachments may be placed or maintained without a permit:
…
H. Objects such as, but not limited to, tables, chairs, canopies, and umbrellas that enable members of the public to assemble and engage in legal activities for the good of the community, insofar as:

1. All members of the public are allowed to utilize these objects, as long as they are engaged in legal activities such as painting, playing games, protected speech, etc.

2. Members of the public are not charged for use of these objects

3. The placement of these objects may narrow the public right of way to no less than six feet, where possible.

Proposal 2:

In Proposal 2, a new section (H) is added to Title 16, Chapter 18, Section 30 entitled Prohibited Encroachments.

Title 16, Chapter 18, Section 30 entitled Prohibited Encroachments Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 16.18.020, the following encroachments are specifically prohibited, and no applications shall be accepted nor permits issued therefor:
…
H. Except for tables, canopies, umbrellas, and chairs with acute mobility (e.g. foldable structure and/or able to be disassembled rapidly); assembled for activities that provide a nonprofitable public good; devoid of major encroachment as defined by 16.18.010 Section C

Referral: Use of Sidewalks for Recreation, Such as Chess CONSENT CALENDAR 01/16/2024

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff time.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Use of the public right-of-way for recreation can create new “third spaces” other than home and work for residents to socialize, especially on commercial corridors where there are other nearby activities and nearby dense housing. Fostering third spaces is critical for the cultivation of walkable neighborhoods, and thereby helpful in reducing vehicular traffic.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rigel Robinson, (510) 981-7170
Councilmember Kate Harrison, (510) 981-7140

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: https://berkeleyca.gov/

PUBLIC HEARING
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Eleanor Hollander, Economic Development Manager Subject: Expansion of the Elmwood Business Improvement District, Levy Assessments in the District for 2025, and Authorize a Contract with the Elmwood Business Association (EBA) to receive assessment revenue

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion:

1. Adopt first reading of an Ordinance expanding the Elmwood Business Improvement District, amending Chapter 7.84 of the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) originally adopted by Ordinance No. 6,164-N.S.; and

2. Adopt a Resolution levying assessments in the Elmwood Business Improvement District for calendar year 2025 and giving the City Manager authority to contract with the Elmwood Business Association (EBA) to receive assessment revenue and spend it on improvements and activities authorized in the Ordinance and the Resolution of Intention: Resolution No. 71,099 -N.S.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the expanded geographic District boundary, projected Business Improvement District (BID) revenue of approximately $50,000 will be deposited into the Elmwood BID Fund, and expensed from budget code 782-21-208-251-0000-000-446-636110. The BID constitutes an independent funding source that must be targeted to commercial revitalization efforts that are recommended by the Advisory Board. The City of Berkeley operates a parking lot within the district and will thus be assessed $2,000 annually, paid through the Off-Street Parking Fund.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On August 18, 2023, the Elmwood Business Association voted unanimously to support the expansion of the district boundary. On October 2, 2023, the Elmwood Business Improvement District Advisory Board voted on an expanded district boundary to be implemented in calendar year 2025 (M/S-Han/Hammond; Ayes: (3) Han, Berne, Hammond, Nays: 0, Absent: (1) Stepak. The Elmwood Business Improvement District Advisory Board also voted to increase the assessment rate by $1,000 for Parking Lot Operators to $2,000, and decrease the $250 assessment rate for Hair, Nail and Skin Services (NAICS 81211) to $200 annually which is reflected in Exhibits A1 and A2 of

Elmwood BID Expansion 2025 PUBLIC HEARING
January 16, 2024

Attachment 2 (M/S-Han/Berne; Ayes: (3) Han, Berne, Hammond, Nays: 0, Absent: (1) Stepak.

California Streets and Highway Code Section 36500, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, requires specific actions to create or expand a business-based improvement district including compliance with Section 54954.6 of the California Government Code. Section 54954.6 requires Council to conduct at least one public meeting at which local officials allow public testimony regarding the proposed new assessment in addition to the noticed public hearing at which the legislative body proposes to enact the assessment.

On November 21, 2023 Council adopted Resolution No. 71,099–N.S., which states the intention to expand the Elmwood BID and directed the City Clerk to schedule a public meeting on December 12, 2023, and a public hearing on January 16, 2024 to consider the expansion of the District. The City Clerk’s Office gave joint notice of both by mailing Resolution No. 71,099-N.S. to all affected businesses in the proposed (expanded) District, as is allowed by Section 54954.6 of the Government Code.

The proposed (expanded) Elmwood BID would assess businesses an annual fee according to classifications and rates defined in Exhibit A2 to Resolution No. 71,105- N.S., attached. T he assessment will be collected at the same time as the annual business license renewal in a special fund, and will be remitted the revenue to the Elmwood Business Association (EBA) which will continue to be the “operating corporation” of the Elmwood BID. Projected revenues of approximately $50,000 per year will be spent by the EBA on a program of services and activities intended to market, maintain and beautify the expanded Elmwood business improvement district.

BACKGROUND
In 2019, the members of the both the EBA and the BID Advisory Board expressed interest in potentially expanding the boundaries of the Elmwood BID to increase capacity and collaboration with unrepresented businesses on the northern and southern ends of the Berkeley’s commercial areas along College Avenue. During the course of outreach with impacted merchants; collaboration with the neighboring Rockridge District Association in Oakland was explored and rich opportunities for streetscape improvements and partnerships were uncovered. The goal of expanding the District boundary is to support activities and programing and increase merchant and business owner collaboration in areas along College Avenue that have not previously benefited from BID support. The resolution of intention was adopted on November 21, 2023, the public meeting held on December 12, 2023, and this public hearing (1/16/24) represents the last legislative step in the process for the BID’s boundary expansion in 2025.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
By maintaining and enhancing the district, the Elmwood BID creates shopping opportunities for residents and visitors alike while encouraging alternative forms of

Elmwood BID Expansion 2025 PUBLIC HEARING
January 16, 2024

transportation. The environmental enhancements contribute to making the Elmwood a more pleasant walking destination. Because the district is served by public transportation and biking infrastructure, these services indirectly support environmental sustainability goals of encouraging alternative transportation choices.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
This public hearing is required by California Streets and Highway Code Section 36623 and Section 54954.6 of the California Government Code.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The merchants considered various alternative boundaries and assessment formulas and rates, but settled on those proposed herein.

CONTACT PERSON
Kieron Slaughter, Office of Economic Development, 510-981-2490 Attachments:
1: Ordinance
2: Resolution, Levy Assessments in the Elmwood Business Improvement District for 2025; Authorize a Contract with the Elmwood Business Association (EBA) to receive assessment revenue
3: Resolution No. 71,099-N.S., Intent to Expand Elmwood BID Boundaries for 2025, November 21, 2023. (Includes Notice of Public Hearing)

ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

ELMWOOD BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENTS; AMENDING BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.84
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 7.84.030 is amended to read as follows:

7.84.030 Boundaries of district.

The boundaries of the District are as specified in this section and in the District’s Boundary Map attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter and on file with the office of the City Clerk.

Western Boundary. A line connecting the western edge of all parcels fronting on the western side of College Avenue in the C-E and R-2A zoning districts from 2832 2640 College to 2992 3212 College but including parcels facing Derby Street, Stuart Street, Russell Street and the City-owned Elmwood parking lot that is accessed from Russell Street, and 2933 Benvenue Ave, addresses on 2626 Ashby Ave and 2953 Benvenue Avefrom 2629 to 2648. The parcels along the western boundary are as follows:

Assessor’s Book 053:

Block 1695: Parcels 4, 6, 7, 11, 9-1, 9-2, 10, 12-1, and 12-2,13, 14, 30, 31, .and 36.

Assessor’s Book 052:

Block 1409: Parcels 1-1, and 3.

Block 1410: Parcels 2, 12, 14-2, 16-1, 18, 20-1, 22-1, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, and 41.

Block 1562: Parcels 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 39, 47, and 50,
Block 1568: Parcels 2, 3, 4-1, 5-1, 5-2, 6-2, 7, 9, 11-1, 12-1, 14, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, and 56.

Block 1573: Parcels 2, 4-1, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, and 103.

Eastern Boundary. A line connecting the eastern edge of all parcels fronting on the eastern side of College Avenue from 2887 College Avenue2704 Derby Street to 2999 ATTACHMENT 1

College Avenue and 2701 Webster Street.2704 Alcatraz Avenue and 3217 College Avenue and parcels fronting Stuart Street, Webster Street, Prince Street, Woolsey Street and Alcatraz Avenue, The parcels along the eastern boundary are as follows:

Assessor’s Book 055:

Block 1845: Parcels 15-1, 15-2, 16, 17
Assessor’s Book 054:

Block 1707: Parcel 10-1
Block 1708: Parcels 14, 15, 16, and 17.

Block 1709: Parcels 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 29, and 38.

Assessor’s Book 053:

Block 1696: Parcels 1, 2, 15,.16, 17, 18, 19, and 20
Block 1699: Parcels 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19
Assessor’s Book 052:

Block 1563: Parcels 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36. 63, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 96, 97, 176-2, 177-1, 188, 191, 203, and 221, Block 1564: Parcels 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, and 37.

Block 1567: Parcels: 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 87, 88, 89, 90, and 91.

Block 1568: Parcels 14, and 16-2.

Block 1573: Parcel 13.

Southern Boundary. Webster Street. A line connecting the southern edge of parcel 052- 1563-188 (3217 College) on the eastern side of College and the southern edge of parcel 052-1409-3 (3212 College) on the western edge of College.

Northern Boundary. TA line connecting the northern edge of parcel 053-1695-011055- 1845-15-2 (2832 2640 College) on the western side of College and the northern edge of parcel 053-1696-015 054-1708-17 (2887 College2704 Derby) on the eastern side of College.

Section 2. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 7.84.040 is amended to read as follows:

7.84.040 Calculation of assessments.

Businesses, trades, and professions located within the District boundaries shall, commencing on January 1, 20142025, pay an annual benefit assessment to the District in the amounts shown in Table 7.84.040.

Table 7.84.040.

Business Classifications and Assessment Rates
Classifications Annual
Rates
Retail including jewelers and groceries but not restaurants (Tax Codes R, M and G but without NAICS 722, Food Services and Drinking Places)
• Gross receipts under $350,000 $250
• Gross receipts $350,000--$999,000 $350
• Gross receipts $1,000,000 $500
Restaurants, including all businesses that prepare and serve food at the request of customers (NAICS 722)
$500
Professionals including offices of real estate brokers (Tax Code P) • Gross receipts under $100,000 $300
• Gross receipts over $100,000 $400
Entertainment and Recreation (Tax Code E) $450
Business, Personal and Repair Services (Tax Code B) except Hair, Nail and Skin Care Services (NAICS 81211)
$200
Hair, Nail and Skin Care Services (NAICS 81211) $2500
Parking lot operators $12,000
Financial Institutions $2,500

No person or business shall be required to pay an assessment based on a residential use of the property within the District. Any business that is classified as a nonprofit (Tax Code N) for business licenses purposes, shall nevertheless pay the assessment at the rate that corresponds to its North American Standard Industrial Classification if it is engaged in the sale of products or services. Any new business established within the District shall not be required to pay an assessment on application for its business license but only on renewal at the end of the year it was initiated.

Section 3. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

Attachment 2
RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

LEVYING AN ANNUAL ASSESSMENT IN THE ELMWOOD BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (BID) FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2025, AND AUTHORIZING A

CONTRACT OR CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WITH ELMWOOD BUSINESS

ASSOCIATION TO SERVE AS FISCAL AGENT FOR RECEIPT AND EXPENDITURE

OF ELMWOOD BID FUNDS
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2023, the City Council by Resolution No. 71,099-N.S described an expanded boundary for the Elmwood BID, and a revised fee structure, and declared its intent to levy an assessment in the District to finance the proposed activities for the calendar year 2025; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 71,099 -N.S. also scheduled a public hearing for January 16, 2024, to consider levying said assessment and gave notice that interested parties could attend and be heard on the issue, for and against; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified potential assessees of the public hearing by publishing the Resolution of Intention in a newspaper of general circulation; and WHEREAS, the public hearing has now been held and there has not been protests by business owners who collectively pay 50 percent or more of the assessment proposed to be levied.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that any protests are overruled and the expanded boundaries of the Elmwood BID is confirmed, thereby levying an annual assessment for the Elmwood BID for calendar year 2025.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the City Manager to enter into a contract or contract amendments with Elmwood Business Association to receive and spend funds for purposes approved in the Annual Report and Budget and as directed by the Elmwood BID Advisory Board.

Human Resources

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Aram Kouyoumdjian, Director of Human Resources Subject: Amending the Miscellaneous CalPERS Contract to (a) Eliminate PEPRA Cost Sharing for Unrepresented Employees (b) Add
Paramedic and Limited Term EMT to Safety Category

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution of Intention and first reading of an Ordinance to amend the contract between the Board of Administration, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, and the City Council for the City of Berkeley (a) pursuant to California Government Code Section 20516 to eliminate the cost share contributions made on behalf of the City by PEPRA members of the Unrepresented Employees group, and (b) pursuant to California Government Code Section 20434 to add the Paramedic and Limited Term Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) classifications under the Safety category.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Based on this action, the additional cost share contributions made on behalf of the City by Unrepresented Employees, originally scheduled for gradual reduction through FY 2026-27, will be eliminated upon amendment of the City’s contract with CalPERS, and the City will begin making those contributions on the affected employees’ behalf.

There are approximately 75 Unrepresented Employees who are PEPRA members of CalPERS and affected by this resolution, and the total cost to approve the ramp down for Unrepresented Employees is approximately $247,957.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Council adopted Resolution #70,156 N.S. at its December 14, 2021 meeting authorizing the FY 2021-22 amendment to the City’s CalPERS Miscellaneous contract. Council must now pass another Resolution of Intention to approve the FY 2023-24 contract amendment between the City and the Public Employees’ Retirement System Board of

Resolution of Intention to Amend CalPERS Contract: (a) Eliminate Cost ACTION CALENDAR Sharing for Unrepresented Employees and (b) Add Paramedic and January 16, 2024 Limited Term EMT to Safety Category
Administration. (See Cal. Gov. Code § 20516.) The contract amendment process includes the following steps:
 The City shall provide CalPERS with the Resolution and a cover letter indicating the exact percentage of change, total cost-share percentage, and who it is applicable to – completed October 2023;
 CalPERS will contact the City to establish the Anticipated Schedule of Agency Actions and send the required documents;
 Over a time period specified by CalPERS, the City will:
o Conduct an employee election whereby a simple majority of the affected PEPRA members in the Unrepresented Employees group must vote in favor of the proposed cost-share terms – completed September 2023; o The City shall adopt a Resolution of Intention;
o The City shall approve the final reading of an ordinance or final resolution and complete certification forms;
 Once the documents are received and approved, the contract amendment becomes effective and is updated with the effective date in MyCalPERS;  CalPERS sends a fully executed contract to the City.

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

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
In order to eliminate the additional cost share contributions made on behalf of the City by PEPRA members of the Unrepresented Employees group, Council must now pass another Resolution of Intention to approve the FY 2023-24 contract amendment between the City and the Public Employees’ Retirement System Board of Administration.

The recommendation to add Paramedic and Limited Term EMT job classifications as Safety Members of CalPERS is consistent with California Government Code Section 20434, which defines “Local firefighter” to include employees of a fire department dedicated to emergency medical services.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Continue with the reduction as scheduled, which will lead to inequity between represented and unrepresented employees.

CONTACT PERSON
Aram Kouyoumdjian, Director of Human Resources, (510) 981-6807.

Resolution of Intention to Amend CalPERS Contract: (a) Eliminate Cost ACTION CALENDAR Sharing for Unrepresented Employees and (b) Add Paramedic and January 16, 2024 Limited Term EMT to Safety Category
Attachments:
1: Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract Between the Board of Administration of California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the City Council of the City of Berkeley
2: Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Berkeley Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City Council of the City of Berkeley and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System 3: Amendment to Contract Between the Board of Administration California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the City Council of the City of Berkeley 4: CalPERS Certification of Governing Body’s Action
5: CalPERS Certification of Compliance with Government Code Section 7507 6: CalPERS Certificate of Compliance with Government Code Section 20516

Resolution of Intention to Amend CalPERS Contract: (a) Eliminate Cost ACTION CALENDAR Sharing for Unrepresented Employees and (b) Add Paramedic and January 16, 2024 Limited Term EMT to Safety Category
RESOLUTION NO. XX,XXX

RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT

BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC

EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY
WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said law; and WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a summary of the change proposed in said contract; and
WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed changes: (1) to provide, pursuant to California Government Code Section 20516 (Employees Sharing Additional Cost), a reduction of 5% for new local miscellaneous members in the Unrepresented Employees group; and (2) to add the Paramedic and Limited Term Emergency Medical Technician classifications to the Safety member category pursuant to California Government Code 20434 (which designates any officers or employees of a fire department employed to perform duties of firefighting, fire prevention, fire training, hazardous materials, emergency medical services, or fire or arson investigation services as “Local firefighter”);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the governing body of the above agency does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the contract between said public agency and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, as an exhibit and by this reference made a part hereof.

Resolution of Intention to Amend CalPERS Contract: (a) Eliminate Cost ACTION CALENDAR Sharing for Unrepresented Employees and (b) Add Paramedic and January 16, 2024 Limited Term EMT to Safety Category
ORDINANCE NO. #, ### N.S.

AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1.

That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Berkeley and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full.

Section 2.

The Mayor of the City of Berkeley City Council is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for, and on behalf of, said Agency.

Section 3.

This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of Council Chambers, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

Agenda Item
Attachment

This attachment will be provided to the City Council and the public prior to the meeting (including posting to the city website) in accordance with the requirements for
revised and supplemental materials in the Open
Government Ordinance.

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

The City of Berkeley, City Council’s Web site:
http://berkeleyca.gov

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: https://berkeleyca.gov/

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Anne Cardwell, Deputy City Manager
Subject: Consideration of Options for Berkeley High School Staff Parking

RECOMMENDATION
Receive information on several options for providing additional parking for Berkeley High School staff. Provide feedback to staff, which will then be shared with 2x2 Committee with the goal of identifying a mutually agreeable solution for both the school district and the City.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Potential fiscal impacts will vary by option, as described in the following sections.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Representatives of Berkeley High School state that Berkeley High School teachers use breaks in their schedule to move their vehicles around within the time-limited parking spaces near the school, for the purpose of avoiding parking tickets. For these reasons, the District has requested that the City issue Preferential Parking Program permits for use by Berkeley High School teachers in both the zone where the school is located, and the zones immediately adjacent to the school.

According to the District, the recipients of permits issued to Berkeley High School are already parking on the streets in the vicinity of the school, and therefore the issuance of these permits would have a negligible impact upon parking conditions in the area.

BACKGROUND
The Preferential Parking Program (Chapter 14.72) creates various categories of parking permits that may be issued by the Department of Finance and establishes various criteria for issuance of those permits. In addition to residential parking permits (14.72.090) and local business permits (14.72.100), parking permits may be issued to Neighborhood-serving Community Facilities, such as “churches, schools, senior centers and alcohol and drug rehabilitation facilities.” (14.72.110.B.). The criteria for issuance of permits to Neighborhood-serving Community Facilities is enumerated at Section

14.72.105.B. as follows:

Consideration of Options for Berkeley High School Staff Parking ACTION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

1. An enterprise for which there is inadequate off-street parking and no financially feasible way of creating adequate off-street parking on the site of the enterprise;

2. An enterprise for which there is no off-street parking available nearby for lease or rental;

3. The total number of permits issued does not exceed the number representing 60% of the enterprise’s employees;

4. The total number of permits issued to a Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) school that is not within 1/2 mile of a Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station, and not within 1/4 mile from a rapid transit bus stop, and not within 1/4 mile from two bus routes that run at a frequency of 20 minutes or less does not exceed 70% of the enterprise’s employees;

5. Distribution of permits shall be through a designated representative of the enterprise who will be responsible for allocation of the permits to employees, or in the case of the senior centers, to users of the enterprise; and

6. Degree of impact on parking conditions for residents and merchants in the area.

Berkeley Unified School District asserts that it meets the criteria for issuance of permits.

Berkeley High School currently lacks adequate off-street parking on its campus.

The City operates a parking garage nearby, and while the district has expressed a willingness to analyze options for funding of spaces, they have also noted that the current cost quoted for the needed number of spaces (approximately $150,000 per year) is likely not fiscally feasible.

1. Quantity of Permits
Whereas businesses and residents have a limit of between one (1) and three (3) permits per address, the only limit for schools is set forth in 14.72.105.B.3.: the total number of permits issued for a Neighborhood-Serving Community Facility cannot exceed 60% of Berkeley High School Preferential Parking Permits Page 3 the enterprise's employees, unless the facility is a BUSD school that is located more than ½ mile from BART or more than ¼ mile from a bus rapid transit stop. Berkeley High School is located well within ½ mile of the Downtown Berkeley BART station, so the operative limit is 60% of the school’s employees.

Without any amendments to the ordinance, the City can issue a number of permits equal to 60% of the employees of Berkeley High School. At the November 2x2 Committee meeting, Berkeley Unified School District Facilities Manager John Calise indicated that there are approximately 400 employees at the school, which would result in 240 permits utilizing the 60% figure.

Consideration of Options for Berkeley High School Staff Parking ACTION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

2. Location of permits
There is no area restriction applicable to Neighborhood-Serving Community Facility permits. In drafting and passing the Preferential Parking Program, Council chose to impose geographical limitations for certain kinds of permits but not for others.

Residential permits can only be issued for a vehicle that is registered with the DMV to an address within the zone. (14.72.090.B.3.) Local business permits can only be issued "for a motor vehicle regularly used in the business activity of such commercial establishment for parking such motor vehicle in such designated local business parking subarea." (14.72.100.B.) However, for Neighborhood-Serving Community Facility permits, the only geographical limitation is a broad consideration of the "Degree of impact on parking conditions for residents and merchants in the area." (14.72.105.B.6.) It is reasonable to assume that the lack of criteria for the location of NSCF permits is intentional, but City staff is seeking Council feedback as to whether or not to issue a substantial number of permits in this area (and potentially others). There may be many facilities located on a boundary of a designated parking area and so they intent may have been to spread the permits around to multiple areas. Moreover, the Department “shall issue permits such that they will not unduly be concentrated on a specific block front in any given residential permit parking area.” (14.72.080.B.) Where a facility such as Berkeley High School is located on the border of a residential permit parking area, this undue concentration requirement can more readily be met by dividing the permits between adjacent permit areas.

For additional context, a staff report from October 17, 2017 entitled Referral Response:

Additional Neighborhood Serving Community Facility Parking Permits for Berkley Unified School District Facilities is attached.

Options for Council Consideration
The following five options for addressing the request for additional parking for Berkeley High School staff are being presented for Council to review, discuss and provide feedback to staff. This feedback will be shared with 2x2 Committee, with the end goal of identifying a mutually agreeable solution for both the school district and the City.

As part of this exercise of developing options, opportunities for increasing access to parking for City employees are also noted, as City employees are experiencing challenges with finding parking similar to Berkeley High School staff.  Option 1: Provide an increased number of permits to Berkeley High School staff and City staff
As previously noted, under the current ordinance, the City can grant up to 60% of the employees of Berkeley High School. One option would be to amend the ordinance to

Consideration of Options for Berkeley High School Staff Parking ACTION CALENDAR January 16, 2024
allow for more permits to be provided to High School staff. It would be beneficial for the City if a similar approach could be applied to City of Berkeley staff (City staff are currently ineligible for permits under the Preferential Parking Program), perhaps under a new, similar program. As previously noted, City staff are also having significant difficulty finding sufficient, inexpensive parking around the Civic Center area.

If the desire is to pursue this option, it should also be clarified whether the increase in permits will be within the existing parking permit area, or will be spread across neighboring parking permit areas.
 Option 2: Amend parking hours around Berkeley High School/Civic Center Another option would be to amend the parking hours in the parking permit area around the High School/Civic Center from two (2) to four (4) hours. While this option would likely result in staff still needing to move their cars at least once during the work day, it would reduce the total number of times they would need to do so.

A related, alternate option would be to remove parking time limits entirely, which would allow staff that are able to find a spot to remain in that spot all day. However, that option would require further study, as the purpose of parking time limitations is to encourage the circulation of vehicles (thus increasing the available spaces at any given time) and eliminating restrictions could reduce the use of the Center Street garage, which was funded via interest bearing bonds with specific performance obligations.  Option 3: Permits based on criteria, coupled with changes to parking hours A hybrid of the above two options would be to provide permits to only those High School and City staff who aren’t able to move their cars throughout the day due to the need to remain in the classroom or at their assigned working space. For example, teachers in classrooms and City positions that are public facing, and so may not be able to readily leave their desks during the day. Additionally, the City could issue these permits in several adjacent zones, to deconcentrate impacts and spread vehicles farther than under current conditions.

For those employees not eligible for permits under the hybrid option criteria, there could also be consideration of making an increase of parking times to four (4) hours on every- other block throughout adjacent zones within two (2) to twelve (12) blocks from the High School and Civic Center. To illustrate, starting one block away from the core area, one side of the street would be two (2) hours and the other is four (4). This would help avoid the majority of vehicles being right next to the High School and Civic Center and distribute parking a bit further out. (Note that in this scenario, blocks immediately next to the Civic Center would remain two (2) hours on both sides in order to serve shorter term visitors.)

Consideration of Options for Berkeley High School Staff Parking ACTION CALENDAR January 16, 2024
 Option 4: “Swap” use of garage by Berkeley High staff for City Council use of the School Board Chambers (or other swap options)
Currently the City Council has an agreement with the Berkeley School District to use the School Board Chambers for Berkeley City Council meetings. One suggested option is to explore amending that agreement to “swap” a number of spaces in the Center Street parking garage for use of the chambers. Additionally, there may be other options for a swap that could be explored.
 Option 5: Discount Parking at Center Street garage
Another option for consideration would be to continue exploring whether the High School could lease a certain number of spaces at the Center Street garage at a discount. As noted previously, the district has expressed a willingness to look at options for funding of spaces for BHS staff, but has also expressed that the current cost quoted of approximately $150,000 per year would be too costly. Further, the City is limited in terms of the amount of discount that can be provided, given that the parking revenues have been pledged to bondholders and the City is not currently meeting its revenue ratio covenant. If the District is able to make funds available for this type of expense, the City and District could explore further how many spaces at what cost they could be made available.

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

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
These options are being provided for the Council in response to the school district’s request for additional parking spaces for their staff and subsequent discussions by 2x2 Committee members (see attached 2x2 Committee minutes). Additionally, several of the options provide an opportunity to provide increased parking for City staff, which is also a significant need expressed by various labor groups and also aligned with the City’s Employer of Choice Initiative.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Staff considered a number of options, all of which are presented in this report.

Consideration of Options for Berkeley High School Staff Parking ACTION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

CONTACT PERSON
Anne Cardwell, Deputy City Manager, City Manager’s Office, (510) 981-7014 Attachments:

1. October 17, 2017 Staff Report

2. 2x2 Committee Minutes – February - June, 2023

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
October 17, 2017
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Phillip L. Harrington, Director, Department of Public Works Subject: Referral Response: Additional Neighborhood Serving Community Facility Parking Permits for Berkley Unified School District Facilities

RECOMMENDATION
To implement the policy change requested by a February 28, 2017 Council referral, adopt first reading of an Ordinance amending Berkeley Municipal Code section

14.72.105 to increase residential preferential parking permits for Berkley Unified School
District schools from a maximum of 60% to a maximum of 70% of total Berkley Unified School District staff (including teachers), for schools more than one half mile from a BART Station, more than one quarter mile from a Rapid Transit Stop, and more than one quarter mile from two major transit lines.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Based on current Berkley Unified School District (BUSD) staffing levels, City staff expect to generate $621 annually for the General Fund from the sale of nine additional residential preferential parking (RPP) permits.

CURRENT SITUATION

AND ITS EFFECTS
At the January 19, 2017 2X2 Committee meeting, two Council members and BUSD Staff proposed increasing the limit on Neighborhood Serving Community Facility (NSCF) permits from 60% to 70% for schools outside areas well served by transit. This report responds to referral #2017-35 that originally appeared on the agenda of the February 28, 2017 meeting, sponsored by Councilmember Maio and Mayor Arreguin, where City Council approved a referral to the City Manager formalizing that requested increase. Individual schools have requested additional permits because they have staff that drive who don’t have NSCF permits, and who are subject to limited transit service or a lack of access to reasonable parking choices. Those employees often park in Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) areas with two-hour visitor time limits, and subsequently move their cars every two hours. This proposed ordinance would codify an increase in the number of available permits in the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC), and will allow staff to implement the requested change.

Attachment 1Page 7 of 36

Referral Response: Additional Neighborhood Serving Community Facility Parking Permits for Berkley Unified School District Facilities CONSENT CALENDAR October 17, 2017

BACKGROUND
Every September, NSCFs apply for permits for RPP permits for staff subject to the following guidelines:
 Per BMC 14.72.105, the number of permits may be no more than 60% of the number of employees at each facility.
 Only K-12 Schools are eligible for NSCF Permits.
 Part time staff (under 30 hours/week) count as one half of an employee for purposes of determining 60%.
 Off-Street Parking available to NSCF staff is subtracted from 60%.  The BMC also takes into account the parking impact on residents. This has caused a cap on the number of permits allocated in area E, as the blocks bounded by Cedar, MLK, University and Shattuck are particularly impacted.  The City does not issue permits to NSCFs in area I due to severely limited RPP parking availability in that area.
 Permits are allocated to staff by the facility administration using whatever criteria they choose.

The primary purpose of RPP is to ensure adequate on-street parking availability for residents of a neighborhood when parking demand from employees and visitors of nearby businesses may otherwise exceed the supply of on-street parking spaces.

When parking supply is particularly low or demand is particularly high, issuing too many NSCF permits in the area may impact the ability of residents and other permit holders to find available parking spaces.

Although the RPP program is intended to discourage use of single occupant vehicles by visitors and employees of nearby businesses, staff acknowledges that for some BUSD employees it is difficult to commute to work by means other than personal vehicles for reasons including limited access to transit services in their commute area. Thus City policy allows issuance of NSCF permits to minimize some of the impacts to BUSD employees.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Using current BUSD staffing levels, this change would result in the issuance of approximately nine more permits. Because this increase would apply only at those schools where commuting by public transit is a less feasible option, there could be a very small decrease in greenhouse gas emissions associated with fewer BUSD staff who would move their cars every two hours.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
BUSD has expressed a need for more permits for staff who cannot easily commute by public transit. The proposed changes would have minimal impacts to residential parking.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None

Attachment 1Page 8 of 36

Referral Response: Additional Neighborhood Serving Community Facility Parking Permits for Berkley Unified School District Facilities CONSENT CALENDAR October 17, 2017

CONTACT PERSON
Matthew Cotterill, Traffic Engineering Assistant, Public Works, 510-981-6433 Attachments:
1: Ordinance
2: Map of Transit Rich area and BUSD Schools

3. Original Referral Report from February 28, 2017

Attachment 1Page 9 of 36

ORDINANCE NO. #,###-N.S.

AMENDING THE RESIDENTIAL PREFERENTIAL PARKING ORDINANCE, BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.72.105, TO INCREASE ALLOWABLE PERMITS TO 70% FOR BERKELEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES OUTSIDE THE

TRANSIT RICH ZONE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code 14.72.105 is amended to read as follows:

14.72.105 Neighborhood-serving community facility permits.

A. The Department of Finance may issue neighborhood-serving community facility enterprise permits with a term not to exceed one year subject to the requirements set forth in this section and in administrative rules and regulations issued pursuant to this chapter.

B. A neighborhood-serving community facility parking permit may be issued to representatives of the following neighborhood-serving community facilities: churches, schools, and senior centers. The issuance of permit can occur no sooner than 30 days after implementation of a residential permit parking area and the following criteria shall be used in establishing eligibility of an enterprise and the number of permits to be issued any enterprise:

1. An enterprise for which there is inadequate off-street parking and no financially feasible way of creating adequate off-street parking on the site of the enterprise;

2. An enterprise for which there is no off-street parking available nearby for lease or rental;

3. The total number of permits issued under no circumstances does not exceeds the number representing 60% of the enterprise’s employees;

4. The total number of permits issued to a Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) school that is not within ½ mile of a Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station, and not within ¼ mile from a rapid transit bus

Attachment 1Page 10 of 36

stop, and not within ¼ mile from two bus routes that run at a frequency of 20 minutes or less does not exceed 70% of the enterprise’s employees;

45. Distribution of permits shall be through a designated representative of the enterprise who will be responsible for allocation of the permits to employees, or in the case of the senior centers, to users of the enterprise; and

56. Degree of impact on parking conditions for residents and merchants in the area. (Ord. 6762-NS § 4 (part), 2003: Ord. 5972-NS § 1, 1990: Ord. 5803-NS § 2 (part), 1987)
Section 2. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of Council Chambers, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

Attachment 1Page 11 of 36

n¤
n¤
n¤
MLK
Berkeley
High School
Williard
Thousand Oaks
LeConte
Cragmont
Berkeley Tech
John Muir
Jefferson
BAM
Malcolm X
Longfellow
Washington
Elementary
School
Emerson
Oxford
Rosa Parks
7TH ST
9TH ST
10TH ST

DWIGHT WY

PARKER ST
4TH ST
5TH ST
6TH ST
8TH ST

DERBY ST

CHANNING WY
I80 EAST HY

GRANT ST

BLAKE ST

SAN PABLO AV

WARD ST
I80 WEST HY

ALLSTON WY
2ND ST

ASHBY AV
3RD ST

CARLETON ST

SACRAMENTO ST

HOPKINS ST

OREGON ST

OXFORD ST

SPRUCE ST

RUSSELL ST

BANCROFT WY

CEDAR ST

VINE ST

MC GEE AV

MILVIA ST

ADDISON ST

COLLEGE AV

HASTE ST

FRONTAGE
RD

WOOLSEY ST
BO
LIVAR
DR

STUART ST

WALNUT ST

PAGE ST

CALIFORNIA ST

DURANT AV

TELEGRAPH AV

ACTON ST

JONES ST

KING ST

CAMELIA ST
EUCLID
AV

DANA ST

MARIN AV

HARMON ST

BONITA AV

ALCATRAZ AV

GRIZZLY PEAK
BL

GILMAN ST
KEITH
AV

ELLIS ST

BERKELEY WY

BONAR ST

KAINS AV

ADELINE ST
SHASTA
RD

FRANCISCO ST

ADA ST

PRINCE ST

EUNICE ST

HEINZ AV

FAIRVIEW ST

REGENT ST

BENVENUE AV

CLAREMONT AV
MILLER
AV

STANNAGE AV

SOUTHERN PACIFIC

HARRISON ST

JOSEPHINE ST

MONTEREY
AV

LINCOLN ST

FOLGER AV
M
ATHEW
S
ST

HILLEGASS
AV

ARCH ST

LECONTE AV
LALOMA
AV

GRAYSON ST

TACOMA AV

CHESTNUT ST

EASTSHORE HY

BROWNING ST

RIDGE RD

SPAULDING AV
TUNNEL
RD

NEILSON ST
RAMP

THE UPLANDS

PARKHILLS RD

CENTER ST

MABEL ST

CAPISTRANO AV

HILGARD AV

HILLCREST RD
66TH ST

FOREST AV

CRAGMONT
AV

WARRING ST
GAYLEY
RD

JULIA ST

ESSEX ST

SANTA FE AV

POTTER ST
KEELER

AVSAN LORENZO
AV

ETNA ST
SUMMIT
RD

HARPER ST

FRANKLIN ST

WEBSTER ST

JEFFERSON AV

TYLER ST

CORNELL AV

BURNETT ST

HENRY ST

PARK ST

BYRON ST

AVALON AV
BUENA
AV
LE
RO
Y
AV

DOHR ST

PARDEE ST
C
AMPUS
DR
PINE
AV

CYCLO TRON RD

MURRAY ST
SUTTER
ST

WEST ST
DEAKIN
ST

STERLING
AV
8TH

LOS ANGELES
AV

PROSPECT STUNIVERSITY AV
NAPA
AV

BOWDITCH ST
63RD, OA ST

ANTHONY ST

OAK ST

JAYNES ST

BAY ST

THE PLAZA DR

ELDORADO
AV

EASTSHO
RE
W

OODSIDE
RD

KITTREDGE ST

SIERRA ST

CENTENNIAL DR

CUTTER WY

DANA CT

SAN PEDRO AV

SW PL

LEWISTON AV

YOLO AV

SATHER RD

DELAWARE ST
THE
ALAM
EDA

VIRGINIA ST SHATTUCK AV

PIEDMONT AV

HEARST AV

CURTIS ST

HILL RD

ROSE ST

BOLIVAR DR
3RD ST
§¨¦
I 80
NSCF

TRANSIT

PROXIMITY
This map is representational only.

Data are not survey precise.
1/19/2017
³
Transportation Division
1947 Center Street 4th Floor
Berkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY
Major AC Transit Routes
6 12
18 51B
72/72R
88 72R Stops
n¤ BART Stations
BUSD Schools
Transit Rich Zone
0 0.50.25
Miles
The "Transit Rich Zone" consits
of parcels within 1/2 mile of a
BART station or 1/4 mile from a
rapid bus stop or 1/4 mile from
2 bus major bus lines. A "major"
bus line is a bus line that runs
at peak hours at a frequency
of every 20 minutes or less.

Attachment 1Page 12 of 36

CONSENT CALENDAR
CITY COUNCIL February 28, 2017
Linda Maio
[email protected] · 510.981.7110 · cityofberkeley.info/lindamaio TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Jesse Arreguin and Councilmember Linda Maio SUBJECT: Increasing the Parking Permit Guidelines for Two BUSD Schools with Limited Access to Public Transit
RECOMMENDATION:

Request the City Manager to increase the guidelines used to grant residential permit parking to BUSD schools from 60% to 70% of the number of BUSD staff (includes teachers) for schools more than 1/2 mile from a BART Station, or 1/4 mile from a Rapid Transit Stop, or 1/4 mile from two (2) major transit lines.

BACKGROUND:

This recommendation will be able to address serious parking impacts for Emerson School as described by its Principal (Susan Hodge) at a recent 2x2 Committee meeting.

John Muir School would also be eligible for allocation increase from 60% to 70% under the proposed policy (see below). The recommendation was discussed at the 2x2 Committee, attended by City transportation staff and the City Manager. The 10% increase will amount to an addition of approximately five additional parking permits.

Given that there are parking issues at most of the BUSD schools, the 2x2 Committee will continue to work within the 2x2 structure, along with City staff, on ways in which we can address the parking needs of our schools while also being sensitive to neighborhood impacts. In addition, staff will be looking into allowing the acquisition of some commercial yellow zone permits for BUSD maintenance staff. It was also requested, as we pursue parking issues, that the Superintendent will share with us the District’s program(s) for incentives staff to utilize public transit.

Neighborhood Serving Community Facility (NSCF) Process
● Every September, NSCFs apply for permits for staff. Per Berkeley Municipal Code, the number of permits may be no more than 60% of the number of employees.
● Part time staff (under 30 hrs./week) count as ½ of an employee for purposes of determining 60% figure.
● Off-Street Parking available to NSCF staff is subtracted from the 60% figure.
● BMC also requires that we take into account the impact on residents with respect to parking. This has caused us to effectively cap the number of

Attachment 1Page 13 of 36

permits allocated in area E as the blocks bounded by Cedar, MLK, University and Shattuck are particularly impacted.
● We also do not issue permits to NSCFs in area I due to severely limited RPP parking availability in area I.
● Permits are allocated by the facility administration using whatever criteria they choose.

BMC 14.72.105 Neighborhood-serving community facility permits.

A. The Department of Finance may issue neighborhood-serving community facility enterprise permits with a term not to exceed one year subject to the requirements set forth in this section and in administrative rules and regulations issued pursuant to this chapter.

B. A neighborhood-serving community facility parking permit may be issued to representatives of the following neighborhood-serving community facilities: churches, schools, and senior centers. The issuance of permit can occur no sooner than 30 days after implementation of a residential permit parking area and the following criteria shall be used in establishing eligibility of an enterprise and the number of permits to be issued any enterprise:

1. An enterprise for which there is inadequate off-street parking and no financially feasible way of creating adequate off-street parking on the site of the enterprise;

2. An enterprise for which there is no off-street parking available nearby for lease or rental;

3. The total number of permits issued under no circumstances exceeds the number representing 60% of the enterprise’s employees;

4. Distribution of permits shall be through a designated representative of the enterprise who will be responsible for allocation of the permits to employees, or in the case of the senior centers, to users of the enterprise; and

5. Degree of impact on parking conditions for residents and merchants in the area. (Ord. 6762-NS § 4 (part), 2003: Ord. 5972- NS § 1, 1990: Ord. 5803-NS § 2 (part), 1987)

Possible actions for Council to consider:

1. Allow distribution of a limited number of visitor passes to substitute teachers (number based on previous years substitute days).

2. Increase permit allocation to 70% of staff only for BUSD locations not ½ mile from a BART Station or ¼ mile from Rapid Transit Stop or ¼ mile from 2 major transit lines.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY:

No environmental sustainability impact.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

None.

Attachment 1Page 14 of 36

CONTACT:

Mayor Jesse Arreguin, 510-981-7100
Councilmember Linda Maio, District 1, 510-981-7110

Attachment 1Page 15 of 36

Attachment 1

2x2 Committee Meeting Notes
February 16, 2023
2:30 – 4:00 p.m.

Quorum: 3:00 p.m.

Roll Call:

All members are present (BUSD Board President Babitt, BUSD Board Director Vasudeo, City Council Member Hahn, and City Council Member Taplin)

Approval of Meeting Notes for April 22, 2022
There was a motion to approve meeting notes from November 4, 2022, the motion was seconded.

Vote:

Yes: 4
No: 0

Motion passes

Public Comment:

The following public comment was heard by the committee:

Cordell Hinder spoke regarding an upcoming event in Contra Costa County on March 2, 2023. He also spoke regarding the parking item and encouraged the school and city to work together to promote more sustainable transportation and good parking.

Mati Teiblum spoke regarding parking and noted that BUSD and City of Berkeley should work collaboratively to tackle the issue.

Damien spoke regarding parking and the various hurdles.

Liza Lutzker spoke regarding the need to get the data from the transportation survey and a detailed analysis of cost. She also expressed that she hopes there will be more regular meetings around student safety. She shared that on March 8 th, there will be an
Oxford elementary school meeting. She also spoke regarding need for workforce housing for teachers.

Douglas Legg spoke about the opportunity for the use of the existing City garage and using the bond dollars to support needs of children.

Ken talked about using bond dollars for classrooms.

Cielo Rios expressed thanks to the City and BUSD staff and noted that the parking space options should be put on pause.

Dietmar Lorenz spoke about need for workforce housing and classrooms. Expressed shock regarding the parking structure, and that it is not needed, particularly in that location.

2x2 Committee Meeting Calendar for 2023

Council Member Hahn expressed that the committee is very committed to having these meetings.

She suggested the committee think about what standing topics the committee should focus on. The following topics were noted:

• Afterschool care/activities
• Food and nutrition
• Health
• Zero waste
• Recreational equity
• Pool

The committee discussed this briefly and then agreed they would work further on identifying topics at their next regular meeting.

The committee agreed to meet every other month, with the exception of holidays, winter and spring break and summer.

Discussion of Milvia Street Project (BHS Tennis and Parking Structure)

The committee received a presentation from BUSD staff. This was followed by each committee member asking questions. It was agreed there would be that staff responses would occur at a subsequent special meeting on this topic.

President Babitt asked for an update on the use of the Center Street garage, and what the next steps, including expected cost.

Council Member Taplin asked about when the tennis courts became a lot. He also inquired about the status of RPP and Center Street Garage. He asked if there was any update on researching alternative options.

BUSD staff responded that the thought is the City would provide a portion of Center Street garage as easements. The District is checking on the legality of this cost with use of bond funds. It was also noted that regarding the parking permits for teachers, the City Council would need to change policy on provision of parking permits.

The City of Berkeley’s Deputy Public Works Director mentioned that the new parking surveys and associated data will be important. He estimated approximately $100,000 per space for cost. He noted that the Center Street garage would be more costly because it is public, paid parking.

Director Vasudeo inquired about the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the associated public process. She also asked about trip alternatives and what is the ongoing maintenance cost for the district.

Council Member Hahn asked for additional information on demographics and the need. Specifically, who would be using the parking and where are they traveling from.

She also noted she would like to better understand the constraints around the use of the bond funds, and what are the options. She encouraged exploring creative solutions.

At this point, Council Member Hahn suggested they extend the meeting to 4:10 p.m. and the committee members agreed.

President Babitt asked if the rates for Center Street garage have gone down given vacancies going up, and if the cost could be lower for Berkeley High School staff.

The Deputy Director of Public Works noted that the garage is busier in the evening than during the day, but not to the point where there is a need to drop the cost. He also noted that the cost to the district would need to be the same as cost charged to public.

Council Member Hahn talked about other options through changing policy, for example, perhaps the City could look at subsidizing cost for teachers and/or perhaps the district could offer something to the City in exchange.

The committee agreed they would like to schedule a special meeting to discuss this item further. It was noted the parking surveys should be completed in March, and so the meeting should be scheduled after that information is available.

Adjourn: 4:10

1 Office of the City Manager

Notes - April 28, 2023 2x2 Committee Meeting

1. Call to Order: 9:18 am

Present: Laura Babitt, BUSD, Board President; Ana Vasudeo, BUSD, Board Vice President; and Sophie Hahn, Councilmember

Absent: Terry Taplin, Councilmember
Others Present: Anne Cardwell, Deputy City Manager and Ramonda Clarke, Secretary to City Manager from City of Berkeley. Enikia Ford Morthel, Superintendent; John Calise, Executive Director of Facilities; and Max Eisssler, Director of Technology from Berkeley Unified School District

2. Approval of Meeting Agenda for April 28, 2023
President Babitt moved to approve agenda. The motion was seconded, and passed.

3. Approval of Minutes for February 16, 2023
President Babitt moved to approve minutes. The motion was seconded, and passed.

4. Public Comment
Tom Lent commented that he was pleased by creative thinking being applied for the Milvia lot.

Strongly support the proposal to add classrooms and move softball field to Derby. The required transportation needs can be met with a combination of RPP and robust TDM. Need top, notch comprehensive professional TDM survey to understand the potential and design.

Phyllis Orrick spoke commented that the school board considered a possible surplus on Oxbow Elementary site; no action was taken. Suggested that City and BUSD work together to create affordable housing site, in a very highly resourced neighborhood, close to transit, schools and shops.

Mati Teiblum commented that Milvia Parking Project be taken off the books until proven viable and asked how new project presented is part of a master plan for BHS.

2 Liza Lutzker thanked the committee for creative new solutions around the Berkeley High parking issue. Commented about draft survey to the District and that input gets used; consult with the city. Comments on RPP and cost to teachers.

Cielo Rios thanked the District and City for working together to pursue creative options that reserve bond money and physical space for our kids instead of cars. Help remedy challenges for elementary and middle school staff, who use cars as primary forms of transit due to Berkeley's unaffordable housing crisis and challenges the comprehensive public transit to school sites.

Rachey Lee expressed excitement about new solutions. Agreed with completely eliminating the parking structure project. Offered to help or serve on a committee, to move new efforts forward.

5. Discussion Items

5.1 - Partnership to Mitigate Ongoing Vandalism Around School Sites, and Fines Imposed by Code Enforcement

Director Calise presented. He spoke about commitment from Board and Council Members to create a partnership for ongoing issues with vandalism. He stated that BUSD’s walls are tagged heavier and it requires BUSD to paint windscreens each time - typically 15 hours overtime on a Saturday and within 24 hours, 75 to 85% of the graffiti is back. He mentioned that BUSD has been issued fines by code enforcement. They are looking for additional solutions, such as windscreens with preprinted murals.

Councilmember Hahn commented that this goes in the broader context of how the City should prioritize the needs of our sister organizations and sister agencies. She mentioned that they had created a program to prioritize BUSD’s Public Works requests, which would include dealing with city signs that had graffiti on it and keeping curbs and crosswalks painted -- Bright Streets.

The referral to have the City establish a form to have BUSD’s Public Works requests jump the line has not been implemented. At recent City Council meeting, it was asked that this be treated as a short-term referral.

Peter Radu who oversees Neighborhood Services for the City provided an update on BUSD’s property at 1222 University with the windscreens. He clarified that no citations have been issued to BUSD in the past three years. He also stated that after looking into issue more closely with the City Attorney, the determination was reached that the City does not have authority to enforce Graffiti Ordinance against BUSD - BMC 1398. The City team will halt current and future enforcement of BMC 1398 against BUSD properties and will rescind any outstanding notices or citation warnings. He further expressed genuine interest in being collaborative in working with property owners.

Director Calise stated that fines were never paid during COVID and no refunds are required. He further commented that PD indicated that the repeat offenders, particularly at West Campus, are the ones tagging the majority of the City and with talking PD, they were willing to put officers on overtime overnight in hopes of apprehending repeat offenders.

3 President Babitt commented that support is needed for making sure the graffiti stops as it is costing the District a lot of money to constantly address graffiti.

Deputy City Manager Cardwell stated that the City will touch base with Police Chief on the overtime issue.

PW Director Garland advised that the City Manager issued an off-agenda memo in August 2022, updating the community on the progress with the Bright Streets initiative. He also advised that in advance of start of school year, Public Works circles all schools (about a block radius) to make sure that signage, curb painting, pavement markings, etc., are all updated and refreshed.

Vice President Vasudeo commented that at a previous 2x2 meeting the discussion regarding Bright Street was to follow the same model that SFMTA with SFSD which is to reach out to principals. Do you know if that's being followed?

PW Director Garland advised that they will share department update at next 2x2 meeting.

Vice President Vasudeo stated she would like to coordinate with the principals regarding traffic safety concerns of the parents within the three blocks.

PW Director Garland stated that principals who have traffic safety concerns can reach him directly and get prioritized.

Councilmember Hahn commented regarding clarifying two things. One, giving priority to Bright Streets before the school year begins along perimeter of school and kids’ routes to school. Two, ongoing, all year requests and having a system for those making sure they get to head of queue.

5.2 - Update on the Milvia Street Project
The committee received a PowerPoint presentation from Director Calise regarding Update on Milvia Street Project. This was followed by committee members asking questions.

Vice President Vasudeo asked clarifying question regarding why TDM survey is being done separate from the staff survey and why the different timelines.

Director Calise responded that the TDM survey is a robust survey much bigger than what can be done in house. There is a need to know how many people are driving and why; and how many spots are available in the neighborhood. TDM is forthcoming; but there is limit on what can be produced.

Vice President Vasudeo asked who is doing the TDM survey, the timeline and how is the District incentivizing staff to use sustainable means for transportation.

Director Calise responded that the District has not picked a consultant to do the TDM. The District currently incentivizes staff with the Cafeteria Plan; but could not speak as to whether the District has additional money to incentivize.

4 President Babitt asked for next steps to solve teachers’ need to move cars every two hours and if there were different policy issues to work on in interim for more parking permits.

PW Director Liam Garland commented that the plan is to take the presentation to the City’s technical experts in parking program, do some further analysis, especially the pros and cons of different policy options in front of the USD and the City and return with analysis and alternatives at next 2x2 meeting.

Councilmember Hahn requested clarification regarding placement of proposed new building and tennis courts.

Director Calise responded that four tennis courts, the new building, and additional parking will be on the main campus.

Councilmember Hahn stated she was looking forward to having data about how many parking permits are desired and what the City will decide to do.

Director Calise stated the intent to have results regarding how many people are driving by next meeting.

Director Vasudeo spoke about the conversation needed for TDM and how are we incentivizing staff to travel more sustainably.

5.3. - Update on Berkeley Youth Equity Partnership
Director of Health, Housing and Community Services, Dr. Lisa Warhuus, along with Nina Goldman, Katie Cobian presented on Berkeley Youth Equity Partnership. The presentation covered the New Name, Impacts of Berkeley’s 2020 Vision; Lessons Learned; YEP’s Framework and Key Activities. This was followed by committee members asking questions.

President Babbit thanked HHCS for presentation and expressed BUSD goal for partnership with the City to support students. President Babbit acknowledged the work and asked for a moment of silence for Hon. Karen Hempfield, former BUSD Board Member and President.

Director Vasudeo commented about having targeted outreach to Umoja and Puente program participants for an opportunity to be a part of the panel. She also spoke about learning how the City is working with CBOs.

Nina Goldman responded that the City funds almost every CBO in Berkeley, in Umoja and Puente, as well as connecting with the three community-based organizations that are serving the Black Lives Matter Resolution. Everyone will be invited to apply in the Fall for next round of funding.

Councilmember Hahn commented about the need for crisper goals in terms of metrics.

President Ford Morthel mentioned a lot of the partners are not clear on metrics around what the program does or what they are trying to accomplish. President Ford Morthel also commented

5 about how to first get clear on what District goals and outcome goals are for students, then working with partners on what their role is in supporting goals. The other discussion was creating clear metrics as partners on the quantitative measures and qualitative measures.

Nina Goldman added that one of the things learned is the complexity of the numbers – collecting data and how it interacts with each other - programs are doing amazing things with kids; but looking at the community measures, there's a disconnect. Expertise is needed in data analysis.

6. Action Item

6.1 - Develop and Prioritize Future Agenda Items
President Babitt asked the committee to have an agreement to prioritize issues for next meeting:

1. Giving more time to resolving parking permit issue; 2. Getting updates on Milvia project; and

3. focusing on next steps on YEP.

Vice President Vasudeo expressed that there are priority topics that come up at 2x2 meetings – 1.

Transportation -- Bright Streets and Milvia project; 2. Closing opportunity gap and agencies collaborating; and 3. Safety in our schools.

Councilmember Hahn commented about having 2x2 meetings every month. Other topics of interest are seeing zero waste in plastics, including issues around recycling, composting, reusables at BUSD and how the City can support; interested in shared facilities and expanding shared facilities for more accessible spaces for the rest of the community.

Committees collected list of topics for future meetings: 1. YEP; 2. Safety Task Force; 3. Milvia Street Project; 4. Shared equitable recreation; 5. Transportation – traffic around school; 6. Zero Waste; and 7. Meeting regularly.

Committee agreed on upcoming Special Meeting on May 17, 2023 at 11:00 am and Regular Meeting on June 16, 2023 at 1:00 pm. Further discussion is needed for proposed dates of September 8 at 10:30 am -12:00 pm, November 9 and/or possible date in October.

7. Next Meeting
Special Meeting on May 17, 2023, at 11:00 am – 12:30 pm Regular Meeting on June 16, 2023, at 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm

8. Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at10:50 am

1 Office of the City Manager

Notes of 2x2 Committee Meeting
May 17, 2023

Called to Order
Meeting commenced at 11:02 am

Approval of Special Meeting Agenda for May 17, 2023
President Laura Babitt moved to approve agenda for meeting. The motion was seconded, and passed.

Roll Call
Director Jennifer Shanoski, BUSD; Councilmember Sophie Hahn, City of Berkeley and President Laura Babitt, BUSD were present. Councilmember Terry Taplin, City of Berkeley was absent. Director Shanoski was the alternate for BUSD Board Member, Director Ana Vasudeo.

Others Present
Matt Meyer, President of Berkeley Federation for Teachers for public comment; Regina Chagolla, Vice President of Berkeley Federation of Teachers for public comment; Ramonda Clarke, City of Berkeley; Anne Cardwell, City of Berkeley; Enikia Ford Morthel, Superintendent BUSD; John Calise, Executive Director of Facilities BUSD; Tom Lent, President of Walk Bike Berkeley for public comment and Jessica Lopez, Executive Assistant BUSD

Approval of Minutes for April 28, 2023
Councilmember Hahn moved to approve minutes of April 28, 2023 meeting. The motion was seconded, and passed.

Public Comment
Matt Myers commented about the parking situation at Berkeley High for staff around commuting with their children with different drop off locations and unable to use ebike for this purpose and

2 lack of available parking for school day. He also expressed support of Director Calise’s alternatives and the need for the City’s collaboration.

Tom Lent commented about the BUSD survey that was shared with staff members and the need for a TDM survey to evaluate needs for BHS staff.

Liza Lutzker expressed appreciation of new flexible approach. She also commented about the survey to staff and suggested District collaboration with City transportation for more accurate data.

Cielo Rios commented about the need for a survey design to create an unbiased and comprehensive analysis of how staff get to work, the distance they travel and where they live.

Discussion Item – 5.1 Up date on Milvia Street Project
Director John Calise presented. The objective of presentation was to review high level findings of the parking study. Director Calise clarified that the internal survey is different from a TDM survey and that the District will bring in a consultant to do a TDM survey and then, engage 2x2 in discussion about possible next steps. The internal survey has been shared with City staff.

Parking study survey has been finalized. There was 40% participation in survey. Out of the respondents 80% drove to work out of necessity; 85% are able to use the staff lot; 5% parked in city or private parking garages; and 14% use surface street parking in the neighborhood.

President Babitt requested clarification of which lot, and if the 220 permits all go to Berkeley High School staff.

Director Calise responded that there are approximately 220 BHS parking permits issued for the 144 spaces, lot on Milvia between Bancroft and Durant. The spaces are first come, first serve with permit.

President Babitt stated that there are zero permits offered to staff by the City.

Director Calise thanked Babitt for clarifying stating that there are no RPP permits issued for anyone who works at BHS.

Director Calise further stated the study showed that if a financial incentive was offered, would driving to work change, 75% said no.

Director Shanoski asked about timeline for TDM survey.

3 Director Calise advised they anticipated putting out an RFP sometime this summer.

Director of Public Works, Liam Garland advised that the City is still digesting presentation and introduced parking policy team members Gordon Hansen and Hamid Mostowfi.

Gordon Hansen of Public Works advised that the City manages parking via RPP permits for the purpose to protect parking for residents. The area around BHS, Area C, where John’s team did the parking survey was established in 1986. BHS is located within Area I, which covers the southside and downtown area. RPP permits are intended for residents only. The City has several other programs that allow different classes of users to be able to park in our different areas. One of those programs is the neighborhood serving Community Facility program or NCF that allows employees of schools, churches and rehab centers to be able to purchase permits for the areas in which the facilities are located. The City also has a program for local merchants that allows them to get permits for certain commercial districts.

Under the current program, facilities apply every year using the same standard process. By using a standard formula, we look at the number of full-time staff , multiply that by 60%, that gives us the top line of parking permits that can be issued at the facility. Off-street parking available to that facility is also taken into account.

Historically BHS and other schools and churches in Area I have been excluded from eligibility for that program due to Area I being quite compacted. The other reason for this is that the City is guided by the Berkeley Municipal Code that staff must consider the degree of impact on parking conditions for residents and merchants in the area where we would consider extending eligibility for these community facility permits. Because of the unique constraints and pressures in Area I, BHS and other facilities have been excluded by administrative regulation in keeping with the direction from the code.

The question is, how do we move forward from here from the city's perspective. These are high level for discussion purposes, not proposals or plans. One idea, we say we will allow Berkeley High School to apply for these permits in Area I. That would be a departure from our past practice and would raise a lot of concern for the City for major impacts on existing permits holders.

Area C borders Berkeley High School. BHS is not actually within the boundaries of Area C where John's team did the parking survey analysis. Area C is a little more tricky and requires additional conversation, it may actually require council action to change the location of RPP area boundaries.

If we wanted to say, allow BHS to apply for community facility permits for Area C. The other piece is changing boundaries of Area I and Area C could disproportionately impact the existing RPP Area I parking, that's located on the periphery of Berkeley High School. Further reducing

4 opportunities for residents in the downtown area to find Area I parking. Those are two potential ways forward that we can discuss.

President Babitt interjected to allow Q & A on what was heard thus far.

Councilmember Hahn thanked Gordon for helpful information. She further commented that the reason for this conversation is because City Council referred it 2x2 saying we don't think it's optimal to have a parking garage in the middle of the downtown and please help problem solve hand in hand with the district. In that spirit, we need a well-developed plan to go to council.

Councilmember Hahn also stated that Area J and Area E, along with Area C should be looked at.

From a regulatory perspective, we would need council action to say Berkeley High is special and we will allow them to apply for permits in these other areas, or we would have to put them in another area.

Councilmember Hahn commented that surveys are helpful but definitive. What is more important even without a study is, putting programs and incentives in place at all our schools, i.e., electric trikes that have a big cargo and enhancing programs BUSD already has in place.

Councilmember Hahn expressed understanding and sympathy of people having complicated lives and being at different stages of life, and some have the need to drive for different reasons and some can take an ebike or other transit. Hahn also stated that they are trying to find solutions and personally thinks getting permits will be part of that solution, and is committed to all of the above.

Director Shanoski appreciated problem solving approach and the City partnering with the school district regarding issue of parking for teachers and staff and concerns about building a parking structure. Further comments about the big issue of subs and part-time teachers parking on city streets and if it would be possible to alleviate some of the city concerns if those folks were prioritized with the city street permits, to minimize the impact on city streets.

Councilmember Hahn clarified that once BUSD has the permits that it is up to District to allocate them.

Director Shanoski confirmed Hahn’s statement and advised that she was just voicing it as a possibility and that in collaboration with labor partners, they can figure out how to prioritize the permanent spaces and we use the permits in a more flexible way

Director Calise provided feedback that Berkeley High is the only school with a parking lot. The lottery is done now for subs, part-time and full-time teachers, but the itinerant staff aren't considered in lottery - special ed folks who roam school to school, do not get into that lottery and

5 are stuck looking for a spot. The reason is to try and maximize lot to make sure every spot is filled for the entire day.

Director Shanoski questioned if those included in the survey, includes the subs and part-time teachers because of the need to understand the impact to all.

Director Calise advised that subs were not included, as they are not part of BHS council.

President Babitt agreed with colleagues regarding being in problem solving mode. Babitt further commented about the fact that people are driving and parking in the neighborhoods from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm every day, and moving their cars every two hours. This is extremely disruptive for the city's educational program. The district needs help eliminating the fact that teachers are moving every two hours and to use the spaces that are already being used in a more efficient way.

Councilmember Hahn asked if the survey taken of Area C that showed 73% of spaces taken, included all the BHS staff, etc., on a school day.

Director Calise responded majority parked in the west in Area C because that's where most spots are available and why the area was studied.

Councilmember Hahn expressed to Deputy City Manager Anne Cardwell that no matter what, the City is going to have to take a look at this. BUSD has not taken action on the alternative plan, etc.; but feels like this needs to get in front of council in some fashion – maybe by writing a discussion item that President Babitt and Councilmember Hahn could write it together with support from Public Works, BUSD, to lay out all these great “ha-has” we have, with imperfect information.

Councilmember Hahn suggested a general outline of a path forward for the City's piece. The city's piece would be to consider a special dispensation for a certain number of permits to be allowed in one, two, or three adjoining areas by a possible ordinance change to see if we can get a certain number of permits in the three outlining areas. The second thing that should be looked at jointly is a robust electric cargo bike program. Teachers and staff can help us understand what would work for them. Maybe there's some grant funding out there for a pilot of a really well thought through program, either loaners; maybe we give some kind of an incentive to purchase one. Let's have a broad dive into an innovative program. The third is to look at what are the transit incentives that BUSD has in place.

6 Director Calise responded that BUSD currently has a cafeteria plan for all staff members who use public transit that they show their receipts and that amount is pre-taxed out of their check.

Councilmember Hahn asked if there is something we can do that is better or a way to design this so that more people take advantage of it. Is there any other thing that we should put in the council's idea box?

President Babitt said that she heard Gordon say that permits are offered at a cost and asked what is the portion that BUSD in the current structure of these neighborhood community service programs would have to pay.

Gordon Hansen responded the NCF permits? Yes, I believe it's $82 a year.

President Babitt responded $66 and then $185? We will need that information.

Director Calise advised that it comes come out of a different fund. The way that the permits are paid for is out of the site funds. The sites are allocated x amount of dollars of general fund dollars to use discretionary. Those permits at the sites are actually paid for by the sites.

Councilmember Hahn would like to explore allocating permits in the three nearby areas, some kind of cargo bike program, reevaluating the effectiveness of the transit incentive and whether that can be enhanced in some way. The possibility that some portion of the vehicle parking need might be handled in some way with a shared cost or something at the new half empty parking facility downtown. Hahn would invite BUSD to present at meeting and having the conversation about BUSD and the City of Berkeley's piece with council.

President Babitt asked where are we landing on the need for additional surveys or the TDM and what are the outcomes we expect a TDM to help offer, giving the framing that we have come up with to solving the immediate problem.

Gordon Hansen first confirmed the permit cost is $83 year. He further commented BUSD already provides a pretax commute benefit which allows employees to set aside funding from their paycheck to be used for any type of transit that they use. Other options to consider an AC Transit Easy Pass program. It offers bulk discounts typically used by either large institutions.

What it does is provide a discounted transit pass for use on transit at a much lower cost to the employer than a normal monthly or yearly pass would be.

Director Babitt responded that it sounds like the results of the TDM would be to basically let us know how to advocate for more of the public transit uses, the funding sources, the discounts or any kind of offerings we could partner with mass transit.

7 Gordon Hansen responded yes, that's definitely one approach.

Councilmember Hahn responded to Gordon saying that the question is, do we really need to spend money to do a special study; or with your expertise, would we be able to just potentially show a menu of things that could help reduce driving? Or do we need to spend the money on a study?

President Babitt said she thinks the study would help us negotiate with AC transit or BART.

Gordon Hansen responded not necessarily. To the first question, we could start with a list of TDM policies that already exist in Berkeley or that we have studied in the past in a parking pilot the city did about 10 years ago. He further stated that there is value to pursuing some external support given we are not always aware of what new programs or policies might be available so there is some research that could be valuable from a consultant.

Director Babitt thanked Gordon for feedback and asked if anyone else had anything pertinent to the solutions that we are moving towards that they would like to add before we adjourn.

Councilmember Hahn asked if we should take some action for the City team to work with the BUSD team to put an item together, a discussion item to bring before the city council so that the city council can engage in a preliminary discussion of how the city can participate in solving this problem.

Approval of Motion for City Team to Prepare Discussion Item for City Council Councilmember Hahn moved for a Motion to request that the City team prepare a discussion item for City Council to begin exploring the City's options to help solve the parking garage question.

The motion was seconded and passed

Director Calise asked if there was a timeline. He further advised that per the Board's direction, they are completing the CEQA and it is almost ready to publish. He further indicated that they are supposed to be writing and releasing the RFP for the design build of the garage project in July. He again asked if he can ask for a timeline, so he understands the direction to look for from the Board as to whether or not to postpone, pause, etc.

Director Babitt asked if there is a difference between pause and terminating.

Director Calise responded there is. But what he is asking is, does the 2x2 have a timeline to work with the City or when would this action or discussion be brought to the City?

8 Councilmember Hahn responded that it is about putting the item together which includes a little bit of background of everything Gordon laid out about our existing rules and explain what it would take to work around them and maybe some pros and cons of the different workarounds.

Director Calise advised that he can make July work and that it is helpful to understand from a planning perspective when we would begin. If we can do it in July, I think it's helpful cause it informs their work and what needed from team.

Councilmember Hahn advised that she is not prepared to give a timeline due to it not yet being an action item. She suggested that by the end of September, she hoped to have had a discussion and an indication of the general direction that council would like to move in.

Director Babitt advised that her concern is money continuing to be spent on this $27 million parking garage.

Director Calise responded we are but not continuing. The EIR and the bridging documents contracts are already in play and in the finalization stage. The dollars have been encumbered and expensed for that. For those particular contracts, is why he asked if there was a timeframe so not to put staff time and dollars or any public dollars, as far as bond dollars into moving this project to the next phase, until we understand. To not encumber or expense more dollars on this project, he’ll need to update the Board. He further stated if this is where we are with project, they are pressing pause since the 2x2 has indicated is a willingness to partner and that it will go before city council for a conversation.

Deputy City Manager Cardwell advised that she will have internal meetings and then update on timing.

President Babitt thanked everyone and advised the next meeting is scheduled for June 16 th and
advised if any other meeting dates had been finalized.

Deputy City Manager Cardwell advised that Jessica and Ramonda are working on getting those on calendars and double checking that it works for everybody's schedule.

Next Meeting
June 16, 2023 from 1:00pm – 2:30 pm

Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 12:23 pm

1 Office of the City Manager

Notes - 2x2 Committee Meeting
June 16, 2023

Called to Order
Meeting commenced at 1:03 pm

Ap
proval of Meeting Agenda for June 16, 2023
President Laura Babitt moved to approve agenda for meeting. The motion was seconded, and passed.

Present
Ana Vasudeo, BUSD Board Vice President; Councilmember Sophie Hahn, City of Berkeley and Laura Babitt, BUSD Board President were present at commencement of meeting.

Councilmember Terry Taplin arrived at 1:12 pm

Ap
proval of Minutes for May 17, 2023
President Laura Babitt moved to approve minutes of May 17, 2023 meeting. The motion was seconded, and passed.

Public Comment
Jeff Jue made comments regarding appreciation of work relating to teacher parking issue; as well as BHS students looking forward to getting tennis courts back at BHS.

Pet
er Wrig
ht echoed Coach Jue’s comments about tennis courts, as well as commented regarding being encouraged by bond measure that passed with tennis courts and parking.

Ray Yep commented regarding need for tennis courts to return to Berkeley High and offered support and assistance for same.

2 Cordell Hindler invited 2x2 Committee members to Contra Costa Mayor’s Conference on July 6th hosted by the town of Moraga.

Martha Cain commented regarding zero waste and discussion of reusable dishes in some BUSD cafeterias. Applauded the effort to get it launched in 23/24.

Discussion Item – 5.1 B USD Presentation on Zero Waste Efforts

Superintendent Ford-Morthel presented on BUSD’s Zero Waste Efforts. The presentation included Reusable Foodware Pilot Project which included challenges/barriers and where additional support is needed. BUSD would like City’s input around the implementation of the single use ordinance. Sofia Peltz and Stephen Collins of BUSD presented slides for discussion item.

Questions and Answers follo wing Discussion Item 5.1 Presentation

Councilmember Hahn stated excitement that efforts are in pilot mode. She also talked about advocacy at schools and districts for these types of programs and the work that Deborah Moore did on the Green Schools initiatives in hopes to get schools to go to reusables, recycle and other changes for zero waste. BUSD is the only one that Moore was never able to get to move forward. Zero waste has been a longstanding goal of the community.

Councilmember Hahn talked about a couple of ideas:
• Using the City’s compostable list. Solution is reusables, any disposables are not a good solution
• Services that service corporate dining rooms like Google and contract with them to pick up/wash dishes
• Hotels and restaurants in Berkeley; kitchens are closed at night; dishwashing capacity in Berkeley that could be available.
• Labor – there are programs in Berkeley to partner with to provide entry level jobs and job training opportunities. The City has formerly homeless individuals who are ambassadors downtown.
• Motivated parents that are willing to volunteer.

Councilmember Taplin commended the District and recognized the work being done.

Director Vasudeo expressed thanks for updates. Further comments regarding the current use of a dishwasher at Cragmont, the Green team and use of reusable cutlery at the school.

3 Director Vasudeo requested more information regarding which campuses do not have a dishwasher, more specifics around cost and what it would take to make sure this is available to all our campuses or what a shared model could look like and, on the labor side, staffing numbers.

Expressed curiosity of how a homeless ambassador program would work, as mentioned by Councilmember Hahn, from an equity perspective.

President Babbitt stated excitement to take it to next level and expressed confidence that it can be done. She expressed need to understand the cost benefit analysis of the services available to District to contract work out. Acknowledged significant challenges with hiring staff to do this type of work and we also the added layer of being on the school campus and clearances needed.

Further suggested that the District partner with Cal Berkeley or Berkeley City Community College and find out how they are washing their dishes. Also, looking into how BHS can be a spot for Vessel, as mentioned by a student at Climate Fair.

President Babbitt asked what was the plan for the next school year 23/24.

Stephen Collins advised that a plan was not currently in place.

Superintendent Ford-Morthel stated this meeting was one of the things to get a plan in place.

The challenges are getting people, facilities having dishwashers and funding. Would like to work with executive team, work on a plan and discuss further at next 2x2 meeting.

President Babbitt summarized that the District will come back with a plan and agreement for a target date of 24/25 school year, which also meets BUSD sustainability plan goals. Babbitt asked to understand what is involved in a pilot program of washing dishes?

Stephen Collins responded that it is having the people to wash the dishes. Money is needed to fill the positions.

Councilmember Hahn suggested having as part of the plan -- recruitment and retention for this classification and look at you whether increasing pay, different working conditions, bonuses, referring friends.

Councilmember Taplin asked if a union gets brought into the project, who do they bargain with.

Stephen Collins responded staff is unionized. The partner organization called the Merit Commission controls all of the recruiting.

4 President Babitt summarized that staffing is the current challenge. Would also like to understanding costs, possibly partnering with Cal Berkeley or Berkeley Community College or bigger entities.

Prioritize Future Agenda Items
President Babitt mentioned continuing the conversation around the parking structure and the permits.

Di
rector Vasudeo me
ntioned Bright Streets and that there are specific requests from district principals around public works projects at the school sites. Would like to know if there are public works requests that district needs to collaborate on. There are also pending safe routes to school safety assessments and need collaboration with planning staff at the city to implement some of the recommendations.

President Babbitt commented about needing updates around the 2020 vision (YEP) and how those funds are being allocated. RFP needed, Grants. Collaborate more with being able to expand things that are working and just simplifying that process in general.

Anne Cardwell advised that Dr. Lisa Warhuus (Director of HHCS) requested that YEP be a standing item on agenda.

Councilmember Hahn commented about Bright Streets and asked regarding status of work from Public Works.

Summary of agenda topics
• Zero Waste
• Bright Streets
• 2020 Vision/YEP
• Transportation - Safety
• Parking Structure and Permits

Next Meeting
September 8, 2023 from 10:30 am – 12:00 pm

Meet
ing adjour
ned at 2:01pm.

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7170 E-Mail: [email protected]

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Rigel Robinson (Author), Councilmember Ben Bartlett (Co-Author,) Councilmember Terry Taplin (Co-Author)
Subject: Referral: Neighborhood-Scale Commercial

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager and Planning Commission to consider and develop policies to permit neighborhood-scale retail uses in residential zones to increase economic opportunity, vitality, and walkability in Berkeley neighborhoods. Changes may include zoning alterations or modifications to use permit requirements.

In order to inform any potential policy changes, staff should conduct analysis and outreach to understand the market demand for neighborhood-scale commercial uses and consider best practices from other municipalities.

Staff and the Planning Commission should consider conditions and development of performance standards to avoid detrimental impacts on surrounding residential uses and neighborhoods, including but not limited to limitations on noise, odors, smoke, waste generation, operating hours, signage, loading/unloading activity, setbacks, tenant protections, limitations on selling alcohol for on-site consumption, considerations for ADA compliance, restricting applicants to businesses with fewer than three locations, and establishing different permitting requirements depending on square footage, proposed use, or other factors.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On December 4, 2023, the Land Use, Housing, & Economic Development Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Robinson/Harrison) to send the item as revised to the City Council with a positive recommendation. Vote: All Ayes.

This proposal was discussed at the November 6th and December 4th meetings of the Land Use, Housing, & Economic Development committee. At the December 4th meeting of the policy committee, the proposal was advanced as amended with a positive recommendation: M/S/C (Robinson/Harrison)
Vote: Ayes – Robinson, Harrison, Humbert; Noes – None; Abstain – None.

BACKGROUND
Small, locally owned businesses are an integral part of the City of Berkeley, contributing to its lively, eclectic atmosphere and its economic development. As the city has evolved, so too has the environment for small businesses. Across Berkeley’s residential

neighborhoods, there are sites, often on corners and at intersections in neighborhoods, that once hosted commercial activities on parcels where such commercial activities would no longer be legal. While some remain, many have been converted into residences.

Starting a small business can be rewarding, but there are barriers to entry for aspiring business owners who do not have the capital to start their own businesses in our current environment. Opening a small business can require heavy upfront costs and risks — especially given the cost of renting and furnishing a traditional commercial space. Small business owners often face significant risks when starting their businesses, as they may need to rely on personal savings or loans, or even use their homes as collateral to cover the upfront costs of starting a business.

Changes to allow neighborhood-scale commercial uses in residential zones would enable Berkeley residents to create new and more affordable commercial spaces, increasing economic diversity, walkability, and neighborhood vitality. Allowing residents to create new spaces for micro businesses within residential spaces like garages will allow more people to contribute to the economic growth and diversity of the City and create opportunities for businesses that would otherwise be economically infeasible in traditional commercial spaces.

This referral contemplates exploring zoning changes that would enable property owners to reactivate formerly commercial spaces in neighborhoods for active commercial uses or to enable new neighborhood-scale commercial uses in residential areas. Nothing in this referral shall be interpreted to pre-determine the level of permitting necessary for any proposed improvements or for any particular use type.

Put simply, this referral seeks to legalize neighborhood corner stores, and similar gentle commercial uses.

One Potential Framework: “Accessory Commercial Units”
In some localities where these sorts of reforms to legalize neighborhood-scale commercial uses have been explored, advocates and policymakers have proposed the development of “Accessory Commercial Units,” or ACUs. ACUs are likened to the business equivalent of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and are commercial spaces on residential property for a small business.1
The City of Raleigh, North Carolina recently legalized ACUs. The City approved a zoning change in 2022 to allow residents who live in neighborhoods currently zoned exclusively for residential uses to start a business on their property. The zoning change makes it so residents no longer have to first go to the Board of Adjustment (the equivalent of our Zoning Adjustments Board) to obtain a special use permit to create an ACU and instead require a city staff-issued permit as long as the guidelines are met. 1Scott Beyer, “The Case for More Backyard Bodegas and Sidewalk Salons,” Governing, March 9, 2022, https://www.governing.com/community/the-case-for-more-backyard-bodegas-and-sidewalk-salons.

Such guidelines are constraints on the type of business, operating hours, and square footage, among others. Examples of approved ACUs in Raleigh are hair salons, music studios, health clubs, eating establishments, and more.2 The city council cited climate- related goals and reducing car-dependency as a primary motivation for approving these changes to make it easier for property owners to open a small business in their home.3 Similarly, ACUs are permitted in Pomona, California under its proposed new zoning ordinance, which provides guidelines for owners of single-family homes to convert their garages into ACUs.4 The ordinance provides constraints on the type of business, noise and odors, and who can operate it; only owners of the residential property may operate an ACU on their property. This approach has some drawbacks, however, as it limits potential occupants substantially and may reduce the total number of ACUs built.

Nonetheless, legalizing ACUs will make neighborhoods more sustainable and vibrant in Pomona and represents a huge step forward.

Advocates from Portland, Oregon are leading the way in trying to re-introduce retail into residential neighborhoods. Specifically, the advocacy group Portland: Neighbors Welcome in the City of Portland, Oregon is seeking to legalize corner stores (ACUs) citywide.5
In developing policy options to permit neighborhood-scale commercial uses in residential zones, staff should consider the benefits and drawbacks of practices in other jurisdictions, such as creating a pathway for permitting neighborhood commercial uses as “accessory commercial units.”

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
As commercial rents in the City of Berkeley increase, it becomes more and more difficult for small business owners to pay for their commercial spaces. Increasingly, businesses that can afford to do business here will be more likely to be corporate chains, crowding out small businesses.

Making it easier to use residential spaces for non-disruptive, neighborhood-scale commercial uses would create new opportunities to generate intergenerational wealth for people of color, addressing systemic wealth inequities. In the Bay Area, only 29% of businesses are owned by people of color.6 Small businesses in the Bay Area have struggled during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially POC-owned small businesses.

The impacts of the pandemic have helped spotlight the systemic racism and wealth 2 Anna Johnson, “Raleigh Could Allow Small Businesses Back into Neighborhoods. How to Weigh In,” Raleigh News & Observer, November 12, 2021, https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county/article255732896.html. 3 Anna Johnson, “Raleigh City Council Makes It Easier to Bring Some Businesses into Neighborhoods,” Raleigh News & Observer, June 9, 2022, https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county/article262258662.html. 4 “City of Pomona Zoning and Development Code Draft,” July 24, 2023, https://www.pomonaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/5714/638260497917530000. 5 “Inner Eastside for All,” Portland: Neighbors Welcome, accessed November 30, 2023, https://portlandneighborswelcome.org/inner- eastside-for-all.
6 PR Newswire, “People of Color Small Businesses More Vulnerable to COVID-19 Impacts Due to Historic, Ongoing Systemic Inequities,” January 27, 2022, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/people-of-color-small- businesses-more-vulnerable-to-covid-19-impacts-due-to-historic-ongoing-systemic-inequities-301468964.html.

inequality in the region. We can help address this through policy reforms that create economic opportunity for those who have been left behind by the market.

The new work-from-home reality presents an opportunity for neighborhood-scale commercial spaces to thrive. Many Berkeley residents remain in their homes throughout much of the week, working from home. 35 percent of Bay Area residents still work from home, one of the highest rates in the country.7 Residents should be given the option to be able to walk to a neighborhood grocery to buy a few ingredients for lunch or to walk to a neighborhood coffee shop to work in a distraction-free environment for the afternoon. These objectives can be achieved in a way that complements, not detracts from, neighborhood character.

Berkeley’s neighborhoods supported neighborhood commercial units in the past—and they still support a select few grandfathered units that still remain, such as the neighborhood retail space shown below. As Berkeley’s neighborhoods densify and more people continue working from home, the demand for nearby walkable access to groceries, coffee shops, daycares, bike repair shops, and other amenities will only continue to grow.

Many grandfathered neighborhood commercial spaces, like this one at Bancroft Way and Roosevelt Avenue, already thrive in Berkeley’s neighborhoods and harness the City’s historic resources to increase livability and economic opportunity. (Photo: Sam Greenberg) Previously, there were numerous corner storefronts throughout residential neighborhoods in Berkeley that made it easier for many residents to get their needs met by walking rather than driving. But rezonings over the years changed the zoning of many neighborhood parcels that previously permitted small retail, prohibiting commercial activity. While existing shops were grandfathered in, many have since been converted to residential units; when storefronts closed, many building owners converted them into apartments. Once these commercial units were converted into apartments, they lost their grandfathered status, and it has become impossible for them to be converted back to commercial uses.
7“The Number of People Primarily Working From Home Tripled Between 2019 and 2021,” US Census Bureau, September 15, 2022, https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022/people-working-from-home.html.

Reactivating previous neighborhood commercial units and creating opportunities for new ones would harness Berkeley’s historical resources to increase livability for residents. These resources include our walkable urban fabric and residential buildings that previously included commercial spaces. Berkeley has a relatively dense and walkable street grid with an abundance of residential lots that used to accommodate commercial activity. Neighborhood commercial units would blend right into their neighborhoods and harness our historical resources, not compromise them. And notably — there may be meaningful grant opportunities available to proposals that seek to renovate and revive historic properties and reintroduce previously existing uses.

Map demonstrating how little access many Berkeley residents have to commercial zones within easy walking distance. Each dot represents a sample resident who does not live within a 5 minute walking distance of a commercial-zoned parcel. Each shaded blue circle represents their “pedestrian shed” – or the area that is walkable within 5 minutes at an average walking pace. (Map: Sam Greenberg) For residents who currently live in neighborhoods without walkable access to groceries and other amenities, neighborhood-scale commercial uses can make it possible and safer for residents to meet daily needs without walking across a major arterial or relying on vehicle access. And further, there may be placemaking and livability benefits to enabling neighborhood-scale commercial uses particularly around city parks.

Beyond increasing the accessibility of shops to local residents, neighborhood commercial units would create new gathering spaces for neighbors. Many Berkeley neighborhoods—especially those in lower income areas including South and West Berkeley—have very few parks. Cafes and similar establishments serve as “third spaces,” or places outside of home or work for friends, colleagues, and acquaintances to meet. They add vibrance to neighborhoods and bring pedestrian activity during the

day. Increased pedestrian foot traffic and street lighting8 from neighborhood retail can improve public safety9 and health outcomes.10

REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS, PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND LAWS
Under existing law, residents may set up a “home occupation” (HO) registered to their home address. There are three different classes of HOs – each with different intensities of use and different permitting requirements. Some HOs can be set up with a Zoning Certificate or AUP, while others require a public hearing.11 In 2021, HO regulations were amended to allow HOs as an incidental use within a Dwelling Unit, Accessory Dwelling Unit, Accessory Building, or Group Living Accommodation room.12 However, the relatively strict requirements on HOs prevent them from enabling the sorts of vibrant neighborhood-scale commercial uses like cafes that this referral seeks to address.

Additional policy changes could build on successful COVID-era policies to allow residents the freedom to run businesses from their homes without disrupting the surrounding neighborhood. While existing law does create some narrow opportunities for residents to run businesses out of their homes, it is too restrictive to allow for the light retail and cafe uses that this item proposes, and which previously have existed in Berkeley’s neighborhoods.

Berkeley already permits general retail in some residential districts — R-4, R-5, R-S, and R-SMU — with a public hearing,13 and some general retail is permitted with an AUP in the MU-R district.14 However, the general retail uses permitted in MU-R and MU-LI districts are arbitrarily narrow and do not fully achieve the goals of this legislation. In both districts, general retail uses permitted with an AUP are food product stores and building materials and garden supply stores. Arbitrarily, arts and crafts supplies stores are also permitted in the MU-R zone, but not MU-LI. In other words, existing law permits general retail in some narrow cases but is too restrictive to allow for the economic opportunity and neighborhood benefits provided by broader adoption of commercial uses in residential zones.
8 Park, Y. & Garcia, M. (2020) Pedestrian safety perception and urban street settings, International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 14:11, 860-871, DOI: 10.1080/15568318.2019.1641577 9 Rosenthal, S. & Urrego, J. (2021). Eyes on the street, spatial concentration of retail activity and crime. Working Paper. Syracuse University.
10 Zandieh, R., et al. (2016). Older Adults’ Outdoor Walking: Inequalities in Neighbourhood Safety, Pedestrian Infrastructure and Aesthetics. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 13(12):1179. https://doi.org/10.3390/
11 “Home Occupations Frequently Asked Questions” (City of Berkeley, March 2021), https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/HO_FAQ_Process_Flow_Charts_PDF_Procedures.pdf. 12 Home Occupations Ordinance (City of Berkeley, 2021), https://records.cityofberkeley.info/PublicAccess/api/Document/AVnK5eEpL2LZwSwhrcJ9lO29fFzYa%C3%89GoZdF0 8nKHTgetchzTofux68m%C3%81k3PHD4iWqhedYtbcLwv7Iv4PKfR6GaU%3D/. 13 “Title 23 Div. 2, Zoning Districts Ch. 23.202, Residential Districts” (City of Berkeley, n.d.), https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/23.202.040.
14 “Title 23 Div. 2, Zoning Districts Ch. 23.206, Manufacturing Districts” (City of Berkeley, n.d.), https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/23.206.090.

Outreach and analysis to inform any zoning changes to permit neighborhood-scale retail uses ought to include studying the market demand for new neighborhood-scale commercial units. This could include surveying small business owners of current commercial uses in neighborhoods to understand their needs and surveying participants of the home occupations program. One can theorize that some residents may have been interested in the home occupations program, but did not follow through with becoming permitted if they decided that their dream business was beyond the scope of the existing HO process.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Costs include staff time for outreach, analysis, and implementation. Staff and the Planning Commission should consider whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be conducted to effectuate any associated zoning changes. If so, costs would include any environmental review.

Implementation of neighborhood-scale commercial zoning reforms could increase sales taxes and permit revenue.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
By providing access for more commercial amenities within walking distance from residents, many vehicle trips can be eliminated. Having more walkable communities contributes to encouraging people to prefer alternative forms of transportation that do not involve an automobile, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And further, small businesses are more likely than large corporations to be motivated to maintain environmental sustainability.15

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rigel Robinson 510-981-7170 Councilmember Ben Bartlett 510-981-7130
Councilmember Terry Taplin 510-981-7120
15 Corporations Boast, But Small Businesses Are Key To Cleaner Environment - Global Trade Magazine. https://www.globaltrademag.com/corporations-boast-but-small-businesses-are-key-to-cleaner-environment/.

Accessed 15 Feb. 2023.

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]

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Harrison
Subject: Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment or Profit

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment or Profit.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On November 13, 2023, the Health, Life Enrichment, Equity, and Community Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Hahn/Humbert) to send the item to Council with a qualified positive recommendation to approve the Ordinance with substantial edits and as may be necessary for legal and administrative purposes. Vote:

All Ayes.

CURRENT SITUATION, EFFECTS, AND RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION Golden Gate Fields is one of the last remaining tracks in the Bay Area and has wide- reaching economic and institutional power. Unfortunately, Golden Gate Fields (GGF), spanning both Berkeley and Albany, remains a disturbing display of sanctioned animal abuse in our City. So far in 2023 alone, 16 horses have died at its facility.1 The horses at GGF have succumbed to a range of causes of death including broken legs, abdominal issues, head injuries, sepsis, and neurological problems. Many fatalities in the horseracing industry are euthanizations after horses suffer non-fatal injuries, cutting their lives unnaturally short. When CBS Bay Area reported on the most recent horse death at GGF in May of this year it cited the fact that “domesticated horses live into their 30s, but the average age of active racehorses is [only] three to five years old”.2 Some 1 This is a 100% increase since this ordinance was introduced in June of 2023. 2 Bay City News Service. “Injured Horse Euthanized at Golden Gate Fields; 8th Horse to Die at Track in 2023.” CBS News, 22 May 2023, www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/injured-horse-euthanized-at- golden-gate-fields-8th-horse-to-die-at-track-in-2023/.

Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment, or Profit

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
data, however, shows that domesticated horses can live until their mid 40s if they have access to healthy living conditions.3
As horse deaths continue to rise at the horse racing tracks within City limits, it is overdue that the community ensure the well-being and safety of racehorses. Half of Golden Gate Fields deaths happen on the Berkeley side of the facilities. As a charter city, Berkeley has the authority to establish regulations and the jurisdiction to protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare by establishing safeguards for horses as long as they do not conflict with or duplicate state and federal law. It is in the public interest to adopt an ordinance prohibiting inhumane or abusive treatment of horses held, owned, used, exhibited or otherwise kept for sport, entertainment or profit within the City limits.

BACKGROUND
In just the last three months, two nationally recognized racetracks have shut down because of the increasing number of horse deaths at their tracks. Churchill Downs, home to the Kentucky Derby, is suspending racing at its primary location following an investigation by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission4 after twelve horses died in two months. Just one month before Churchill Downs halted racing, a trainer was barred from participating in any further events at Churchill Downs or related tracks after two of his horses suddenly collapsed. At GGF, three horses have died under the same trainer this year, but Golden Gate Fields remains business as usual.

Baltimore’s Laurel Racetrack also suspended horse racing indefinitely. In 2023, 13 horses died at Laurel Racetrack in 2023 and the two most recent euthanizations occurred after racing injuries.

Of the physical problems that lead to regular stable deaths, the three most common causes are (1) colic, (2) laminitis, and (3) pleuropneumonia, all of which are worsened by excessive confinement. According to Dr. Nathaniel White, Professor of Surgery at Marion DuPont Scott Equine Medical Center, one of the three primary situations that present a higher-than-normal risk factor for colic in horses is being confined to a stall for more than 12 hours per day.5 VCA Veterinary Hospitals reports that “severe colic pain can cause a horse to roll and throw itself about in an uncontrolled and dangerous manner.6 In extreme cases, the confined horse can violently lunge its body or head into 3 University of California, Davis. "Humane Disposition of Horse Carcasses." Center for Equine Health, https://ceh.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/sites/g/files/dgvnsk4536/files/local_resources/pdfs/pubs-HR24-3-bkm- sec.pdf.
4 Fuente, Homero De la, and Zoe Sottile. “Churchill Downs to Suspend All Racing Operations to Further Evaluate Safety Measures amid Increase in Horse Deaths.” CNN, 2 June 2023, www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/sport/churchill-downs-suspension-horse-deaths/index.html. 5 Dr. Nathaniel A. White II DVM, MS. “Prevalence, Demographics, and Risk Factors for Colic.” Presented at: AAPE Focus on Colic, Quebec City, Quebec, 2005.
6 Colic in Horses, vcahospitals.com/know-your-pet/colic-in-horses. Accessed 20 June 2023. See also, Jennifer Rice, DVM. “Colic in Horses.” PetMD, 27 Apr. 2022, www.petmd.com/horse/conditions/digestive/c_hr_equine_colic.

Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment, or Profit

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
a wall or other solid object…the horse might also ‘throw itself’ to the ground.”7 Horses likely will incur serious self-injury during these explosive episodes, leading to the severe injury and blunt force trauma that cause many of the stable deaths.

In contrast, providing a turnout in which a horse can graze helps reduces the chance of colic, reduces stress and stable vices/behavioral issues, and reduces the chance of respiratory system illness among other benefits.8
Beyond the severe physical problems that stabling causes, are the severe psychological problems. When a horse's special, dietary, and social needs are thwarted, so-called stereotypies, or repetitive behaviors that do not have an apparent goal or function, occur. In horses, the classic stereotypies are including cribbing, wind-sucking, bobbing, weaving, pacing, stall-circling, digging, kicking, bucking, spinning, headshaking, or self- mutilation.9 Through these repetitive activities, endorphins are released which reinforce the behavior as a habit. These are the same symptoms of deep psychological distress commonly seen in other animals in captivity, such as circus elephants and bears.

According to Dr. Nicholas Dodman, Animal Behaviorist and Professor Emeritus at Tufts University:
"[t]he longer horses are confined per day the more stall vices/stereotypies they will exhibit.

Racehorses are the prime example of that with long periods of confinement (up to 23 hours per day), so they exhibit an unusually high prevalence of stereotypies. The suffering can be described by referencing the suffering of people in solitary confinement. A recently released man who had spent years in solitary said he sometimes felt anxiety, paranoia, panic, hallucinations etc. The only way he could help suppress the dysphoria was to walk back and forth in his cell until the line he walked was soaked in his sweat. That's what equine stall walkers do - walk endlessly in circles (or in the case of weavers, walk to and fro)."10
Confining a 1200-pound animal to a 12x12 stall is akin to confining an elephant to a box car or a killer whale to a swimming pool. Equine veterinarian, Dr. Kraig Kulikowski, compared this to locking a child in a 4x4 closet for 23 hours a day, abuse punishable by law.11 The United Nations deems solitary confinement as “cruel and unusual punishment.” Prison reserves solitary confinement for the most violent criminal as the worst punishment.

Our office has edited the ordinance to be in accordance with the recommended edits from the November 13 HLEEC Committee Meeting.
7 Id.
8 “Turnout Areas.” All Horse Care, allhorsecare.weebly.com/turnout-areas.html. Accessed 20 June 2023. 9 Fernanda C. Camargo. University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Stereotypic Behavior In ..., www2.ca.uky.edu/agcomm/pubs/ASC/ASC212/ASC212.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2023. 10 Sue McDonnell. Equine Self-Mutilation, 28 Feb. 2019, thehorse.com/16597/equine-self-mutilation/. 11 Battuello, Patrick. “Equine Vet: ‘What Impact Would 23 1/2 Hours of Standing in a Closet Have on the Mental Health of a Child?’” Horseracing Wrongs, 6 Aug. 2019, horseracingwrongs.org/2019/08/06/equine-vet-what-impact-would-23-1-2-hours-of-standing-in-a- closet-have-on-the-mental-health-of-a-child/.

Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment, or Profit

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
 Changed the term racehorse to horse to encompass a wider breadth of animals  Included a definitions section to specify the meanings of: “Full turnout,” “Horse,” and “Overwork”
 Included all grammar revisions
 Deleted the felony stipulation under the “Penalties” section  Changed the enforcement role of the City Manager to only be responsible for enforcing provisions under section 12.75.030 C
 Deleted the language around regulating all animal abuse to protect from state and federal preemption and duplication.
 Deleted “mental and physical abuse” to just say, “abuse”  To ensure the penalties do not unjustly do legal harm to low-wage workers, who may also be subject to unhealthy work and housing conditions. The Ordinance penalizes the owner of the horse and/or the facility where the violation occurred, not the stable-hands, jockeys, or trainers.

Ordinance Overview
This proposed ordinance:

1. Makes it illegal to confine a horse to a stable for more than 10 hours per day and;

2. Requires every horse access to a full turnout with access to a minimum of 1,000 square feet of pasture, where the horse can freely roam, unrestricted and untethered.

3. Prohibits manual, electrical, mechanical, or other devices, implements, instruments or any method or modality that can cause injury, pain, suffering, overwork, and death, except as otherwise authorized by state or federal law.

This legislation is designed to govern only those areas not already directly covered by State and Federal laws. It specifically focuses on a limited set of conditions to supplement the existing regulatory framework.

Enforcement of the ordinance would be carried out by City officials, including police officers and the City’s Animal control officers. The City Attorney is also empowered to conduct inquiries or investigate complaints of violations of this Ordinance, and may seek injunctive relief in the courts or otherwise. Private parties may bring a private action for injunctive relief, penalties, or both, to prevent or remedy a violation of this Ordinance after the prospective plaintiff has (1) provided the City and the prospective defendant at least 30 days prior written notice of the alleged violation; and (2) the City has failed to initiate enforcement proceedings, or after initiation, has failed to diligently prosecute. In any action prosecuted under this Ordinance a court may award attorney’s fees to a prevailing party.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Staff time will be necessary for implementation and enforcement.

Adopt an Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment, or Profit

ACTION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Horse breeding is extremely resource (including food, water, and medicine) and environmentally intensive. The senseless waste of precious animal life currently associated with horse racing also results in needless waste of limited and precious environmental resources.

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

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance Adding Chapter 12.75 to the Berkeley Municipal Code to Establish Protections Relating to Horses Held, Owned, Used, Exhibited, or Otherwise Kept for Racing or Other Sport, Entertainment or Profit

1 ORDINANCE NO. –N.S.

ADDING CHAPTER 12.75 TO THE BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE

TO ESTABLISH PROTECTIONS RELATING TO HORSES HELD, OWNED, USED,

EXHIBITED OR OTHERWISE KEPT FOR RACING OR OTHER SPORT,

ENTERTAINMENT OR PROFIT
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Chapter 12.75 of the Berkeley Municipal Code is added to read as follows:

Chapter 12.75

HORSE PROTECTION POLICY
Sections:

12.75.010 Findings and Purpose

12.75.020 Horse Protection Policy

12.75.030 Enforcement, Private Right of Action

12.75.040 Penalties

12.75.050 Severability

12.75.060 Effective Date

12.75.010 Findings and Purpose.

The Council of the City of Berkeley finds and declares as follows:

A. Article XI, section 7 of the California Constitution recognizes the police power of cities to “make and enforce within [their] limits, all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws.”
B. The home rule provision of the California Constitution authorizes a charter city to exercise plenary authority over municipal affairs, free from any constraint imposed by the general law and subject only to constitutional limitations.

C. The City of Berkeley, as a Charter City, has authority to make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs.

D. California provides laws and regulations for the licensing and associated operations of horse racing tracks, which preempt the City’s authority to impose laws and regulations that conflict with such state laws and regulations or intrude into the state’s regulatory scheme.

E. The humane protection and care for horses is a matter of local concern essential to the public health, safety and general welfare of Berkeley residents and is a proper

2 subject of regulation by the City acting pursuant to its police powers separate and apart from issues of licensing and racetrack operations preempted by the state or federal government. To the extent that state and federal laws and regulations implicate the health and safety of horses, those provisions are limited in scope and overly narrow, necessitating additional safeguards adopted pursuant to the City of Berkeley’s police power.

F. According to the American Association of Equine Practitioners, as pasture provides additional health benefits to horses, allowing them to move and exercise and regular pasture turnout should be part of a horse’s daily routine.

G. The UC Davis Center for Equine Health indicates that horses should not be “- confine[d] … to a stall unless absolutely necessary for medical reasons.” The UC Davis Center for Equine Health defines “Abuse and Cruelty” to include “use of excessive restraint such as tethering or confining movement for long periods of time” and/or “failure to provide adequate feed, water, care or protection.” H. The City of Berkeley desires, within its jurisdiction and authority, to establish regulations that protect health, safety, and welfare by prohibiting abusive treatment of horses held, owned, used, exhibited or otherwise kept for sport, entertainment or profit within its jurisdiction and authority.

I. This Ordinance aims to protect and promote public health, safety and welfare by establishing safeguards, protections and assurances for horses held, owned, used, exhibited or otherwise kept for sport, entertainment or profit within the City’s jurisdiction and authority and, to the fullest extent feasible and consistent with federal, state and local law, to prevent and deter infliction of any and all abuse, overwork, and injury and death.

12.75.020 Definitions
A. “Full turnout” means the practice of giving a horse unfettered access to a dedicated paddock, pasture, or other safe and fully fenced outdoor space in which it can roam freely, graze, and socialize with other horses.

B. “Horse” has the same meaning as in California Code of Regulations Title 4 Part 1420(g), i.e. “horse” means an equine and includes a stallion, gelding, mare, colt, filly or ridgling and includes mule, jack, jenny, ginnet, and hinney.

C. “Overwork” means to push a horse uncomfortably past its physical capacity such that it becomes exhausted, overheated, or otherwise distressed. Indica of overwork can include but are not limited to a strained or slowing gait, a lolling tongue, strained breathing, a slowing pace, decreased responsiveness to aids, and reduced coordination.

12.75.030 Horse Protection Policy

3 A. Except as otherwise authorized by state or federal law, it shall be unlawful to use on any horse, manual, electrical, mechanical, or other devices, implements, instruments, or any method or modality that can cause injury, pain, suffering, overwork, and death.

B. It shall be unlawful to confine a horse to a stable for more than 10 hours per day.

C. During the remaining hours of the day, it shall be required to provide every horse with a full turnout with access to a minimum of 1,000 square feet per horse of pasture where the horses can freely roam, unrestricted and untethered. Where a facility houses more than one horse, pasture shall be shared amongst all horses at the facility via one contiguous shared pasture equal to 1,000 square feet or greater per horse.

12.75.040 Enforcement, Private Right of Action
A. City officials shall have the power and authority to enforce the provisions of

12.75.030 C and perform all duties imposed by, or as reasonably necessary to implement, the provisions of this Section.

B. The City Attorney may conduct inquiries or investigate complaints of violations of this Ordinance. The City Attorney may seek injunctive relief, penalties, or both, or any other type of relief, in the courts or otherwise to enforce the provisions of this Ordinance. In any action prosecuted under this subdivision, the court may award reasonable attorneys’ fees to the City.

C. Any resident of the City may bring a private action for injunctive relief, penalties, or both, to prevent or remedy a violation of this Ordinance. No action may be brought under this Subsection C. unless and until the prospective plaintiff has provided the City and the prospective defendant at least 30 days prior written notice of the alleged violation. In any action prosecuted under this subdivision, the court may award reasonable attorneys’ fees to any prevailing party.

D. Nothing in this chapter shall be interpreted as authorizing a right of action against the City.

12.75.050 Penalties
Any violation of this Chapter shall be deemed a violation by the owner of the horse and/or the facility where the violation occurred. Agents or employees of the owner of the horse or the facility where the violation occurred, such as but not limited to stable- hands, jockeys, or trainers, shall not be deemed to have violated this Chapter. A violation of this Chapter is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for a period of not less than 30 days and not exceeding six months or a fine of not less than $1,000 per animal, per violation, per day. Any subsequent violation of this Chapter by the same actor is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for a period of not less than 60

4 days and not exceeding six months or a fine of not less than $1,000 per animal, per violation, per day.

12.75.060 Severability
If any section, subsection, paragraph, or word of this Ordinance, or any application thereof to any person or circumstance, either on its face or as applied, is held to be invalid, the invalidity of such provision shall not affect the other sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences or words of this act, and the applications thereof; and to that end the sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this act shall be deemed to be severable. The City Council of the City of Berkeley hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, and word not declared invalid without regard to whether any other portion of this Ordinance or application would be subsequently declared invalid.

12.75.080 Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective immediately for immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency and is passed by a two-thirds vote of the City Council. Otherwise, this ordinance shall become effective 30-days after its final passage.

Section 2. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

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

INFORMATION CALENDAR
January 16, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Sharon Friedrichsen, Budget Manager
Subject: FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status

INTRODUCTION
This budget update presents the preliminary Fiscal Year 2023 (FY 2023) Year-End financial status. The FY 2023 Year-End budget summary covers the period starting July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023 (FY 2023) and is based on unaudited estimated actuals.

The information is considered preliminary and subject to change as the citywide financial statements and annual comprehensive financial report are being finalized.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
FY 2023 Year-End Summary
General Fund
On June 28, 2022, the City Council adopted the FY 2023 budget (Adopted Budget)1.

The FY 2023 adopted General Fund revenues totaled $258.6 million. The unaudited estimated actual FY 2023 year-end General Fund revenues generated $275.1 million.

The FY 2023 Adopted Budget included General Fund expenditures totaling $280.7 million. During the fiscal year, two Adjustments to the Appropriation Ordinance occurred totaling $27 million, which increased the total FY 2023 General Fund expenditure budget to $305.6 million2. As part of the FY 2023 year-end process, encumbrances, or planned expenditures for services and goods that did not materialize by June 30, 2023, are carried forward to the next fiscal year. This process results in two outcomes: (1) the FY 2023 year-end expenditure budget is adjusted to $289.1 and (2) the FY 2024 Adopted Budget increases by $16.8 million. However, due to underspending, the FY 2023 year-end unaudited General Fund expenditures totaled $258.2 million. 1 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-06- 28%20Item%2044%20Biennial%20Budget%20Adoption.pdf (Items 44 & 45) 2 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2023-05- 09%20Item%2003%20Amendment%20%20FY%202023%20Annual.pdf

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

Revenues
At FY 2022 year-end, unaudited actual General Fund revenues generated $275.1 million, or $16.5 million more than the adopted budget of $258.6 million.

During FY 2023, General Fund revenue and transfers decreased $9,377,271 or 3.30%, from $284,519,452 in FY 2022, to $275,142,181 in FY 2023. Notable declines were the following:
 The declines in Property Transfer Taxes and Measure P Property Transfer Taxes were especially troubling because they appeared to be due to a collapse in the real estate market in Berkeley in the third and fourth quarter of FY 2023.  The decline in Transfers In was due to a decline of $10,947,306 in transfers from the American Rescue Plan Fund.

Attachment 1 includes a detailed chart on General Fund Revenues and Transfers in FY 2022 compared to FY 2021 to accompany the narrative below.

Expenditures
Unaudited actual FY 2023 General Fund expenditures total $258.2 million, or $22.5 million more than the initial adopted budget of $280.7 million and $30.9 million less than the adjusted budget of $289.1 million.

In the end, the General Fund personnel budget finished under budget by only $606,822.

Non-personnel savings totaled approximately $30.3 million, primarily due to delays in projects. Funding for several ongoing projects was requested to carry into FY 2024 as part of the FY 2024 AAO#1 presented and adopted by Council on December 12, 2023.

The chart below summarizes unaudited expenditures compared to the budget by department.

1. Property Transfer Taxes $20,023,414

2. Measure P Property Transfer Taxes 10,391,733

3. Transfers In 10,508,338

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

Significant General Fund Variances
 City Manager’s Office (+$690,013) due to non-personnel savings  Finance (+$1,278,634) due to salary savings from vacant positions ($1,184,494).  Health, Housing and Community Services (+$6,822,773) due to staffing vacancies during the year close to $2.3 million in FY 2023. The remainder was due to unspent non-personnel funds. Some of the non-personnel funds for critical priority projects were carried over to FY 2024 as part of AAO#1.  Planning (+$3,401,450) was due to salary savings from vacant positions ($100,624) and unspent non-personnel funds ($3,300,825) most of which were project funds carried over to FY 2024 in AAO #1 including $1.5 million for the Just Transition project.
 Public Works (+$8,199,145) primarily due to non-personnel and capital project funds not being completely spent in FY 2023. A significant amount of these funds was carried over to FY 2024 as part of the AAO#1 for the following projects:
 Cameras in Public Right of Way (+$1,293,889)
 EV Charging Stations ($1,450,000)
 Southside Complete Streets ($1,000,000)
 AC-Durant Transit Lane Project ($330,120)
 West Berkeley Senior Center Improvements ($163,306)
 Traffic Calming ($153,200)
 Fire Safety Prevention ($109,894)
Department FY 2023
Adopted
FY 2023
Adjusted
Year-End
Actuals
Balance Percent
Expended
Mayor & Council 4,785,155 4,912,933 3,939,049 973,884 80% Auditor 3,006,058 2,905,412 2,633,228 272,184 91%
Rent Board 550,000 670,000 568,412 101,588 85%
Police Accountability 1,120,676 1,218,549 909,307 309,242 75% City Manager 11,628,466 14,075,447 13,385,434 690,013 95% City Attorney 4,010,250 4,711,297 3,701,943 1,009,354 79% City Clerk 2,590,414 2,954,492 2,550,698 403,794 86%
Finance 8,022,118 8,354,606 7,075,972 1,278,634 85%
Human Resources 2,980,172 3,447,973 2,971,640 476,333 86% Information Technology 1,526,760 1,398,069 882,432 515,637 63% Health, Housing & Community Services 24,795,803 34,976,799 28,154,026 6,822,773 80% Parks, Recreation and Waterfront 8,879,746 9,967,131 9,694,847 272,284 97% Planning 3,062,324 6,326,119 2,924,669 3,401,450 46%
Public Works 5,783,759 15,302,097 7,102,952 8,199,145 46% Police 79,269,594 80,248,184 84,895,064 (4,646,880) 106% Fire 41,626,945 41,217,457 40,875,362 342,095 99%
Non-Departmental 77,033,053 56,404,818 45,909,230 10,495,588 81% Total 280,671,293 289,091,383 258,174,266 30,917,117 89%

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

 $100,000 Dwight Triangle Traffic Circle
 Police (-$4,646,880) began FY 2023 with a General Fund salary savings deferral target of $3,738,019, which was deducted at the beginning of the fiscal year.

During the year, salary savings from vacant Sworn Police Office positions generated $2,757,238. However, overtime expenses were almost $2 million over budget due to maintaining essential public safety service with vacancies. In addition, at the end of FY 2023, Accounting made a correction related to the FY 2023 Police PERS costs that added an additional $2.7 million in expenditures. In total, the personnel budget finished over budget by $4.4 million. The Non- Personnel budget finished over budget by $231,915 with most of the overage due to actuals for internal service charges being higher than the budgeted amounts, especially for fuel and other vehicle costs.
 Fire ($342,931) is projected to be under budget by $80,984 in personnel costs.

Salaries were over budget by almost $1.1 million and overtime was over budget by $1.2 million. Similar to the Police Department, Accounting made a correction for FY 2023 Fire PERS costs that resulted in a reduction of $2.6 million in expenditures. Other benefits finished over budget by $236,257. All this combined for the personnel savings of $80,984. Non-personnel line items finished under budget $261,948 and resulted in the total savings of $342,931.  Non-Departmental ($10,495,588) was due to savings for Reimagining Public Safety personnel and non-personnel allocations, Tier 1 personnel positions, Tier 1 operations costs, and Council allocations made during AAO #1 not being fully spent in FY 2023. Some of these allocations were carried over to FY 2024 in AAO #1.

General Fund Reserve
The General Fund Reserve is distinctly separate from the General Fund Balance (Excess Equity). On January 24, 2017, the City Council established Resolution No. 67,821 – N.S., a policy for the General Fund Reserves. The General Fund reserves are comprised of two elements: (1) a Stability Reserve and (2) a Catastrophic Reserve:
 The Stability Reserve was established to mitigate the loss of service delivery and financial risks associated with unexpected revenue shortfalls during a single fiscal year or during a prolonged recessionary period. The purpose of the Stability Reserve is to provide fiscal stability in response to unexpected downturns or revenue shortfalls. Fifty-five percent of the General Fund Reserve is allocated to the Stability Reserve.
 The Catastrophic Reserve was established to sustain the General Fund operations in the case of a public emergency such as a natural disaster or other catastrophic event. The Catastrophic Reserve may be used to respond to extreme onetime events, such as earthquakes, fires, floods, civil unrest, and terrorist attacks. The policy was revise to include public health emergencies and

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

pandemics. Forty-five percent of the General Fund Reserve is allocated to the Catastrophic Reserve.

When the City Council adopted the General Fund Reserve Policy the target level established for the Reserve was set at a minimum of 13.8% of Adopted General Fund Revenues with an Intermediate Goal of a minimum of 16.7% by the end of Fiscal Year 2020, if financially feasible. In addition, the Council adopted a Long-Term Goal of 30% of General Fund revenues, to be achieved within no more than 10 years. The Council demonstrated their commitment to these policy goals by assigning 50% of the General Fund Excess Equity above the first $1 million to the Stability and Catastrophic Reserves (Reserves). Additional Excess Equity may be allocated to Reserves by a majority vote of the Council.

During the FY 2023 & FY 2024 Biennial Budget process, the Council allocated a pre- funding amount of $1.5 million in FY 2022 Excess Property Transfer Tax revenues to the reserves plus $1.5 million from projected FY 2023 & FY 2024 Excess Property Transfer Tax revenues. This funding was in addition to the budgeted baseline amount of $2.5 million each fiscal year to the reserves.

In June 2022, the Council also revised their fiscal policies and added the following language that 1/3 of any additional revenue earned from investments that is over the annual (fiscal year) baseline of $6 million is allocated to reserves (with 1/3 allocated to the Section 115 Trust and 1/3 allocated to capital needs).

The chart directly below illustrates the current status of the reserve funds after adding $1 million in revenues over the interest investment baseline and the FY 2023 year-end excess equity amount of $10.8 million and shows a reserve percentage resulting in an actual Reserves level of 18.22%3.

Unfunded Liabilities- Section 115 Trust
Council held a Worksession on April 4, 2017 on the Projections of Future Liabilities - Options to Address Unfunded Liabilities Tied to Employee Benefits. The City’s outside actuary provided options for Council’s consideration to help reduce the City’s unfunded liabilities tied to post-employee benefits including the following recommendations:
3 Catastrophic Reserve Fund Balance includes $3.3 million loan to Camps Fund - Tuolumne Camp Project. Reserve Percentage based on the FY 2023 Adopted General Fund Revenues of $258.7 million.

General Fund Reserves
Stability
Reserve
Catastrophic
Reserve Reserve %
Beginning Cash Balance - 23.32$ 13.45$
FY 2023 Allocation to Reserves 6.47$ 5.30$
% Allocation 55% 45%
Ending Cash Balance - Reserves 29.79$ 18.75$ 18.22%

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

 Investing for the long-term to generate more earning to meet long-term funding targets,
 Increase annual contribution by approximately $4.5 million per year and fully pre-fund the plans, and
 Establish an irrevocable supplemental trust for CalPERS to stabilize the increasing employer contribution rates.

On June 26, 2018, Council authorized the City Manager to establish an IRS Section 115 Pension Trust Fund (Trust) to be used to help pre-fund pension obligations. On May 14, 2019, Council authorized the City Manager to execute a contract with Keenan Financial Services to establish, maintain, and invest the pension Section 115 Trust.

In June 2022, the Council added a policy that 1/3 of interest investment over the annual baseline of $6 million be allocated to the Section 115 Trust up to $5.5 million per fiscal year, or as advised by the City’s actuarial and staff. Approximately $2.0 million will be allocated to the Trust in FY 2024 as a result of this policy and augment the $2.0 million that has already been included within the Adopted FY 2023 & FY 2024 Biennial Budget.

The Section 115 Trust currently has a balance of $19,133,331 as of June 30, 2023.

All Funds
On an All Funds basis, the City is projected to finish FY 2023, $198 million (23%) under the adjusted budget of $849.4 million. These fund balances are largely due to uncompleted projects and personnel cost savings. The chart below summarizes unaudited expenditures compared to the budget by department.

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

Significant All Funds Variances
 Library (+$4,257,680) due in large part to salary savings from vacant positions and underspending of non-personnel funds in FY2023.
 Information Technology (+$8,227,797) was due to FUND$ Replacement Funds and the IT Cost Allocation Fund not being fully spent in FY 2023.  Health, Housing & Community Services (+$40,536,275):
 Of this amount, $11.2 million in state grant funds designated for specific public and mental health activities. These funds were unspent due to vacancies throughout the Mental Health and Public Health Divisions, including both existing difficult-to-fill positions and new positions budgeted for the full year but not filled until later in the fiscal year.  The next largest cluster of funds are the $15.3 million in federal, state, and local funds designated for affordable housing activities.  Parks Recreation and Waterfront (+$15,269,634) had unspent funds due to personnel savings and unexpended project funds in the Playground Camp Fund, Parks Tax Fund, Measure T1 Fund, and the Marina Fund. Only certain unspent project funds will be carried over to FY 2024.
 Public Works (+$95,958,457) were largely due to the following:
 State Transportation Tax (+$3.3 million): $2.6 million in continuing projects for completion in FY 2024
Department FY 2023
Adopted
FY 2023
Adjusted
Year-End
Actuals
Balance Percent
Expended
Mayor & Council 4,785,155 4,920,433 3,943,449 976,984 80% Auditor 3,101,376 3,000,730 2,711,754 288,976 90%
Rent Board 7,247,755 7,392,711 6,784,837 607,874 92%
Police Accountability 1,120,676 1,218,549 909,307 309,242 75% City Manager 15,066,824 22,190,972 19,826,928 2,364,044 89% Library 24,918,604 24,213,814 19,956,135 4,257,680 82%
City Attorney 7,807,548 8,120,722 7,880,613 240,109 97% City Clerk 3,101,282 3,465,360 2,876,231 589,129 83%
Finance 10,425,037 10,781,787 8,872,348 1,909,439 82%
Human Resources 4,939,883 5,423,103 4,588,217 834,886 85% Information Technology 22,287,156 23,682,401 15,454,604 8,227,797 65% Health, Housing & Community Services 92,548,598 142,639,547 102,103,272 40,536,275 72% Parks, Recreation and Waterfront 53,173,498 64,369,528 44,548,310 19,821,218 69% Planning 27,166,905 30,745,053 24,148,378 6,596,675 79% Public Works 200,373,196 229,008,011 133,049,554 95,958,457 58% Police 83,997,178 86,737,154 89,672,154 (2,935,000) 103% Fire 63,233,225 67,822,949 62,873,512 4,949,437 93%
Non-Departmental 128,882,728 113,644,407 101,008,818 12,635,589 89% Total 754,176,624 849,377,231 651,208,420 198,168,811 77%

FY 2023 Preliminary Year-End Status INFORMATION CALENDAR January 16, 2024

 Measure BB – Local Streets & Roads (+$9.3 million): $5.9 million in continuing projects for completion in FY 2024
 Capital Grants – State (+$10.2 million): $2 million in continuing projects for completion in FY 2024
 Capital Improvement Fund (+$14.8 million): $11 million in project fund carryover for transportation, street, facilities project funds in FY 2024  Measure T1 (+$6.6 million): $6.2 million in continuing projects in FY 2024  Sanitary Sewer (+$14.1 million): $1.7 million in continuing projects in FY 2024 were carried over in AAO #1
 Clean Storm Water (+$3.2 million): $2.7 million in continuing projects in FY 2024
Next Steps
Staff will present second-quarter revenue and expenditure projections as part of the FY 2024 Mid-Year Update in February/March 2024.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Actions included in the budget will be developed and implemented in a manner that is consistent with the City’s environmental sustainability goals and requirements.

CONTACT PERSON
Sharon Friedrichsen, Budget Manager, City Manager’s Office, 981-7000 Rama Murty, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager’s Office, 981-7000 Henry Oyekanmi, Finance Director, Department of Finance, 981-7300

ATTACHMENT
Attachment 1: General Fund Revenues and Transfers in FY 2023 compared to FY 2022

Attachment 1
General Fund Revenue and Transfer In FY 2023 vs FY 2022 Comparison Notes: (1) This statement is presented on a budgetary basis (i.e., cash). (2) Includes all TOT rebates owed through June 30, 2023 (3) Total Other Taxes includes Redemptions-Regular
General Fund revenue and transfers decreased $9,377,271 or 3.30%, from $284,519,452 in FY 2022, to $275,142,181 in FY 2023. Notable declines were the following:

1. Property Transfer Taxes $20,023,414

2. Measure P Property Transfer Taxes 10,391,733

3. Transfers In 10,508,338
• The declines in Property Transfer Taxes and Measure P Property Transfer Taxes were especially troubling because they appeared to be a collapse in the real estate market in Berkeley in the third and fourth quarter of FY 2023.
• The decline in Transfers In was due to a decline of $10,947,306 in transfers from the American Rescue Plan Fund.

The large declines in Property Transfer Taxes, Measure P Property Transfer Taxes and Transfers were cushioned by increases in the following revenue sources: Secured Property Taxes (+$8,182,716), Utility Users Tax (+$2,884,500), Transient Occupancy Taxes (+$1,750,865 net of rebates), Business License Taxes (+$1,449,796), Other Taxes (+$2,287,823), Vehicle in Lieu Taxes (+$1,111,737), Ambulance Fees (+$1,309,390), Interest Income (+$5,422,903), IDC Reimbursements (+$1,683,882), and Other Revenue (+$1,504,957).

Revenue Categories Adopted Actual Variance % Received Adopted Actual Variance %
Received Amount %
(a) (b) c=(b) - (a) ( d) = (b)/(a) (e) (f) g=(f) - (e) (h) = (f)/(g) (i) = (b) - (f) (j) = (i)/(f) Secured Property $75,664,920 $79,260,689 $3,595,769 104.75% $71,382,000 $71,077,973 ($304,027) 99.57% 8,182,716 11.51% Redemptions -Regular 831,441 738,032 (93,409) 88.77% 831,441 759,808 -71,633 91.38% (21,776) -2.87% Supplemental Taxes 2,000,000 3,561,752 1,561,752 178.09% 2,000,000 2,317,723 317,723 115.89% 1,244,029 53.67% Unsecured Property Taxes 3,516,000 3,830,697 314,697 108.95% 2,625,000 4,001,922 1,376,922 152.45% (171,225) -4.28% Property Transfer Tax 34,462,172 22,878,336 (11,583,836) 66.39% 21,000,000 42,901,750 21,901,750 204.29% (20,023,414) -46.67% Property Transfer Tax-Measure P (New December 21, 2018) 14,073,750 10,199,580 (3,874,170) 72.47% 8,500,000 20,591,313 12,091,313 242.25% (10,391,733) -50.47% Sales Taxes 19,016,546 19,194,971 178,425 100.94% 18,287,215 18,928,278 641,063 103.51% 266,693 1.41% Soda Taxes 990,210 1,162,310 172,100 117.38% 990,210 1,025,800 35,590 103.59% 136,510 13.31% Utility Users Taxes 13,800,000 17,634,565 3,834,565 127.79% 13,000,000 14,750,065 1,750,065 113.46% 2,884,500 19.56% Transient Occupancy Taxes 5,000,000 7,477,911 2,477,911 149.56% 2,173,000 5,727,046 3,554,046 263.55% 1,750,865 30.57% Short-term Rentals 1,000,000 1,372,439 372,439 137.24% 630,000 1,295,798 665,798 630,000 76,641 5.91% Business License Tax 19,000,000 21,854,193 2,854,193 115.02% 18,498,146 20,404,397 1,906,251 110.31% 1,449,796 7.11% Recreational Cannabis 1,400,000 997,572 (402,428) 71.26% 1,643,739 1,250,792 -392,947 76.09% (253,220) -20.24% U1 Revenues 4,900,000 5,844,564 944,564 119.28% 5,120,350 4,913,872 -206,478 95.97% 930,692 18.94% Other Taxes (excluding Redemptions-Regular) 1,800,000 4,717,855 2,917,855 262.10% 1,761,714 2,430,032 668,318 137.94% 2,287,823 94.15% Vehicle In-Lieu Taxes 15,926,168 16,659,665 733,497 104.61% 14,959,837 15,006,003 46,166 100.31% 1,653,662 11.02% Parking Fines-Regular Collections 4,326,450 5,875,858 1,549,408 135.81% 3,726,450 4,764,121 1,037,671 127.85% 1,111,737 23.34% Moving Violations 132,600 149,420 16,820 112.68% 132,600 156,253 23,653 117.84% (6,833) -4.37% Ambulance Fees 3,880,779 5,143,120 1,262,341 132.53% 3,154,002 3,833,730 679,728 121.55% 1,309,390 34.15% Interest Income 6,000,000 12,117,025 6,117,025 201.95% 4,462,320 6,694,122 2,231,802 150.01% 5,422,903 81.01% Franchise Fees 1,613,283 1,822,528 209,245 112.97% 1,613,283 1,720,056 106,773 106.62% 102,472 5.96% Other Revenue 6,729,977 9,043,937 2,313,960 134.38% 6,729,977 7,538,980 809,003 112.02% 1,504,957 19.96% IDC Reimbursement 5,490,000 6,758,577 1,268,577 123.11% 5,490,000 5,074,695 -415,305 92.44% 1,683,882 33.18% Transfers 17,096,148 16,846,585 (249,563) 98.54% 27,354,923 27,354,923 0 100.00% (10,508,338) -38.41% - 0 -
Total Revenue: $258,650,444 $275,142,181 $16,491,737 106.38% $236,066,207 $284,519,452 $48,453,245 120.53% ($9,377,271) -3.30% FY 2023 FY 2022 Comparision FY23 vs FY22

Attachment 1
Excluding Transfers, General Fund revenue increased $1,131,067 or .4%, from $257,164,529 in FY 2022, to $258,295,596 in FY 2023.

Clearly, the City General Fund has, at least for the near term, lost two of its three primary drivers of annual growth (Property Transfer Taxes and Measure P Property Transfer Taxes). This will make it difficult for significant overall growth in General Fund revenue.

Before getting into the FY 2023 General Fund revenue details, I also want to point out that the City’s General Fund revenue challenges will not end when the Fed stops raising short -term rates and starts lowering them, for two reasons:

1.The Fed’s monetary tightening includes a program to sell $95 billion/month (or $1.14 trillion per year) of Agency and Mortgage-Backed securities from its Balance Sheet, which increases the supply of these securities and puts additional upward pressure on long-term rates, including mortgage rates.

Prior to the monetary policy change, the Fed was the major purchaser of these long-term securities; and,

2. The proposed $1.8 trillion federal budget deficit for the upcoming fiscal year will require the issuance of an additional $1.8 trillion in Treasury Bonds to fund the deficit.

The additional huge supply of bonds from these two macroeconomic factors will overwhelm demand for long-term b onds and continue to put upward pressure on long -term interest rates , including mortgage rates. In addition to reducing consumer spending and slowing down the economy, it has already pushed mortgage rates up from around 4% to 8%.

The other unknown is how the war in the Middle East will impact the economy, the oil market which is already volatile will probably see more volatility which might put more pressure on inflation.

Bottomline from a Macro Economic view is we are in for a turbulence environment and we need to be prudent in our financial decisions in the near to mid-term.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

Benado, Tony
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Elana Auerbach <[email protected]>
Wednesday, December 6, 2023 3:52 PM
All Council; Arreguin, Jesse L.; Harrison, Kate; Taplin, Terry; Bartlett, Ben; Wengraf, Susan; Robinson, Rigel; Humbert, Mark; Kesarwani, Rashi
Please Watch~ THANK YOU!
WARNING: This is not a City of Berkeley email. Do not click links or attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor & Council~
Several of you have mentioned wanting to learn more about the history of the conflict in Israel/Palestine.

I recommend these two documentaries to begin to cut through the reality distortion field that persists around this conflict.
1) The Occupation of the American Mind
2} Tantura
As our city's elected leaders, please be willing to confront difficult truths.

Thank you~
Elana Auerbach
1 140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

430

431

432

433

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

443

444

445

446

447

448

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456

457

458

459

460

461

462

463

464

465

466

467

468

469

470

471

472

473

474

475

476

477

478

479

480

481

482

483

484

485

486

487

488

489

490

491

492

493

494

495

496

497

498

499

500

501

502

503

504

505

506

507

508

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

522

523

524

525

526

527

528

529

530

531

532

533

534

535

536

537

538

539

540

541

542

543

544

545

546

547

548

549

550

551

552

553

554

555

556

557

558

559

560

561

562

563

564

565

566

567

568

569

570