Berkeley City Council
July 29, 2025

14 24-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP
Discussion
Finding funding
Funding is also a major issue in supporting the night-time economy, and in some cases, there is tension between public and private sources. Many cities are happy to leverage public funds to make improvements that directly support private businesses. In Sydney, Australia, for example, the city had “Night-time diversification” and “Live music and performance” grants to support small entertainment businesses with upgrades meant to improve their spaces and pilot new types of entertainment. This support can include upgrading event spaces, support for event production, acoustic improvements, and health and safety projects. This policy incentivizes extra measures that improve the business while also adding benefits that the city would otherwise want, like safety improvements and noise reduction.

There is even power in cities working together to lobby higher levels of government for support- Groningen, the Netherlands, has also found success in partnering with other dutch cities to lobby for funds and support from the national government on supporting night-time economies.

However, in some cities, getting the government to invest funds in private businesses is more difficult. It often takes creative action from civil society to show cities the value of such programs. In Vilnius, Lithuania, the city government is readily willing to invest funds in public art and culture, but the city has traditionally been very hesitant to use government money in support of private business. Given that funding from the government can often incentivize establishments to implement things they cannot be otherwise compelled to do, outside groups looked for ways to prove the efficacy of these types of governance tactics.

15 24-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP

DISCUSSION
The Vilnius Night Alliance worked with the city to develop the municipally- led “More than a Bar” program to give bars a door sticker for providing extra staff training that is not required by law, for example, sexual harassment prevention. The sticker will provide the bars with a special status and includes a code that can be scanned to understand how the bar is putting in extra effort. This provides the dual benefit of educating patrons and helping the city government quantify the additional positive actions businesses are willing to take when incentivized, making the argument for city financial support easier.

Demystifying the night
On of the biggest barriers to implementing proposals that further support the night-time economy is resistance from residents. This resistance often stems from misunderstandings of the function of night-time businesses and a feeling of disconnection between night-time businesses and their surrounding communities. Solving this requires working with and in communities to help them understand, demystify the night, and help communities realize the benefits of the night economy.

In Groningen, proponents of night-time businesses have focused on building a broad spectrum of political support. The city has found success by emphasizing the business and safety benefits with right-leaning groups and the cultural aspects with those on the left. This has been crucial to the successful implementation of 24-hour licenses that have been in place since 1983. The scheme has brought the city a variety of benefits that please all sides. Right-leaning groups can appreciate the increased economic growth that comes from a longer period of daily economic activity, as well as the benefits to safety as the increased amount of people on the streets at all hours disincentivized crime. The flourishing culture pleases those on the left as more artists, and cultural sector workers have flowed into the city to take advantage of the increased opportunity. Emphasizing the many benefits in a way different groups can understand is important for creating broad-based buy-in for implementing beneficial night-time governance policies.

While working with the most active and vocal sectors of a city’s citizenry is important, it is also useful to educate surrounding communities on what goes on in businesses at night. This makes it easier for them to relate to the benefits and helps them understand what supporting the night-time economy means for them. In Zurich, night-time businesses participate in Open Club Day. Bars and venues open one day per year in the afternoon and invite the neighbors to come and see what happens behind the scenes. It often includes children’s discos where families can take their children to play in the club and give them a glimpse of what it is like to produce music and entertainment. Strategies like these help neighbors and politicians understand why night-time businesses can be a positive for them and their families.
“Resistance often
stems from
misunderstandings
of the function of
night-time businesses
and a feeling of
disconnection between
night-time businesses
and their surrounding
communities.

Solving this requires
working with and in
communities to help
them understand,
demystify the night,
and help communities
realize the benefits of
the night economy.”

16 24-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP
Lessons from COVID
As for nearly all sectors of the economy, the COVID-19 pandemic had a huge effect on the night-time economy, with many businesses that operated primarily at night brushing closer than most to existential crisis.

While many of the dire predictions made about the demise of nightlife at the height of the pandemic did not come to pass, night-time business still used the time as a moment of reflection, and many have come back with a different approach than before the pandemic. Discussions around topics like diversity, inclusion, and social justice in nightlife have led to new commitments for how business is conducted. The right to be safe at work or at play during the night and the right to move freely are just a few of the issues that are top of mind for all involved in night-time cities.

COVID-19 also accelerated the development and implementation of a variety of innovative ideas that will remain an integral part of night-time city life around the world. Through Bogota 24h (the city’s night-time office) Bogotá, Colombia, undertook 13 pilot projects to help spur the economic recovery of the city, with nightlife at the forefront, but also introduced a “Night at the Museum” concept during the pandemic that will also become a recurring feature of Bogotá nightlife.

Bogotá A Cielo Abierto was another project the city undertook in 50 areas of the city to support restaurants and bars as they recovered from the pandemic that will provide valuable insights into policies that can help the city’s economy long-term. The initiative focused on ways to support businesses using open-air city spaces for patrons that will outlast the pandemic and include a new legislatively-approved licensing process.

Making change permanent
One of the most significant issues facing effective night-time governance is ensuring the staying power of 24-hour policies, strategies, and implementors. In many cities, night mayors and offices of nightlife are not written in legislation and can often be shut down between city administrations. It is important that the work that these offices do is sustainable while they exist so that it can survive from administration to administration. For those whose offices are not guaranteed, it is important to demonstrate the value of the office to the wider government. One approach is emphasizing the value of coordinating inside, outside, and in between the government and the private sector. The ability to bring together businesses, community groups, police, the health department etc. is rare and should be highlighted. As is the role such offices can play as a conduit between industry and government. It is also worth stressing the support these offices give in encouraging industry to take more of a leadership role in policymaking and solutions.

DISCUSSION

17 24-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP
Additionally, the way in which night-time offices are created needs to be reoriented. Too often, they are reactive in nature- a city sees its problems at night and creates an office to help solve them. As the field of research and understanding around night-time economies continues to develop, cities must move from simply addressing night-time problems to actually building proactive, affirmative programs and policies to support and foster robust night-time activity with a particular focus on how to turn short-term pandemic interventions into long-term more permanent change.

Part of this involves providing decision-makers with data and evidence in formats they can understand. The ideas from the community of night-time activists, thinkers, and professionals need to be translated into facts and figures for policymakers to ensure a cohesive conversation. In Philadelphia, a partnership between the Philadelphia Department of Planning and Development and the University of Pennsylvania has enabled research across a variety of topics from mobility and zoning. This partnership enables experts to be able to walk into politicians’ offices to give data-backed presentations about how to take advantage of the various opportunities presented by a 24-hour city in their area of responsibility- as well as the losses incurred by not taking a proactive stance toward night-time economic development. These types of partnerships can be an important initial step in setting up night-time governance bodies. In the case of Philadelphia, the findings of this research partnership became the founding set of principles that established the city’s night-time economy office.

However, it is also important to recognize the role that organizations outside of government can play in the continuity of night-time governance. These organizations often precede and catalyze the creation of official night-time governance apparatuses. Their role remains important while official agencies operate, particularly if they are eliminated or downsized. Their proactive work can be a source of innovation and accountability for government counterparts, no matter the direction of city government.

Conclusion
City life doesn’t stop when the sun goes down- in fact, it only gets richer.

From the $35.1 billion in economic activity generated in New York City to the laugh shared with a long-lost friend at a restaurant table in a public plaza in Bogota- supporting cities at night has benefits for the city-wide economy and our relationship with our family, friends, and neighbors. Effective governance is key to reaping these benefits. Building effective strategies to develop governance will be crucial for any city looking to be a true 24-Hour city. Whether this be building out government night-time offices, creating government-sponsored outside advisory groups, or leveraging citizen-led initiatives that push the city to act, it’s up to the whole community to develop quality night-time cities. Particularly in the wake of the COVID-19, 24-hour economic development is crucial for a global urban economy still scarred by lockdowns, population shifts, and business closures. Creating the right frameworks, policies, and initiatives to support 24-hour cities will ensure they thrive for all residents- day and night.

DISCUSSION

GOVERNANCE AT NIGHT
Workshop participants
Resident Expert
Andreina Seijas
Consultant
NightTank/IdenCity
Barcelona, Spain
Presenters
Michele Acuto
Director
Melbourne Centre for Cities
University of Melbourne
Melbourne, Australia
Mathieu Grondin
General Manager
Montreal 24/24
Montreal, Canada
Ariel Palitz
Senior Director
New York City
Office of Nightlife
New York City, USA

Attendees
Ana Almeida
Diretora da Movida
Ágora - Cultura e Desporto do
Porto, EM, SA
Porto, Portugal
Brian Block
Entertainment
Services Manager
City of Austin
Austin, USA
Alexander Bücheli
Managing Director
Bar & Club Commission
Zurich, Switzerland
Antonio Carvalho e Silva Neto
Secretary of Governance
City Hall of Maceió
Maceio, Brazil
Paula Cucalon
Directora de Competitividad
Secretaria de Desarrollo Economico
Bogota, Colombia
1824-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP

WORKSHOP AND DISCUSSION

PARTICIPANTS
Julieta Cuneo
Policy Officer - London
24 Hour Team
Greater London Authority
London, UK
Alejandro Delgado
Líder cooperación internacional
Secretaría de Desarrollo Económico
Bogota, Colombia
Anna Edwards
PhD Researcher
The University of Melbourne
Melbourne, Australia
Michael Fichman
Lecturer, Acting Director - Master
of Urban Spatial Analytics Program,
Weitzman School of Design
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, USA
Dominique Greco
Founder/Executive Director
Orlando Hospitality Alliance
Orlando, USA
Allison Harnden
Night-time Economy Manager
City of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, USA
Mark Adam Harold
Chair
Night Economy Association of
Lithuania
Vilnius, Lithuania
James Hulme
Director of External Affairs
and Programs
Office of the 24-Hour Economy
Sydney, Australia
Alessio
K olioulis
Lecturer
UCL
London, UK

Mario León Ossa
Secretario de Desarrollo
Económico y Competitividad
Alcaldía de Pereira
Pereira, Colombia
Sofia Linares
Advisor for International Relations
Office of the Mayor - Direction of
International Relations
Bogota, Colombia
Adelina
Lobo Guerrero Serrano
Consultant
Alcaldía Nocturna AC
S
an Luis Potosi, Mexico
Francesca Mirra
Strategic Planning Associate
New York City Office of Nightlife
New York City, USA
Ronald
Mora
Economista
S
ecretaria Distrital de Desarrollo
Economico
Bogota, Colombia
Francesca Marina Morpurgo
Consigliera Municipale
Municipio Roma II
Rome, Italy
Jordi Nofre
FCT Associate Research Professor
LXNIGHTS Research Group - NOVA
University Lisbon
Lisbon, Portugal
1924-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP

Esteban Demetrio Parra Martínez
Leader of Bogotá 24h
Secretary of Economic Development
Bogota, Colombia
Carolina Pedraza Guevara
Investigadora
Nocturno Investigar Integrar
Intervenir
Bogota, Colombia
Ivan Pera
Chief of Staff Prevention and
Safety Area
Ajuntament de Barcelona
Barcelona, Spain
James Peters
President
Responsible Hospitality Institute
Scotts Valley, USA
Merlijn
P
oolman
Nightmayor
Nachtraad Groningen
(Nightlife Council)
Groningen, The Netherlands
Matthias Rauch
Head of Cultural Innovation &
Creative Economy
NEXT Mannheim
Mannheim, Germany
Jess Reia
Assistant Professor
University of Virginia
Montreal, Canada
Orlando Salazar Zapata
Secretaría de Desarrollo
Económico y Competitividad
Alcaldía de Pereira
Pereira, Colombia
Cristina Secades
Coordinadora de proyectos
Ayuntamiento de Barcelona
Barcelona, Spain
Claudia Rave
Gerente
Fluir.D.Lab Laboratorio de
Decisión SAS
Medellín, Colombia
Jose Soegaard
Deputy Director
New York City Office of Nightlife
New York City, USA
William Straw
Professor
McGill University
Montreal, Canada
Sara Torres
Project Manager
Câmara Municipal de Cascais
Cascais, Portugal
Ben Van Houten
Business Development Manager,
Nightlife & Entertainment Sector
San Francisco Office of Economic
and Workforce Development
San Francisco, USA
Daniela Velasquez
Prof Internacionalización
SDDE
Bogota, Colombia
Ana Maria Veloza
Subdirectora de Internacionalización
Secretaria de Desarrllo Economico
de Bogota
Bogota, Colombia
Alexis Wichowski
Innovation & Emerging Tech
City of New York
New York City, USA

WORKSHOP AND DISCUSSION

PARTICIPANTS
2024-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP

City Possible
Alby Bocanegra
Vice-president, Global City Partnerships
Mastercard
New York City, USA
Joseph Losavio
Manager, Ecosystem Engagement &
Development, Global Cities
Mastercard
New York City, USA
About the 24-Hour Cities Network
The 24-Hour Cities Network is a multistakeholder group of urban leaders who, supported by City Possible, gather to share best practices and co-create new solutions to address the challenges cities face at night.

Through workshops and thought leadership production, the Network will help cities understand how to create strategies and set policies that ensure their cities are as safe, prosperous, inclusive, and enjoyable at night as they are during the day.

About City Possible
City Possible™, pioneered by Mastercard, is a new model for urban innovation in which a global network of cities, businesses, academics, and communities work together to make the world’s cities more inclusive and sustainable. Find out more at www.citypossible.com.

WORKSHOP AND DISCUSSION

PARTICIPANTS
2124-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP

22 24-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP
Helpful links
The Urban Night Events and Publications
Nights Conference 2022
New York City Office of Nightlife Report 2018-2021
Montreal 24/24
The University of Melbourne Centre for Cities
Melbourne Night-time Economy Advisory Committee
Project Night Justice
Philadelphia Nightlife Data Dashboard
Open Club Day
Measuring and Analysing the Nighttime City
New York City’s Nightlife Economy Impact, Assets, and Opportunities New South Wales 24-Hour Economy Commissioner Year in Review Managing Cities at Night
A Practitioner Guide to the Urban Governance of the
Night-Time Economy

23 24-HOUR CITIES NETWORK GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP
INSIGHT REPORT©2022 Mastercard. Mastercard is a registered trademark, and the circles design is a trademark, of Mastercard International Incorporated.

Designed by Mastercard Creative Studio

CONSENT CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Taplin (Author), Councilmember Lunaparra (co-sponsor), Councilmember Bartlett (co-sponsor), Councilmember Tregub (co-sponsor) Subject: Berkeley Green New Deal: Workforce Development

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager a feasibility analysis and request for recommendations for possible models to either establish a green workforce development board within the City of Berkeley or strengthen the alignment between City of Berkeley and community partner programs and the Alameda County Workforce development board to create pathways to gainful employment in green industries and accelerate the transition to a fossil-free local economy.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On June 10th, 2025 the Land Use, Housing, & Economic Development Committee adopted the following action: M/S/C (Tregub/Lunaparra) to send the item to the City Council with a qualified positive recommendation that Council adopt the item and that the item be revised to include a referral to the budget process, clarify and make explicit that the full-time employee (“FTE”) is either an in-house City of Berkeley employee or is a privately funded employee not on the City’s payroll, and include a privately funded alternative to a full-time City employee when creating the budget referral.

Vote: All Ayes.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff time TBD, est. $125,000 for 1 FTE Senior Planner. Planning staff estimates that capacity for additional Specific Area Plan work to be available in Fiscal Year 2025 at the earliest. Currently, San Pablo Avenue Specific Area Plan work is supported by grant funding from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Priority Development Area (PDA) program. Other grant funding opportunities, such as the Priority Conservation Area (PCA) and Priority Production Area (PPA) programs1, or the California Strategic Growth Council’s Transformative Climate Communities2 program, may also be available in future grant cycles.
1 Metropolitan Transportation Commission: Land Use Programs. https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/land-use 2 California Strategic Growth Council: Transformative Climate Communities. https://sgc.ca.gov/programs/tcc/

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Since the passage of SB 1000 (2016), California Government Code Section 65302(h) requires an Environmental Justice Element and/or related Elements in municipal General Plans to:
(A) Identify objectives and policies to reduce the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities by means that include, but are not limited to, the reduction of pollution exposure, including the improvement of air quality, and the promotion of public facilities, food access, safe and sanitary homes, and physical activity. (B) Identify objectives and policies to promote civic engagement in the public decision making process.
(C) Identify objectives and policies that prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities. (See Attachment 6) The City of Berkeley has incorporated Environmental Justice policies in its plans, most recently in its 2023 Housing Element Update. However, many area plans such as the most recent update to the West Berkeley Plan3, adopted in 20114, predate SB1000 requirements.

This contributes to a growing need to update area planning with recent accomplishments including: a renewed Development Agreement with Bayer5 (formerly Miles Corp) in 2021, which funded a West Berkeley Fund for community infrastructure and resilience; removal of minimum parking requirement;, expansion of Research and Development (R&D)6 uses to Manufacturing zones, including development of a 3 City of Berkeley. (1993, Dec. 14.) Resolution 57,301-N.S. Adopting the Certification of Environmental Impact Report for the West Berkeley Plan…The West Berkeley Plan as an Area Plan and as an Amendment to the City of Berkeley Master Plan. https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022- 03/12_14_1993%3B%20CLK%20-
%20Resolution%3B%20City%20Council%3B%2057301%3B%20West%20Berkeley%20Area%20Plan%3 B.pdf
4 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/3_22_2011%3B%20CLK%20- %20Resolution%3B%20City%20Council%3B%2065210%3B%20%3B%20West%20Berkeley%20Project _%20Amending%20the%20West%20Berkeley%20Plan%20and%2C%20by%20Reference%2C%20the% 20General%20Plan.pdf
5 City of Berkeley. (2021). Bayer Healthcare LLC – Amended and Restated Development Agreement. https://newspack-berkeleyside-cityside.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2021-11-30- Item-24-Bayer-Healthcare-LLC-%E2%80%93-Amended-and-Restated-Development-Agreement-1.pdf 6 Robinson, R. & Chen, A. (2022). Referral: Keep Innovation in Berkeley. https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-09- 13%20Item%2030%20Referral%20Keep%20Innovation%20in%20Berkeley.pdf

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
Manufacturing - Research & Development (M-RD)7 zone; development of a San Pablo Avenue Specific Area Plan.8 While no single policy change will be a silver bullet, these and future efforts must inevitably also mitigate the impacts of anthropogenic climate change such as rising groundwater9; and the overall increasing risk of flooding, fires, and other natural disasters due to anthropogenic climate change.10 The increasing local demand for services and environmental mitigations, in tandem with historic investments in green energy and advanced manufacturing through the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act, present a major opportunity for the local community to reap the rewards of these challenges through workforce development.

These targeted investments are intended to reduce consumer price inflation and eliminate lifecycle carbon emissions by rebuilding the material inputs of goods and services in the economy from lower-cost and renewable energy sources.11 However, advanced manufacturing sectors are also facing acute workforce shortages in strategically significant goods such as semiconductors and lithium-ion batteries, with significant federal initiatives underway to address them.12 In partnership with the UC Berkeley College of Environmental Design, UC Chancellor’s Office, and McGee Avenue Baptist Church, the District 2 Council Office supported field research and stakeholder outreach in the local community to determine top priorities for a Just Transition, and echoing President Biden’s position on tackling climate change (“jobs, jobs, jobs”), most responses focused on the need for gainful employment and income support. These are related but distinct goals: while cash transfer programs such as a basic income may be necessary to address short-term needs, education and career development also can provide a sense of community belonging and self- actualization independent of monetary compensation. Accordingly, workforce development has been central to the City Council’s reparative justice efforts, including 7 City of Berkeley Planning Commission Presentation (2023, Feb. 1). https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/legislative-body-meeting- attachments/2023_02_01_Item%2012_Gilman%20Gateway%20Rezone_Presentation.pdf 8 City of Berkeley: San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. https://berkeleyca.gov/construction- development/land-use-development/general-plan-and-area-plans/san-pablo-avenue-specific 9 kristina hill, Daniella Hirschfeld, Caroline Stanhope Lindquist, et al. Rising coastal groundwater as a result of sea-level rise will influence contaminated coastal sites and underground infrastructure. ESS Open Archive. May 25, 2023. DOI: 10.22541/essoar.168500245.55690018/v1 10 City of Berkeley: January 2023 Disaster Preparedness Notice. https://berkeleyca.gov/community- recreation/news/rains-and-winds-continue-stay-alert-and-safe-while-still-reporting 11 Glass, A. & Walter, K. (2022). How Biden’s American-Style Industrial Policy Will Create Quality Jobs.

Center for American Progress. Retrieved 16 May, 2024 from https://www.americanprogress.org/article/how-bidens-american-style-industrial-policy-will-create-quality- jobs/
12 Department of Energy. (2022, March 18). Press Release: https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe- announces-5-million-launch-lithium-battery-workforce-initiative

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
support for Career Technical Education in the Bayer Development Agreement (see footnote 4) and a referral to study municipal support for reentry employment.13 While the City of Oakland14 and the City of Richmond15 both have municipal Workforce Development Boards that allocate federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) grants and offer America's Job Centers of California (AJCC) services, Berkeley residents can only rely on the Alameda County Workforce Development Board for these services. The above Workforce Development Boards, along with the Contra Costa County Workforce Development Board, have jointly adopted a 2021-2024 Regional Plan under East Bay Regional Planning Unit as EastbayWorks.16 Research in a forthcoming paper from Cuiffo & Sarkodie (2024) finds that this has resulted in a significant gap in workforce development outlays per capita.

Berkeley investing local funds into workforce development to bridge this gap would have significant reparative justice benefits, as the EastbayWorks 2021-2024 Regional Plan identifies low-income communities at risk of displacement concentrated in West Berkeley, and at least 25% of Alameda County’s largest employers located in the City of Berkeley.

Research for an Environmental Justice Element would thus naturally overlap with implementation of Just Transition principles vis a vis workforce development.

Establishing an Environmental Justice Element in the General Plan pursuant to California Government Code Section 65302(h) is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to: be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment.

BACKGROUND
Just Transition Principles
On December 14, 2021, the Berkeley City Council adopted Resolution No. 70,171–N.S. “Resolution Committing the City of Berkeley to a Just Transition from Fossil Fuels and the Creation of a West Berkeley and South Berkeley Green New Deal” as revised (see Attachments 1 and 2). A Just Transition framework for West Berkeley Plan 13 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-12- 06%20Item%2006%20Office%20of%20Racial%20Equity.pdf
14 https://www.oaklandca.gov/topics/2021-24-local-plan
15 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/57308/RWDB-PY-2021-24-Local-Plan- FINAL?bidId=
16 https://www.eastbayworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/EBRPU-Regional-Plan-03-11-21.pdf

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
Amendments should be developed such that civil engagement and centering the needs of disadvantaged communities comprise an interrelated process.

The District 2 Council Office has convened several meetings of a West Berkeley Green New Deal Ad Hoc Working Group, whose work is still ongoing. The Ad Hoc Working Group expressed consensus that heavily impacted and disadvantaged communities that should be centered in a Just Transition include, at a minimum: seniors; unhoused residents; low-income households; disabled or mobility-impaired residents; Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC); and LGBTQIA+ residents.

The transition away from fossil fuels must ensure that the most vulnerable in our society are protected from both the turbulence of restructuring our entire economy and the effects of global warming that the community is already facing. The core premise is:
“Transition is inevitable. Justice is not.”17 The environmental justice movement calls this approach to the climate crisis a “Just Transition.”
Transition is inevitable. In macroeconomic terms, any government actively working to change the composition of household consumer demand (e.g. rapid industrialization amid World Wars, a green transition, etc.) will face significant distributional problems from shocks to energy and raw material costs, which manifest in price levels and/or rationing. We are already confronting such shocks locally and globally. As recent inflationary episodes and supply shocks following the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine have demonstrated, reliance on the fossil fuel economy increasingly undermines price stability.18 Just Transition principles are partially intended to proactively mitigate both the threat of wage deflation for households depending on labor income from fossil fuel industries, and the inflationary pressures of unprecedented supply shocks. In a complementary framework, the Green New Deal19 proposed by Democratic lawmakers20, some aspects of which have been passed in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, was designed to increase domestic high-road 17 Climate Justice Alliance. (2018). Just Transition Principles. Climate Justice Alliance. https://climatejusticealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/CJA_JustTransition_Principles_final_hi- rez.pdf
18 Weber, Isabella M.; Jauregui, Jesus Lara; Teixeira, Lucas; and Nassif Pires, Luiza, "Inflation in Times of Overlapping Emergencies: Systemically Significant Prices from an Input-output Perspective" (2022).

Economics Department Working Paper Series. 340.
https://doi.org/10.7275/0c5b-6a92
19 Carlock, G. & Mangan, E. (2018). A Green New Deal. Data for Progress. https://www.filesforprogress.org/pdfs/Green_New_Deal.pdf 20 House Resolution 109. (2019). https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hres109/BILLS-116hres109ih.pdf

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
employment21 and capacity in green energy industries to manage this transition equitably.

A Just Transition is possible. While fossil fuel supply chains must end, other resilient supply chains must replace our community’s changing needs. Renewable energy and electricity transmission will have to grow to meet increasing demands for vehicle and building electrification to replace petroleum and natural gas; batteries, solar panels, and wind farms must replace oil rigs and coal mines. Californians will have to shift at least 25% of their automobile trips to other modes of transportation while converting the rest to electric vehicles22, aided by more energy-efficient housing, public transit, and e-bike access. All of this will be made possible in part by Berkeley’s growing innovation ecosystem of high-wage STEM employment in green energy technology and life sciences. To illustrate, over one third of employees in Alameda County’s growing life sciences sector had no college degree23 The federal government is also increasing public sector fiscal capacity for clean energy development through direct pay provisions for municipal and nonprofit entities in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.24 Just Transition policies are already being enacted globally. For example, in Poland, a 75% decline in coal mining jobs was coupled by a mining social package and special privileges for mining communities. Canada’s efforts to phase out coal-powered electricity have been accompanied by a national stakeholder task force that has traveled the country to hear from Canadians on how to justly shepherd the transition.

Egypt’s fuel price increases were paired with minimum wage boosts, food stipends, and progressive taxation.25
The Climate Justice Alliance, a climate organization at the forefront of the fight for a Just Transition, lays out the following Just Transition principles:
21 Williams, M., et al. (2022). The Inflation Reduction Act Provides Pathways to High-Quality Jobs. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-inflation-reduction-act-provides- pathways-to-high-quality-jobs/
22 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2018-11/Final2018Report_SB150_112618_02_Report.pdf 23 City of Berkeley Staff Report: Business Support Zoning Amendment Referrals – Research and Development. (2021, June 20). pp. 13-56.https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/legislative-body- meeting-agendas/2021-10-06%20PC%20Agenda%20Packet.pdf
24 Lala, C. (2023). Direct pay: an uncapped promise of the Inflation Reduction Act. Center for Public Enterprise. Retrieved from
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/622cca56a2f5926affd807c6/t/64257e7047150f31bf02e7cf/1680178 800773/Direct+Pay+101+-+Center+for+Public+Enterprise.pdf 25 Gass, P. (2019). In Search of Just Transition: Examples From Around the World. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/articles/just-transition-examples

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
A Just Transition moves us toward Buen Vivir
Buen Vivir means that we can live well without living better at the expense of others. Workers, community residents, women and Indigenous Peoples around the world have a fundamental human right to clean, healthy and adequate air, water, land, food, education and shelter. We must have just relationships with each other and with the natural world, of which we are a part. The rights of peoples, communities and nature must supersede the rights of the individual.

A Just Transition creates Meaningful Work
A Just Transition centers on the development of human potential, creating opportunities for people to learn, grow, and develop to their full capacities and interests. We are all born leaders, and a regenerative economy supports and nurtures that leadership. In the process, we are transforming ourselves, each other, our communities, and our society as a whole. Meaningful work is life- affirming.

A Just Transition upholds Self Determination
All peoples have the right to participate in decisions that impact their lives. This requires democratic governance in our communities, including our workplaces.

Communities must have the power to shape their economies, as producers, as consumers, and in our relationships with each other. Not only do we have the right to self determination, but self determination is one of our greatest tools to realize the world we need. The people who are most affected by the extractive economy — the frontline workers and the fenceline communities — have the resilience and expertise to be in the leadership of crafting solutions.

A Just Transition equitably redistributes Resources and Power We must work to build new systems that are good for all people, and not just a few. Just Transition must actively work against and transform current and historic social inequities based on race, class, gender, immigrant status and other forms of oppression. Just Transition fights to reclaim capital and resources for the regeneration of geographies and sectors of the economy where these inequities are most pervasive.

A Just Transition requires Regenerative Ecological Economics Just Transition must advance ecological resilience, reduce resource consumption, restore biodiversity and traditional ways of life, and undermine

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
extractive economies, including capitalism, that erode the ecological basis of our collective well-being. This requires a re-localization and democratization of primary production and consumption by building up local food systems, local clean energy, and small scale production that are sustainable economically and ecologically. This also means producing to live well without living better at the expense of others.

A Just Transition retains Culture and Tradition
Capitalism has forced many communities to sacrifice culture and tradition for economic survival. It has also defaced and destroyed land held as sacred. Just Transition must create inclusionary spaces for all traditions and cultures, recognizing them as integral to a healthy and vibrant economy. It should also make reparations for land that has been stolen and/or destroyed by capitalism, colonialism, patriarchy, genocide and slavery.

A Just Transition embodies Local, Regional, National and International Solidarity
A Just Transition must be liberatory and transformative. The impacts of the extractive economy knows no borders. We recognize the interconnectedness of our communities as well as our issues. Therefore, our solutions call for local, regional, national and global solidarity that confronts imperialism and militarism.

A Just Transition builds What We Need Now
We must build the world we need now. This may begin at a local small scale, and must expand to begin to displace extractive practices. We must build and flex the muscles needed to meet our communities’ needs.26
With these frameworks, staff and commissioners can study robust and flexible development standards in the General Plan
Transportation Demand Management
The West Berkeley Plan as originally adopted in 1993 was prescient in calling for a “reduction of single occupant automobile trips.” The Plan envisioned several mitigations for increased traffic congestion, including implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plans “to encourage carpooling and vanpooling, walking and 26 Climate Justice Alliance. (2018). Just Transition Principles. Climate Justice Alliance. https://climatejusticealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/CJA_JustTransition_Principles_final_hi-rez.pdf

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025
bicycle use, the use of transit, flexible scheduling of work hours, and other methods to reduce travel demand[.]”
However, the Transportation impact mitigations in the Plan are still codified under Level Of Service (LOS) standards, i.e. delay in vehicle throughput. As of 2020, state law requires transportation impacts to be assessed under a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) standard for environmental review, measuring the total volume of traffic. Reducing VMT is of critical importance for Berkeley and the state of California’s climate goals, as the California Air Resources Board has illustrated in a 2018 report: “Even if the share of new car sales that are ZEVs [zero-emission vehicles] grows nearly 10-fold from today, California would still need to reduce VMT per capita 25 percent to achieve the necessary reductions for 2030.”27 Any amendments to the West Berkeley Plan’s Transportation mitigations would have to incorporate the goal of absolute VMT reduction to be consistent with state environmental standards.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
In 2006, Berkeley voters approved Measure G, committing to reduce the entire community’s greenhouse gas emissions by 80% below 2000 levels by 2050. The City Council approved Berkeley’s first Climate Action Plan in 2009.28 The California Air Resources Board released an updated Scoping Plan29 in 2022.

Following this plan, the state of California’s goals by 2045 are:
● Cut greenhouse gas emissions by 85% below 1990 levels ● 71% reduction in smog-forming air pollution
● Reduce fossil fuel consumption (liquid petroleum) to less than one-tenth of what we use today – a 94% reduction in demand.
● Create 4 million new jobs.
● Save Californians $200 billion in health costs due to pollution in 2045.

All planning efforts must achieve and exceed these thresholds in order to advance Environmental Justice.
27 California Air Resources Board: 2018 Progress Report. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2018- 11/Final2018Report_SB150_112618_02_Report.pdf
28 City of Berkeley: Climate Action Plan. https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Berkeley- Climate-Action-Plan.pdf
29 California Air Resources Board: 2022 Scoping Plan. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-releases- final-2022-climate-scoping-plan-proposal

Just Transition Framework for West Berkeley Plan Consent Calendar JULY 29, 2025

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Taplin Council District 2 510-981-7120
Attachments:
1: 2021-12-14 Annotated Agenda - Berkeley City Council Meeting 2: 2021-12-14 Item 35 Commit the City of Berkeley to a Just Transition (Supp. 2) 3: Fact Sheet: The Weight of Cities - United Nations International Resources Panel 4: Senate Bill 1000 (2016)
5: Workforce Development Recommendations to Advance Berkeley’s Green New Deal Policy by Yaa Freemah Sarkodie and Kathryn Cuiff

Igor Tregub Councilmember, District 4
Mark Humbert, Councilmember, District 8
Cecilia Lunaparra, Councilmember, District 7

CONSENT CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Igor Tregub (Author), Councilmember Mark Humbert (co- sponsor), Councilmember Cecilia Lunaparra (co-sponsor)
Subject: Resolution in Support of California Senate Bill 627 (Wiener, Arreguín, Pérez), the No Secret Police Act, to Prohibit Non-Essential Face Covering for Law Enforcement and Require Officer Identification During Operations

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution in support of California State Senate Bill (SB) 627 (Wiener, Arreguín, Pérez), the No Secret Police Act, which would prohibit law enforcement officers from covering their faces during operations (with exceptions for medical and fire-related protection), and require visible identification on uniforms in the state of California; and distribute copies to the California Governor Gavin Newsom, Senators Scott Wiener, Jesse Arreguín, and Sasha Renée Pérez, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, California Senate President pro tempore Mike McGuire, and California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas to advocate for its passage.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Amid increasing public concern about the presence of unidentified, masked law enforcement agents conducting operations in communities across California, SB 627 would prohibit law enforcement officers of all levels from covering their faces while interacting with the public. The bill allows for exceptions for approved face coverings and their appropriate uses, including, but not limited to, N-95 masks to prevent the spread of airborne diseases or wildfire smoke inhalation.

SB 627 also establishes a statewide standard for law enforcement transparency and accountability by requiring officers to display names or other identifying information while performing official duties, with exceptions for officers engaged in an undercover assignment. The bill will enforce such violations as infractions for sworn peace officers and a misdemeanor for non-sworn peace officers.

Cities across California, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Concord, and Montebello, have recently been subject to federal operations by agents wearing masks and lacking visible identification. These concealments of identification erode public trust and create fear. In several incidents, individuals have been detained without due process, having their rights denied in detention centers.1 United States citizens have also been wrongfully detained by immigration enforcement, leading to further mistrust.2 The presence of unnecessarily masked and unidentifiable agents undermines democratic principles and disrupts communities, and reduces public willingness to engage with law enforcement, report crimes, or testify in court. In the worst cases, this erosion of trust in law enforcement inspires vigilantism.

In South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Florida, individuals in several incidents have been caught, and some charged, with impersonating law enforcement.3 These incidents are often committed with the intention of intimidating individuals that the perpetrators racially profile as immigrants. California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a warning in response to increased reports of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) impersonators and other immigration scams.4 By requiring visible identification on uniforms, these impersonators will be more easily identified as imposters.

This bill intends to strengthen public trust and safeguard against secretive, extrajudicial enforcement by ensuring that all law enforcement personnel conducting operations in California do so in an open and accountable manner.

The City of Berkeley Chief of Police was consulted in recommendations for this Resolution.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Limited staff time associated with communicating the city’s position to the State representatives.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
1 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ice-record-59000-immigrant-detainees-half-no-criminal-record/ 2 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/16/los-angeles-immigration-raids-montebello 3 https://prospect.org/justice/2025-06-24-ice-impersonations-proliferate-agencys-undercover-tactics/ 4 https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-issues-warning-amid-increased-reports-fake-ice- officers

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

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Igor Tregub, Council District 4
510-981-7140
[email protected]
Amy Johnson, Legislative Aide, Council District 4
[email protected]
Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Fact Sheet

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

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 627, THE NO SECRET

POLICE ACT, TO PROHIBIT NON-ESSENTIAL FACE COVERINGS FOR LAW

ENFORCEMENT AND REQUIRE OFFICER IDENTIFICATION DURING

OPERATIONS
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 627 (Wiener, Arreguín, Pérez) seeks to prohibit law enforcement officers at all levels operating in California from covering their faces during operations, with exceptions for personal protection against airborne diseases, wildfire smoke, and other dangers; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 627 would also require all officers to display names or other identifying information while performing official duties; and WHEREAS, recent operations conducted by unidentified and masked law enforcement agents have bred fear and distrust in communities across California, particularly among immigrant populations and communities of color; and
WHEREAS, these secretive operations bear troubling similarities to tactics used by authoritarian regimes to intimidate and detain civilians without accountability or oversight; and
WHEREAS, the nation was witnessed an increase of impersonation of law enforcement, particularly by individuals targeting people of Latine descent; and WHEREAS, identification requirements will prevent further these incidents of law enforcement impersonation; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 627 explicitly affirms the Legislature’s intent to allow Special Weapons and Tactics (S.W.A.T). and tactical officers to protect their physical safety while maintaining transparency and public accountability; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 627 enhances public safety by protecting civilians from impersonation and vigilantism, and intends to dissuade unconstitutional detentions by encouraging accountability; and
WHEREAS, Berkeley has a longstanding commitment to police reform, civil liberties, and community accountability and supports efforts that promote transparent, constitutional policing practices; and
WHEREAS, California has a responsibility to lead on civil rights protections, especially when federal agencies engage in practices that violate the principles of transparency and due process

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Berkeley City Council hereby declares its support for California Senate Bill 627, which prohibits face coverings by law enforcement during public interactions and requires officers to display identifying information; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Berkeley City Council directs the City Manager to distribute copies of this resolution to California Governor Gavin Newsom, Senators Scott Wiener, Jesse Arreguín, and Sasha Renée Pérez, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, California Senate President Pro Tempore Mike McGuire, and California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas in strong support of California Senate Bill 627.

SB 627 No Secret Police in America Act – 6.16.25

SUMMARY
Senate Bill 627 prohibits law enforcement at all
levels operating in California from covering their
faces while conducting operations, with limited
exemptions for masking for medical or fire-
related reasons. The bill states the intent to ensure
SWAT officers can protect their faces further
requires officers to have their names or other
identifying information on their uniforms.

Public safety depends on the public’s trust in law
enforcement, and public trust is undermined
when masked, unidentified, and armed agents
disrupt communities and disappear members of
the public without warrant or warning and
without anyone knowing who they are. It
foments an atmosphere of chaos and mistrust and
encourages vigilantism. SB 627 bolsters public
safety and trust in law enforcement by requiring
enforcement be conducted in an open and
transparent manner — and making crystal clear
that in America, there are no secret police.

BACKGROUND
In recent months, federal law enforcement
officials have conducted raids — in California
and across the country — while covering their
faces and, at times, badges, names, and other
identifying information. They sometimes wear
jackets stating “Police” — effectively
impersonating local law enforcement. Such raids
have occurred in Los Angeles, San Francisco,
Concord, Downey, Montebello, and many other
places since the new federal administration
began ramping up its immigration enforcement
efforts.

In some operations, federal law enforcement
have appeared masked to grab residents off the
street and whisk them away to detention centers
across state lines without contacting their
families or loved ones. University students,
workers, and others have been grabbed off the
street, sent to detention centers and even been
sent to a gulag in El Salvador.

The use of face coverings and failure to provide
identifying information have uncovered a glaring
omission in state law: that all law enforcement
should be identifying themselves and not hiding
their identities. Given that the current federal
administration is urging and even trying to force
state and local law enforcement to help enforce
immigration laws, California should end this
omission for all levels of law enforcement.

Secret police forces are core features of
authoritarian regimes. They frequently appear
masked and unidentified to intimidate or
disappear members of the ruling regime’s
political opposition. One in four Californians was
born outside of the U.S., and many have direct —
and frequently traumatic — experience with such
secret police in their home countries.

PROBLEM
The introduction of unidentified law enforcement
conducting operations in the U.S. is already
disrupting communities and undermining public
safety. In Florida, a woman was recently arrested
for allegedly dressing as a masked ICE officer
and kidnapping her ex-boyfriend's wife. Public
acceptance of secret police tactics will only
inspire more copycat behavior from the public.

Masking their faces while conducting operations
undermines the public’s trust in law enforcement
Senator Scott Wiener, 11th Senate District
Senate Bill 627 – No Secret Police Act Fact Sheet

SB 627 No Secret Police in America Act – 6.16.25
– making it less likely people will report crimes
and testify in court. This practice also inspires an
environment of fear among the general public
that runs counter to the basic principles of
democracy.

SOLUTION
SB 627 prohibits law enforcement officers from
wearing any mask or personal disguise while
interacting with the public in the performance of
their duties. The bill exempts medical grade
masks (surgical or N95) and masks designed to
protect against exposure to smoke during a state
of emergency related to wildfires. The bill
defines law enforcement officers as any officer
of a local, state, or federal law enforcement
agency, or any person acting on behalf of a local,
state, or federal law enforcement agency. A
violation of this prohibition is punishable as a
misdemeanor.

This bill also states that it is the intent of the
Legislature to ensure that SWAT officers can
protect their faces from physical harm while
performing their responsibilities and to require
local, state, and federal law enforcement officers
to include their names or other identifying
information on their uniforms.

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Stella Fontus, Policy Analyst
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (916) 651-4011

Berkeley City Councilmember
Mark Humbert, District 8
2180 Milvia Street, 5th Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704
[email protected]
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7180 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Humbert (Author)
Subject: Berkeley’s First Sun Day Event: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to General Fund and Grant of Such Funds

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $500 per Councilmember including $500 from Councilmember Humbert to the Berkeley Rotary Club for the purpose of covering costs associated with hosting Berkeley’s inaugural “Sun Day” renewable energy festival on Sunday, September 21, 2025 with funds relinquished to the City’s General Fund for this purpose from the discretionary Council Office Budgets of Councilmember Humbert and any other Councilmembers who would like to contribute.

BACKGROUND
Solar energy and electrification have a bright future, and the City of Berkeley has existing policies and programs to shine a light on clean energy. Berkeley’s Sun Day celebration will be a free, all-ages community gathering at Willard Park’s new LEED- certified clubhouse on Sunday, September 21st.

The event will make clean energy feel local, doable, and joyful by showing residents tangible ways to electrify their homes and lives, while showcasing our city’s leadership in the clean energy transition. This event would celebrate renewable energy, spotlight new technologies, and help people warm up to appliances like induction stoves and heat pumps. With local partners, hands-on activities, and practical resources, Sun Day will empower Berkeley neighbors to take meaningful climate action together.

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

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

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Mark Humbert Council District 8 510-981-7180

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

BERKELEY SUN DAY EVENT 2025
WHEREAS, solar energy and electrification have a bright future, and the City of Berkeley has existing policies and programs to shine a light on clean energy; and WHEREAS, Berkeley’s Sun Day celebration will be a free, all-ages community gathering at Willard Park’s new LEED-certified clubhouse on Sunday, September 21st, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the event will make clean energy feel local, doable, and joyful by showing residents tangible ways to electrify their homes and lives, while showcasing our city’s leadership in the clean energy transition; and
WHEREAS, neighborhood and city events like this energize our community; and WHEREAS, this event would celebrate renewable energy, spotlight new technologies, and help people warm up to appliances like induction stoves and heat pumps; and WHEREAS, Councilmember has surplus funds in his office expenditure account, which would rays needed support for the event; and
WHEREAS, the Berkeley Rotary Club and the Sierra Club plan a fusion of effort to support the festivities; and
WHEREAS, with local partners, hands-on activities, and practical resources, Sun Day will empower Berkeley neighbors to take meaningful climate action together; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that funds relinquished by the Councilmembers from their Council Office Budgets up to $500 per office shall be granted to the Berkeley Rotary Club for helping cover the costs of the First Berkeley Sun Day Event.

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
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Jordan Klein, Director, Planning and Development Department Subject: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): Amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions) to Allow Separate Sale of ADUs, and Amendments to Title 23 (Zoning) to Comply with State Law and Encourage ADU Development

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing, and upon conclusion, adopt the first reading of an Ordinance to 1) amend Title 21 (Subdivisions Ordinance) to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1033 by establishing local regulations for the separate sale of ADUs as condominiums; and 2) amend Title 23 (Zoning) to bring the City’s ADU regulations into compliance with recent changes to State law, to incorporate feedback from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), and encourage ADU development.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions) for ADU Condominiums The Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) does not currently provide for the separate sale of ADUs. Assembly Bill (AB) 1033, a state law passed in 2024, permits municipalities to create regulations to permit the separate sale of ADUs. On May 14, 2024, the City Council adopted a referral (Attachment 2) to prepare an ordinance to permit the separate sales of ADUs in Berkeley as allowed under AB1033. The referral highlighted the potential of ADU condominiums to expand homeownership opportunities for moderate-income households, help existing homeowners build equity, and increase the supply of naturally affordable housing in the city. The proposed amendments to BMC Title 21 would provide for such separate sales.

Currently, condominium conversions are regulated in BMC Chapter 21.28 (Condominiums and Other Common Interest Subdivisions). The Planning Commission’s recommendation would treat ADU condominiums differently than typical condominiums.

These differences include:

Amendments to BMC Title 21 and Title 23 regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING July 29, 2025

 Condominium Conversion Mitigation Fee: The proposed ordinance does not apply the Condominium Conversion Mitigation Fee to ADU condominiums. The Planning Commission felt the fee was unnecessary given the small scale of likely ADU condominium projects, and expressed concern that the amount of the Fee would discourage the creation of affordable homeownership opportunities from ADU condominiums.
 Tenant Protections: The Commission affirmed the importance of maintaining tenant protections consistent with existing Chapter 21.28 requirements, including notice provisions and the right to remain in a unit after conversion.

Under the Berkeley Rent Stabilization Ordinance (BMC 13.76), ADUs fall into two rent-ordinance categories, which in turn determine which tenant protections apply upon conversion:

Rent-Ordinance
Status
Description Tenant Protections
Covered Rental
ADU
An ADU on a parcel with a
multifamily building, once the
initial rent is established.
 Right of first
refusal (1 year);
 Right to remain
after conversion.

Exempt ADU A parcel with a single-family
dwelling plus a single ADU is
treated as a “single-family”
property, so both units are
exempt.
 None.

For purposes of the ADU Condominium ordinance, any Covered Rental ADU remains subject to the tenant-protection provisions of BMC Chapter 21.28, specifically the tenant’s right to remain in the unit after conversion (BMC

21.28.090(C)(4)), and a tenant’s exclusive right to purchase the unit.

Amendments to Title 23 (Zoning)
The City's current ADU regulations are not consistent with state law. Certain recent changes in State law have not yet been reflected in the Berkeley Municipal Code. In addition, feedback from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) (Attachment 4) states that the City's existing provisions are not consistent with State law. The proposed amendments to BMC Title 23 would address HCD’s comments, and make the City’s ADU regulations consistent with recent changes to State law.

Amendments to BMC Title 21 and Title 23 regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING July 29, 2025

The Planning Commission also made three policy changes to promote the construction of ADUs that were not a result of a need to comply with state law. The proposed amendments are summarized below in Table 1.

Table1 Summary of ADU Ordinance Changes
Ord
Section
BMC Section Section Title Summary of Change Rationale
2 23.306.010 Purpose Updates code references from
former Gov. Code sections to new
Gov. Code § 66314–66339.

Technical
edit: update
reference.
3 23.306.020(C) Density
Exemption and
Growth Limits
Revises BMC to explicitly state
that ADUs do not count toward
density, are consistent with
GP/zoning, and are exempt from
growth controls (per Gov. Code §
66319).

State law
requirement.
4 Table 23.306-1 Number of Units
Allowed
Clarifies that one conversion
ADU, one new construction ADU,
and one JADU are permitted on
lots with single-family dwellings.

For lots with multifamily dwellings,
allows up to 8 detached ADUs
(not exceeding number of units)
and interior ADUs up to 25% of
the total units.

State law
requirement.

Increases the size of permitted
ADUs to 1,200 sq. ft. and
removes size requirements based
on the number of bedrooms.

Planning
Commission
direction to
encourage
ADUs.

Removes front setback and
building separation standards.

State law
requirement.
5 Table 23.306-2 ADU
Development
Standards
Revises height requirements to
allow 25 ft. for both detached and
attached ADUs
Planning
Commission
direction to
encourage
ADUs.

23.306.030(A)(2) Duplex or Multi-
Family Dwelling
Conversion
Updates BMC to reflect State law
by replacing “main building” with
“multifamily building structures”
and refining examples of non-
living space. Removes the term
“Duplex” for consistency with
related changes throughout the
BMC.

Technical
edits.
6 23.306.030(A)(3) Accessory
Building or
Accessory
Structure
Conversion
Removes “legally established”
requirement
State law
requirement.

Amendments to BMC Title 21 and Title 23 regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING July 29, 2025

23.306.030(A)(4) Front Setback,
New Construction
Removes section for consistency
with revisions to Table 23.306-2,
Development Standards.

Technical
edit:
consistency.

23.306.030(A)(7) Building
Separation for
Attached ADU
Removes section for consistency
with revisions to Table 23.306-2,
Development Standards.

Technical
edit:
consistency.
7 23.306.030(B)(1) JADU Basic
Standards
Clarifies spaces considered
“within” an existing dwelling or
structure.

State law
requirement.
8 23.306.030(D) Rooftop Decks Allows rooftop decks for all ADUs with additional height provisions.

Planning
Commission
direction to
encourage
ADUs.
9 23.306.040(A) Zoning Certificate
Review
Clarifies that review of ADUs is
ministerial, and applications must
be approved or denied within 60
days. Adds denial notice
requirement per Gov. Code §
66317(b).

State law
requirement.
10 23.306.040(C) Deed Restriction Updates section to refer to BMC Chapter 21.29 and state law for
separate sale; clarifies JADU
rental/sale terms per Gov. Code §
66333, 66340–66341.

Technical
edit;
consistency
11 23.306.040(D) Qualified
Nonprofit
Developer Sales
Updates state law reference to
Gov. Code § 66341; clarifies
required TIC agreement
provisions.

State law
requirement.
12 23.322.030 Parking
Requirements
Removes existing off-street
parking requirements within the
Hillside Overlay.

State law
requirement.

The Planning Commission recommended three additional policy changes that, while not required by State law, are intended to incentivize the construction of ADUs:
 Maximum Gross Floor Area (Ordinance Section 5): Currently, the maximum gross floor area for ADUs is determined by the number of bedrooms included in a proposed ADU. ADUs that are studios or one bedrooms are limited to 850 square feet, while ADUs with two or more bedrooms are limited to 1,000 square feet.

The Planning Commission recommended increasing the maximum gross floor area to 1,200 square feet, regardless of the number of bedrooms. The Planning Commission held that 1,200 square feet was a more typical size for a smaller dwelling unit, and that the number of bedrooms included in an ADU should not determine its permitted size.

Amendments to BMC Title 21 and Title 23 regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING July 29, 2025

 Height (Ordinance Section 5): Currently, the maximum height for a detached new construction ADU is 20 feet and the maximum height for an attached ADU is 25 feet.

The Planning Commission recommended eliminating the distinction between attached and detached ADUs and limiting any ADU to a 25 foot height.  Rooftop Decks (Ordinance Section 8): Currently, rooftop decks are not permitted for ADUs within the Hillside Overlay zone.

The Planning Commission recommended permitting rooftop decks for ADUs citywide, and provided additional height allowances for rooftop access and protective railings.

BACKGROUND
Amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions) for ADU Condominiums At its March 5, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission received an informational report regarding AB 1033 implementation (Attachment 3) and requested that staff prepare an ordinance to permit the separate sale of ADUs as condominiums. At its May 7, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission received staff’s recommended BMC amendments (the creation of Title 21, Section 21.29: Accessory Dwelling Unit Condominium Subdivision) and recommended the proposed amendments included in Attachment 1.

Amendments to Title 23 (Zoning)
At its March 5, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission received an informational report covering policy issues raised by the May 3, 2024 letter from HCD (Attachment 4), as well as recent changes to State law pertaining to ADUs. The Commission provided input to staff to prepare amendments to Berkeley’s ADU ordinance to bring it into compliance with State Law and to incorporate HCD’s other recommended changes.

At its June 4, 2025 and July 17, 2025 meetings, the Planning Commission considered specific amendments to bring Berkeley’s ADU ordinance into compliance with State law.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The proposed ordinance amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions) do not include any allowances for additional development capacity or other new physical changes to the environment that are not already permitted and previously evaluated under CEQA. Adoption of the proposed amendments would in no way have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore is not subject to CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), Common Sense Exemption).

Amendments to BMC Title 21 and Title 23 regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING July 29, 2025

The proposed ordinance amendments to Title 23 (Zoning) are statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, per Guidelines Section 15282 ”Other Statutory Exemptions” (h) which states:
(h) The adoption of an ordinance regarding second units in a single-family or multifamily residential zone by a city or county to implement the provisions of Sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 of the Government Code as set forth in Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposed ordinance amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions) fulfill the City Council’s 2024 referral to adopt provisions to permit the separate sale of ADUs.

The proposed ordinance amendment to Title 23 (Zoning) would bring the City’s ADU regulations into conformance with recent changes to State law, and address comments on the ordinance made by HCD. Specific additional provisions related to size, height and roof decks would encourage the development of ADUs.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions)
As noted above, the Rent Stabilization Ordinance extends certain rights to sitting tenants in units covered by the Rent Ordinance that are proposed to be converted to condominiums. The Planning Commission had considered extending these protections to tenants of Exempt ADUs, who had occupied their units for at least 12 months.

Ultimately, the Planning Commission’s recommendation did not include extending these provisions to Exempt ADUs, due to a concern that such requirements could discourage the construction of new ADUs.

Amendments to Title 23 (Zoning)
At its June 4, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended further revisions to Title 23 beyond those proposed by staff. Staff’s original recommendation did not include the new provisions related to increasing the maximum gross floor area or heights for all ADUs (Ordinance Section 5) or permitting roof decks on ADUs within the Hillside Overlay (Ordinance Section 8).

CONTACT PERSON
Branka Tatarevic, Associate Planner, Planning and Development, 510-981-7472.

Amendments to BMC Title 21 and Title 23 regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING July 29, 2025

Attachments:
1: Ordinance
2: City Council Referral to implement AB 1033, May 14, 2024. 3: Planning Commission Staff Report, March 5, 2025
4: Letter from California HCD, Review of Berkeley’s ADU Ordinance under State ADU Law, May 3, 2024.
5: Public Hearing Notice

ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS) TO ALLOW SEPARATE SALE OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADU), AND AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 23 (ZONING) RELATED TO ADUS TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 21.29 is added to Title 21 (Subdivisions) to read as follows:

21.29. Accessory Dwelling Unit Condominium Subdivision

21.29.010. -- Purpose and Applicability.

A. This Chapter establishes regulations and procedures for the subdivision of property to allow separate ownership of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) from other buildings on the same lot in the City of Berkeley. It implements California Government Code Section 66342, which authorizes local ordinances permitting ADUs to be conveyed as condominiums.

B. This Chapter applies to all lots that contain (or will contain) one or more ADUs constructed in compliance with BMC Chapter 23.306 (Accessory Dwelling Units).

C. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Berkeley Municipal Code, an ADU condominium subdivision that conforms to this Chapter and state law may be approved and recorded as provided herein. An ADU condominium subdivision shall not be subject to the provisions of Chapter 21.28, except that:
1) Covered Rental ADUs. If the ADU is a covered rental unit under BMC Chapter 13.76 (Rent Stabilization Ordinance), the tenant protections of Chapter 21.28 shall apply in full, including:
a. A tenant in an ADU shall have a continued right to occupy the ADU after a conversion, pursuant to Section

21.28.090(C)(4).
b. A tenant in an ADU shall have an exclusive right to purchase the unit, pursuant to Section 21.28.030(C) and

21.28.090(C)(2).
2) All other requirements of Chapter 21.28, including application procedures and rent-ceiling limitations, shall not apply to an ADU condominium subdivision processed under this Chapter unless expressly referenced above.

D. This Chapter is intended to provide a streamlined, ministerial process for qualifying ADU condominium subdivisions and shall remain operative only so long as state law authorizes such subdivisions (Government Code §66342).

21.29.030. -- Permit required.

The Planning Director shall review, on a ministerial basis and without a hearing, an application for a parcel map or a tentative and final map for an ADU Condominium subdivision, and shall approve the application if the criteria in Government Code Section 66342 and this section are satisfied.

Units other than ADUs that are part of an ADU Condominium Subdivision may be subject to the provisions of Chapter 21.28, or any other applicable regulations.

21.29.040 -- Eligibility.

A. A property is eligible for an ADU Condominium subdivision under this Chapter only if all the following criteria are met:
1) Existing Units. The lot contains at least one legally established primary dwelling unit and at least one legally established ADU, or there is a valid building permit for construction of a new ADU on the lot. The ADU must be in compliance with BMC Chapter 23.306.
2) Number of Condominium Units. In no event shall an ADU condominium subdivision result in more than ten (10) total condominium units on the lot inclusive of all residential, commercial, and accessory dwelling units.

B. Junior ADUs. Junior ADUs shall not be eligible for conversion to condominiums.

21.29.050 -- Application Requirements.

In addition to the information required by Section 21.24.020 (Parcel Maps, Form and Content) and Section 21.16.020 (Tentative Maps, Form and Content), an application for an ADU condominium subdivision shall include all of the following information:

A. The condominium shall be created pursuant to the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Part 5 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 4 of the Civil Code).

B. Subdivision Map Act Compliance. The condominium shall be created in conformance with all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2, commencing with Section 66410) and all other objective requirements of this Part.

C. Safety Inspection. Prior to the recordation of the condominium plan, a safety inspection of the ADU shall be conducted as evidenced either through a certificate of occupancy or housing quality standards report from a building inspector certified by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

D. Lienholder Consent.
1) Neither a subdivision map nor a condominium plan shall be recorded with the county recorder without obtaining the written consent of each lienholder. A lienholder may refuse to give consent. A lienholder may also consent provided that any terms and conditions required by the lienholder are satisfied. Prior to recordation of the initial or any subsequent modifications to the condominium plan, written evidence of the lienholder’s consent shall be provided to the Assessor-Recorder along with a signed statement from each lienholder that states as follows:
"(Name of lienholder) hereby consents to the recording of this condominium plan in its sole and absolute discretion, and the borrower has or will satisfy any additional terms and conditions the lienholder may have."
2) Required Information. The lienholder’s consent, whether included directly on the condominium plan or attached thereto, must include the following information:
a. The lienholder’s signature.
b. The name of the record owner or ground lessee.
c. The legal description of the real property.
d. The identities of all parties with an interest in the real property as reflected in the public records.
e. A statement that the lienholder’s consent shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder.

E. Tenant Protections Notice. Proof of service of a Notice of Tenants’ Rights Regarding ADU Condominium Conversion, on a form required by the City, shall be submitted for each tenant household occupying the subject ADUs, no earlier than 60 days prior to the date of the application. The Notice shall include, but not be limited to:
1) The tenant’s continued right to occupy the unit pursuant to Section

21.28.090(C)(4), which prohibits eviction for the purpose of occupancy by the owner or the owner's relatives so long as the unit remains the tenant’s principal place of residence.
2) Information concerning any agreement by the owner to limit rents under Section 21.28.080(B).
3) The tenant’s exclusive right to purchase the unit under 21.28.090(C)(2).

F. Notice to providers of utilities. If an ADU is established as a condominium, the owner shall notify providers of utilities, including water, sewer, gas, and electricity, of the condominium creation and separate conveyance.

G. The owner of a property or a separate interest within an existing planned development that has an existing association, as defined in Section 4080 of the Civil Code, shall not record a condominium plan to create a common interest development under Section 4100 of the Civil Code without the express written authorization by the existing association.

For purposes of this subdivision, written authorization by the existing association means approval by the board at a duly noticed board meeting, as defined in Section 4090 of the Civil Code, and if needed pursuant to the existing association’s governing documents, membership approval of the existing association.

21.29.060 -- Required Notice to Consumers.

The City shall include the following notice to consumers on any Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) or Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) submittal checklist or public information describing requirements and permitting for ADUs, and as a standard condition of any building permit or condominium plan approval:
“NOTICE: If you are considering establishing your primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit as a condominium, please ensure that your building permitting agency allows this practice. If you decide to establish your primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit as a condominium, your condominium plan or any future modifications to the condominium plan must be recorded with the County Recorder. Prior to recordation or modification of your subdivision map

and condominium plan, any lienholder with a lien on your title must provide a form of written consent either on the condominium plan, or on the lienholder’s consent form attached to the condominium plan, with text that clearly states that the lender approves recordation of the condominium plan and that you have satisfied their terms and conditions, if any.

In order to secure lender consent, you may be required to follow additional lender requirements, which may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following:
(a) Paying off your current lender.

You may pay off your mortgage and any liens through a refinance or a new loan. Be aware that refinancing or using a new loan may result in changes to your interest rate or tax basis. Also, be aware that any subsequent modification to your subdivision map or condominium plan must also be consented to by your lender, which consent may be denied.
(b) Securing your lender’s approval of a modification to their loan collateral due to the change of your current property legal description into one or more condominium parcels.
(c) Securing your lender’s consent to the details of any construction loan or ground lease.

This may include a copy of the improvement contract entered in good faith with a licensed contractor, evidence that the record owner or ground lessee has the funds to complete the work, and a signed statement made by the record owner or ground lessor that the information in the consent above is true and correct.” Section 2. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.306.010(A) is amended to read as follows:

A. Implement California Government Code Sections 65852.1, 65852.2, and 65852.2266314 through 66339..

Section 3. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.306.020(C) is amended to read as follows:

C. Density Exemption and Growth Limits. ADUs are considered an accessory use consistent with the parcel’s General Plan and zoning designation, shall not count toward the allowable density, and shall not be subject to any local ordinance, policy, or program that limits residential growth. ADUs and Junior ADUs are not included in the minimum or maximum density established by the underlying zoning district.

Section 4. That Table 23.306-1 (ADU and Junior ADU Maximum Number of Units per Lot) within Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.306.020 is amended to read as follows:

Table 23.306-1 ADU AND JUNIOR ADU MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS PER LOT

USE, PRIMARY ADU AND JADU, MAXIMUM PER LOT
Single Family Dwelling, one unit on lot 1 Conversion ADU, 1 New Construction ADU, and 1 Junior ADU., both All are
permitted.

Single Family Dwelling, more than one
unit on lot
1 ADU
Duplex orExisting Multif-Family Dwelling 2 detached8 new construction ADUs, and at least one interior ADU provided that
the number of ADUs does not exceed the
number of existing units, and at least one
interior ADU up to 25% of the total
number of existing duplex or multi-family
dwelling units on the lot.

Proposed Multifamily Dwelling 2 New Construction ADUs
Group Living Accommodation 1 ADU
Section 5. That Table 23.306-2 (ADU Development Standards) within Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23.306.030 is amended to read as follows:

Table 23.306-2 ADU DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

BASIC STANDARDS SUPPLEMENTAL

STANDARDS
Gross Floor Area,
Maximum
1,200 sf
Studio or 1 bedroom 850 sq. ft.

23.306.030(A)(1)

23.306.030(A)(2)

23.306.030(A)(3)

2+ bedrooms 1,000 sq. ft.

Building Height, Maximum
Conversion Same as existing
structure

23.306.030(A)(1)

23.306.030(A)(3)
Detached, New
Construction
20 ft.

Detached or Attached,
New Construction
25 ft. 23.306.030(A)(5)

23.306.030(A)(8)
Lot Line Setbacks, Minimum
Front of Interior Lot Same as underlying
district
Front of Through Lot Same as underlying
district or 10 ft. on the
secondary frontage as
determined by the
Zoning Officer.

Rear 4 ft.

Interior Side 4 ft.

Street Side 4 ft.

23.306.030(A)(3)

23.306.030(A)(4)

23.306.030(A)(6)
Building Separation for Detached ADU, Minimum
Outside of Hillside Overlay 5 ft.

Within Hillside Overlay 8 ft.

Required Off-Street Parking Spaces See 23.322.030 – Required Parking Spaces
Section 6. That Municipal Code Section 23.306.030(A)(2) through (8) is amended to read as follows:

2. Duplex or Multif-Family Dwelling Conversion. Interior ADU(s) must be created entirely through non-habitable residential portions of the existing main buildingmultifamily dwelling structures that are not within the living space of a dwelling unit (e.g. basements, attics, garages, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways).

3. Accessory Building or Accessory Structure Conversion. An ADU converted from an legally established accessory building or accessory structure is allowed to maintain non-conformity to the same location and dimensions of the existing accessory building or accessory structure, provided that the ADU meets fire and safety standards set forth in the California Building Standards Code adopted in BMC Title 19. Any physical additions to the existing accessory building or accessory structure shall comply with the development standards in Table

23.306-2 ADU Development Standards.

4. Front Setback, New Construction. An ADU shall not occupy area within the front setback, unless the requirement would preclude an ADU of 800 square feet.

Should an ADU require area within the front setback, the ADU shall maintain a minimum 10-foot setback from the front lot line, unless such setback would preclude an ADU of 800 square feet. If a 10-foot setback would preclude an ADU of 800 square feet, the ADU shall maintain a 5-foot setback from the front lot line.

If a 5-foot setback would preclude an ADU of 800 square feet, the ADU may be sited up to the front lot line.

54. Attached ADU. An ADU shall be considered attached if sharing a common wall with a primary dwelling.

65. Detached ADU Setback Exceptions. If there is a lesser setback allowed in 23.304.060 -- Accessory Buildings and Enclosed Accessory Structures for a comparable accessory building or accessory structure in the underlying zoning district, that setback shall apply.

7. Building Separation for Detached ADU. A minimum 8-foot separation is required within the Hillside Overlay, except where such separation would preclude an ADU of 800 square feet, in which case the minimum building separation shall be reduced to 5 feet.

86. Attached ADU, New Construction Height. Attached ADUs with height up to 25 ft. allowed with a Zoning Certificate.

Section 7. That Municipal Code Section 23.306.030(B) (1) is amended to read as follows:

1. Basic Standards. A Junior ADU shall be contained entirely within an existing or proposed single family dwelling (including basements, attics, storage rooms, boiler rooms, and passageways) or its attached garage, and have no more than 500 square feet in floor area.

Section 8. That Municipal Code Section 23.306.030(D) is amended to read as follows:

D. Rooftop Decks within the Hillside Overlay. Roofs on ADUs within the Hillside Overlay may not be designed, converted, or used as usable open space with a maximum additional height allowance of nine feet (beyond the height maximum allowed by development standards) only to enable rooftop access and protective railings.

Section 9. That Municipal Code Section 23.306.040(A) is amended to read as follows:

A. Zoning Certificate. An application for an ADU or Junior ADU shall be allowed with a Zoning Certificate. The rReview must be completed, and the application approved or denied, within 60 days of submission receipt of a completed application. A completed application must include evidence of compliance with this Chapter, including development standards, deed restrictions, and neighborhood noticing.

1. If an application to create an ADU or Junior ADU is submitted as part of a project that requires discretionary review, a Zoning Certificate for a building permit shall not be issued for the ADU or Junior ADU until the discretionary approval(s) has/have been granted and any applicable appeal periods have expired.

See 23.404.060(A) Post-Decision Provisions (Effective Dates).

2. Issuance of a Zoning Certificate shall not be denied for the construction or conversion of an ADU or Junior ADU that complies with the requirements of Government Code
Section 65852.2(e)(1)66323.

3. Issuance of a Zoning Certificate for the construction or conversion of an ADU or Junior ADU shall not be denied based on the failure of an applicant to correct a nonconforming zoning condition.

4. If the Zoning Officer denies an application, the applicant shall be provided, within the same 60-day period, a written notice identifying all deficiencies in the application and a description of how the application may be corrected.

Section 10. That Municipal Code Section 23.306.040(C)(2) and (3) are amended to read as follows:

2. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the main building, unless authorized under BMC Chapter 21.29 (ADU Condominium Ordinance) or unless the conditions of under BMC 23.306.040(D) -- ADUs Developed by a Qualified Nonprofit Developer, or as otherwise permitted by state law. are met;

3. The ADU and/or Junior ADU shall not be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days; and
Section 11. That Municipal Code Section 23.306.040(D) is amended to read as follows:

D. ADUs Developed by a Qualified Nonprofit Developer. An ADU built or developed by a "qualified nonprofit corporation" may be sold or conveyed separately from the main building to a "qualified buyer," as such terms are defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65852.2666340 of the California Government Code. The ADU must be held pursuant to a recorded tenancy in common agreement recorded on or after December 31, 2021 that includes the following elements:

1. Delineation of all areas of the property that are for the exclusive use of a cotenant;

2. Delineation of each cotenant’s responsibility for the costs of taxes, insurance, utilities, general maintenance and repair, and improvements associated with the property;

3. Procedures for dispute resolution among cotenants before resorting to legal action;

4. Allocates to each qualified buyer an undivided, unequal interest in the property based on the size of the dwelling each qualified buyer occupies;

5. A repurchase option that requires the qualified buyer to first offer the qualified nonprofit corporation to buy the ADU or primary dwelling if the buyer desires to sell or convey the property;

6. A requirement that the qualified buyer occupy the ADU or primary dwelling as the buyer’s principal residence; and

7. Affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the ADU or primary dwelling that ensure the ADU and primary dwelling will be preserved for low-income housing for 45 years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold to a qualified buyer.

8. If requested by a utility providing service to the primary residence, the ADU shall have a separate water, sewer, or electrical connection to that utility.

Section 12. That the row “Accessory Dwelling Units” in Table 23.322-1 (Required Offstreet Parking in Residential Districts) within Berkeley Municipal Code Section

23.322.030 is amended to read as follows:

Accessory Dwelling Units
Junior ADU: None required
ADU outside of Hillside Overlay: None required
ADU within Hillside Overlay: 1 per ADU unless
the parcel satisfies the criteria in subdivision (d)
of Government Code Section 65852.2, using the
definition of public transit as established in
subdivision (j)(11) of Government Code 65852.2.

Section 13. 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.

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember, District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 14, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Author)
SUBJECT: Increasing Entry Level Homeownership Opportunities:

Implementation of AB 1033 to Allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) To Be Sold Separately

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to City Manager to implement AB 1033, which would allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to be sold separately from a primary unit.

This referral would necessitate elimination of any mention of sales restrictions as they pertain to ADUs within the Berkeley Municipal Code and adoption of an ordinance allowing ADU sales separate from a primary unit(s).

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
AB 1033 Allows ADUs to be Sold Separately from a Primary Residence, Increasing Entry Level Homeownership Opportunities. State law AB 1033, effective January 1, 2024, eliminates the prior state law prohibiting the mapping and selling of a single-family home and its ADU as condominium units. While this prohibition on condominium conversion has been lifted, local agencies must opt-in and amend their codes to permit these entry-level homeownership opportunities. Congruent with the condominium homeownership model, property owners wishing to sell an ADU will need to notify their utility provider and establish a homeowners’ association responsible for overseeing property maintenance. ADUs tend to be more affordable than a typical single-family home. By permitting the independent sale of ADUs, the City of Berkeley can increase the available stock of entry-level homeownership opportunities. Further, ADU condominium conversion purchases are eligible for federally guaranteed mortgages, easing financing opportunities for homebuyers.1 AB1033 not only helps households seeking entry-level homeownership opportunities, it can also help existing homeowners to age in place by providing lump-sum resources from an ADU sale. 1 Casita Coalition and Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP: AB 1033 - How to Implement New State ADU Condominium Laws, p. 1
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f2c2d67c58236227115e0de/t/65397c083ac9fc75cf8701fd/169 8266121029/AB-1033-Casita-Coalition-RJR-ADU-Condos-memo.pdf

ATTACHMENT 2Page 19 of 45

2 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

BACKGROUND
California, particularly the Bay Area, faces an ongoing housing crisis, with affordability and accessibility becoming increasingly challenging for residents. As the state grapples with this issue, nearly 20 percent of housing units constructed in California today are ADUs, reflecting the significant contribution that ADUs are making in reducing the housing shortage.2 According to the California Association of Realtors Housing Affordability Index, only 17 percent of households in the state can afford a single-family home, a figure that falls significantly below the national average.3
The California Legislative Analyst’s Office, a nonpartisan entity, examined the state's exorbitant housing costs and delineated various factors contributing to it, notably a pronounced housing shortage, particularly in coastal California.4 Since 1980, housing construction in California has lagged significantly behind both national and historical averages. Despite a national housing boom in the mid-2000s, California's housing production remained relatively sluggish. Moreover, merely 10 percent of Berkeley's housing units were constructed after 1980.5 As construction slowed over time, California's housing costs escalated, surpassing the national average. Presently, home prices in Berkeley stand at $1.4 million compared to the national average of $354,000.6 In their report, "Closing California’s Housing Gap," the McKinsey Global Institute proposed specific measures to alleviate housing insecurity in the state. They recommend tackling housing scarcity by identifying potential "hot spots" for housing creation, such as areas within a half-mile radius of transit hubs, underutilized urban lots, and the addition of extra units to single-family homes.7
While the impact of high housing costs disproportionately affects certain racial and socioeconomic groups, there is also a noticeable generational divide. The scarcity of affordable housing near employment opportunities, coupled with mounting student debt, has resulted in a net worth for young households that is 20 percent lower than that of baby boomers in 1989 and 40 percent lower than that of Generation X families in 2001.

Additionally, homeownership is increasingly unattainable for younger generations, with millennials being 8 percent less likely to own homes compared to baby boomers and Gen Xers.8 Nearly half of households aged 18-34 are considered rent-burdened. The Urban 2 Casita Coalition and Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP: AB1033 – How to Implement New State ADU Condominium Law, p.1
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f2c2d67c58236227115e0de/t/65397c083ac9fc75cf8701fd/169 8266121029/AB-1033-Casita-Coalition-RJR-ADU-Condos-memo.pdf 3 Casita Coalition and Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP: AB1033 – How to Implement New State ADU Condominium Law, p.1
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f2c2d67c58236227115e0de/t/65397c083ac9fc75cf8701fd/169 8266121029/AB-1033-Casita-Coalition-RJR-ADU-Condos-memo.pdf 4 California’s High Housing Costs, Causes and Consequences (2015) Legislative Analyst’s Office. https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.aspx 5 2015-2023 Berkeley Housing Element (2014). City of Berkeley. https://cityofberkeley.app.box.com/s/x7cfk49voo9hr56iw3exsqogx0w7e6y3 6 Home Values (2024) https://www.zillow.com/home-values/ 7 Woetzel,J., Mischke, J., Peloquin, S., and Weisfield, D. (2016, October). A Toolkit to Close California’s Housing Gap: 3.5 Million Homes by 2025. McKinsey Global Institute:
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/public%20and%20social%20sector/our%20in sights/closing%20californias%20housing%20gap/closing-californias-housing-gap-full-report.pdf 8 Grabar, Henry. (2019). I Got Mine. Slate Magazine.

3 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
Institute conducted an extensive study on the barriers to millennial homeownership and recommended a series of policy changes, with a key recommendation being the alteration of land use and zoning restrictions, particularly in areas with rigid housing supply.9 Furthermore, moderate-income earners often find themselves unable to access Below Market Rate (BMR) housing, exacerbating the issue. Naturally affordable housing options, such as ADUs, often offer a pathway to more affordable living. An analysis by the Terner Center revealed that 58 percent of ADU owners rented their units at below-market-rate rent.

Due to their smaller size and/or cost-effective construction, ADUs frequently provide more affordable options for both owners and renters compared to single-family homes.10

FISCAL IMPACT
Staff time to amend the Berkeley Municipal Code to eliminate mention of sales restrictions as they pertain to ADUs and to prepare an ordinance allowing ADU sales separate from the main unit(s).

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The recommendation to promote ADUs has significant implications for environmental sustainability, particularly through the concept of infill housing, especially near transit hubs.

By encouraging the construction of ADUs, cities can capitalize on existing infrastructure and minimize urban sprawl by using underutilized parcels within established neighborhoods. This approach to infill housing not only optimizes land use but also reduces the need for further development on undeveloped land, preserving natural habitats and open spaces.11 Moreover, situating ADUs near transit promotes alternative modes of transportation, such as walking, biking, or public transit, thus reducing reliance on cars and lowering greenhouse gas emissions associated with commuting. Overall, the strategic implementation of ADUs as infill housing near transit contributes to a more sustainable urban environment, aligning with efforts to combat climate change and promote eco-friendly living practices.

Expanding housing options plays a crucial role in addressing environmental concerns, aligning with the City of Berkeley's Climate Action Plan. Researchers from the University of California have developed a climate policy tool for local governments to evaluate policies' https://slate.com/business/2019/05/californiahousing-crisis-boomer-gerontocracy.html 9 Choi, j., Zhu, J., Goodman, L., Ganesh, B., and Strochak, S. (July 2018). Millennial Homeownership.

The Urban Institute.
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/98729/millennial_homeownership.pdf 10 Garcia, D. (2017). ADU Update: Early Lessons and Impacts of California’s State and Local Policy Changes. Terner Center for Housing Innovation. https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and- policy/adu-update-early-lessons-and-impacts-of-californias-state-and-local-policy-changes/ 11 The Environmental Center September 24, 2020 Blog Post: Accessory Dwelling Units: A Sustainable Housing Solution: https://envirocenter.org/accessory-dwelling-units-a-sustainable-housing- solution/#:~:text=Since%20these%20units%20tend%20to,more%20sustainable%20and%20livable%2 0community.

4 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7110 ● Fax: (510) 981-7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
effectiveness in reducing carbon footprints. Their study of 700 cities revealed that infill housing has the most significant impact.12

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, District 1 (510) 981-7110 Attachments:

Casita Coalition and Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP: AB 1033 - How to Implement New State ADU Condominium Law. Pages 3-5 include required text in ADU condominium ordinances – Cal. Govt. Code Section 65852.2(a)(10)
12 Jones, C, Wheeler, S, and Kammen, D. (2018) California Local Government Climate Policy Tool.

Cool Climate Network. https://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/ca-scenarios/index.html

AB1033 – HOW TO IMPLEMENT NEW STATE ADU CONDOMINIUM LAW

Today, nearly 20% of housing units built in California are accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”). According to the California Association of Realtors Housing Affordability Index, only 17% of households can afford a single-family home, less than half of the national average. In many States across the country, ADU condo conversion projects are re-enabling a generation of home buyers to live in the communities of their choice near work and family. The State of Washington recently required all local agencies to allow conversions of a primary unit and ADU to condominiums for sale.

Consequently, in Seattle and Portland 40% to 50% of ADUs constructed are sold as condominiums to new homebuyers, where they are bought for approximately half the value of a stand-alone single-family home. Such ADU condo conversion purchases are eligible for federally guaranteed mortgages, making them easy to finance for ordinary homebuyers.

The California State Legislature recently adopted a new law, AB1033, that creates affordable options for homeownership by allowing ADU’s to be sold separately from a primary unit. AB1033 removes the previous State law prohibition against mapping and selling a single-family home and its ADU as condominiums. Even though this prohibition on condo conversion has been eliminated, it is up to Local Agencies to amend their codes to allow these entry-level home ownership opportunities.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO ALLOW SALE OF ADUS?

Respecting local control, the Legislature left it up to Local Agencies to amend their municipal code(s) to allow these entry-level home ownership opportunities through the sale of ADUs. The Casita Coalition and Reuben, Junius, and Rose, LLP have developed this guidance to encourage your Local Agency to make the following changes to your code(s), procedures and policies to re-enable Californians priced out of many of our communities to once again have a dream of buying a home by enabling more naturally-affordable condominiums for sale.

RECOMMENDED STEPS TO IMPLEMENT SALE OF ADUS

1. Eliminate Sale Restrictions. Remove all provisions in your municipal code that prohibits the sale or other conveyance of an ADU. These restrictions are typically included in local Condominium Codes and Zoning Codes.

2. Adopt Legislation Expressly Allowing ADU Sales. To align local rules with State law, adopt changes to the municipal code that allow conversion of a home and its ADU into condominiums subject to the requirements of the Davis- Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 4400-6150.) Appropriate amendment text will differ depending on the existing municipal code, but AB1033 requires a list of express provisions be included in such local ordinance, attached at the end of this document.

3. Publish ADU Checklists. Provide a comprehensive checklist for any ADU building permit and for ADU condominium/subdivision projects, indicating Subdivision Map Act compliance and lender subordination information.

4. First Right of Offer to Owner Occupants. To further encourage new homeownership, consider including a condition of approval for establishing condominiums of a primary unit and ADU giving a first right of offer for a period of 45 days on publicly accessible databases, e.g., MLS, to buyers indicating an intent to live in the property (either themselves or their immediate family). To avoid issues with lenders, however, do not require owner occupancy.

5. Create “Grow Homeownership” Program. Establish a program with dedicated staff that expedites ADU condominium processing with first comments to be issued within 45 days of submission of a complete application. • Consider waiving or reducing application and impact fees otherwise applied to condominiums.
• The Grow Homeownership Program could be paired with other funding programs your jurisdiction may have, e.g., through SB2 (2017) funds.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss any of the above, please do not hesitate to reach out to Justin A. Zucker from Reuben, Junius & Rose, LLP at 415.656.6489 or [email protected].

AB1033 – Required Text in ADU Condominium Ordinances – Cal. Govt. Code Sec. 65852.2(a)(10)

(A) The condominiums shall be created pursuant to the Davis -Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Part 5 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 4 of the Civil Code).

(B) The condominiums shall be created in conformance with all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)) and all objective requirements of a local subdivision ordinance.

(C) Before recordation of the condominium plan, a safety inspection of the accessory dwelling unit shall be conducted as evidenced either through a certificate of occupancy from the local agency or a housing quality standards report from a building inspector certified by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

(D) (i) Neither a subdivision map nor a condominium plan shall be recorded with the county recorder in the county where the real property is located without each lienholder’s consent. The following shall apply to the consent of a lienholder:

(I) A lienholder may refuse to give consent.

(II) A lienholder may consent provided that any terms and conditions required by the lienholder are satisfied.

(ii) Prior to recordation of the initial or any subsequent modifications to the condominium plan, written evidence of the lienholder’s consent shall be provided to the county recorder along with a signed statement from each lienholder that states as follows:

“(Name of lienholder) hereby consents to the recording of this condominium plan in their sole and absolute discretion and the borrower has or will satisfy any additional terms and conditions the lienholder may have.”

(iii) The lienholder’s consent shall be included on the condominium plan or a separate form attached to the condominium plan that includes the following information:

(I) The lienholder’s signature.

(II) The name of the record owner or ground lessee.

(III) The legal description of the real property.

(IV) The identities of all parties with an interest in the real property as reflected in the real property records.

(iv) The lienholder’s consent shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the real property is located.

(E) The local agency shall include the following notice to consumers on any accessory dwelling or junior accessory dwelling unit submittal checklist or public information issued describing requirements and permitting for accessory dwelling units, including as standard condition of any accessory dwelling unit building permit or condominium plan approval:

“NOTICE: If you are considering establishing your primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit as a condominium, please ensure that your building permitting agency allows this practice. If you decide to establish your primary dwelling unit and accesso ry dwelling unit as a condominium, your condominium plan or any future modifications to the condominium plan must be recorded with the County Recorder. Prior to recordation or modification of your subdivision map and condominium plan, any lienholder with a lien on your title must provide a form of written consent either on the condominium plan, or on the lienholder’s consent form attached to the condominium plan, with text that clearly states that the lender approves recordation of the condominium plan and that you have satisfied their terms and conditions, if any.

In order to secure lender consent, you may be required to follow additional lender requirements, which may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following:

(a) Paying off your current lender.

You may pay off your mortgage and any liens through a refinance or a new loan. Be aware that refinancing or using a new loan may result in changes to your interest rate or tax basis. Also, be aware that any subsequent modification to your subdivision map or condominium plan must also be consented to by your lender, which consent may be denied.

(b) Securing your lender’s approval of a modification to their loan collateral due to the change of your current property legal description into one or more condominium parcels.

(c) Securing your lender’s consent to the details of any construction loan or ground lease.

This may include a copy of the improvement contract entered in good faith with a licensed contractor, evidence that the record owner or ground lessee has the funds to complete the work, and a signed statement made by the record owner or ground lessor that the information in the consent above is true and correct.”

(F) If an accessory dwelling unit is established as a condominium, the local government shall require the homeowner to notify providers of utilities, including water, sewer, gas, and electricity, of the condominium creation and separate conveyance.

(G) (i) The owner of a property or a separate interest within an existing planned development that has an existing association, as defined in Section 4080 of the Civil Code, shall not record a condominium plan to create a common interest development under Section 4100 of the Civil Code without the express written authorization by the existing association.

(ii) For purposes of this subparagraph, written authorization by the existing association means approval by the board at a duly noticed board meeting, as defined in Section 4090 of the Civil Code, and if needed pursuant to the existing association’s governing documents, membership approval of the existing association.

(H) An accessory dwelling unit shall be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence only under the conditions outlined in this paragraph or pursuant to Section 65852.26.

ATTACHMENT 3
Planning and Development Department
Land Use Planning Division

STAFF REPORT
March 5, 2025
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Branka Tatarevic, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance Amendments

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the staff report, receive the staff presentation, consider public comments, and provide feedback to staff on potential amendments to the ADU Ordinance.

BACKGROUND
The consideration of updates to the ADU ordinance has been prompted by a number of factors including a City Council referral for implementation of Assembly Bill (AB) 1033, the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) review of Berkeley’s ADU Ordinance, and changes to state law pertaining to ADUs.

Assembly Bill 1033 (ADU Condominiums)
AB 1033 (Gov. Code § 66340 – 66342), which took effect on January 1, 2024, allows ADUs to be sold separately from the primary residence as condominiums, creating new opportunities for entry-level homeownership. Prior to AB 1033, California law prohibited the separate conveyance of ADUs, requiring them to remain under the same ownership as the primary dwelling unit. AB 1033 lifts this restriction, but local jurisdictions must opt- in by adopting an ordinance to enable separate ADU sales.

On May 14, 2024, the Berkeley City Council approved a referral (Attachment 1) directing the City Manager to implement AB 1033 by amending the Berkeley Municipal Code to eliminate restrictions on the sale of ADUs and adopt an ordinance allowing their separate sale. The referral emphasizes the potential of ADU condominiums to increase homeownership opportunities for moderate-income households, help existing homeowners generate equity, and expand naturally affordable housing options in the city.

As of today, the City of San José remains the only jurisdiction in California to have adopted an ADU condominium ordinance (Attachment 4). Staff have met with the San José team to discuss their approach to AB 1033 implementation, as well as their processing procedures. San José's ADU Condominium Ordinance is separate from its existing ADU, subdivision or other land use regulations and applies only to the creation of ADU condominiums. The ordinance limits ADU condo projects to a maximum of four

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

units, as subdivisions with four nor fewer units can be processed ministerially as Parcel Maps, rather than through the discretionary process required for Tentative Tract Maps.

Unlike Berkeley, San José does not have its own policies to disincentivize condo conversions or mitigate the impacts of condo conversions on the affordability of the rental housing market.

ADU Letter from California Housing and Community Development Department As part of its oversight of local ADU regulations, HCD issued a letter to the City of Berkeley on May 3, 2024 (Attachment 2), reviewing the Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23.306 (Accessory Dwelling Units)1, which was adopted on October 10, 2023.

In the letter, HCD asserted that several provisions of BMC Chapter 23.206 do not align with state ADU law and must be amended.

The City responded to HCD’s letter on June 3, 2024 (Attachment 3). The City’s letter determined that:
 a number of the HCD’s suggested changes were minor. These minor changes were included in the State Law and Technical Edits package the Planning Commission recommended in June 2024;
 a select number of findings did not require any changes; and  an additional set of findings required policy consultation with the City Council.

These are the findings included in this report for policy recommendations from the Planning Commission.

California Government Code Section 66323 includes types of ADUs that the City must approve ministerially. Generally speaking, these are ADUs that are 800 square feet or less, meet specified height requirements, and comply with specified rear and side setback requirements. While the City can adopt development standards and regulations for larger ADUs, cities are limited in the regulation of these “Section 66323 ADUs”
Senate Bill 1211
Senate Bill 1211 (SB 1211) was signed into law in on September 19, 2024. SB 1211 contains two provisions which could require amendments to the BMC.

Previously, state law allowed only two detached ADUs on a multifamily lot. SB 1211 now permits up to eight detached ADUs on a multifamily lot, or a number equal to the existing units on the lot, whichever is less. BMC Chapter 23.206 is proposed to be amended to comply with SB 1211 as part of the annual State Law and Technical Edits (STLE) package which the Planning Commission will review in the spring.

Additionally, SB 1211 includes a provision which prohibits the City from imposing objective development or design standards on Section 66323 ADUs beyond what is authorized in state law.

DISCUSSION
1 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/23.306

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

Assembly Bill 1033 and ADU Condominiums
AB 1033 Local Ordinance Requirements
AB 1033 allows a city to adopt a local ordinance permitting separate sale of the primary dwelling and one or more ADUs as condominiums. To do so, the local ordinance must include the following components:
 Compliance with:
o the Subdivision Map Act;
o the Davis-Stirling Act (the state law that regulates condominiums); and o the City’s Subdivision Ordinance (Title 21).
 A procedure to obtain lienholders’ consent (i.e., the property owner must get the mortgage lender’s sign-off before a separate sale would be permitted).  A process to conduct and verify a safety inspection. Obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy from the city, or obtaining an inspection report from a HUD-certified inspector are two of the most common approaches to meeting this requirement.  Mandatory consumer disclosures regarding lender requirements.

If an ADU is tenant-occupied and the property owner seeks to sell the ADU as a separate condominium under an AB 1033 ADU Condominium Ordinance (once the city adopts it), the city may require that a tenant receive a right of first refusal. If the city were interested in implementing an ordinance with a right of first refusal requirement, an AB 1033 ADU Condominium Ordinance could treat ADU condos the same as typical condos under the city’s own Condo Conversion Ordinance (BMC Chapter 21.28)2, or it could include different requirements for the conversion of ADUs to condos.

Existing City Regulations Governing Condominiums
Existing Subdivision Ordinance (BMC Title 21 (Subdivisions))3 BMC Title 21 (Subdivisions) was enacted for the purpose of adopting regulations to implement and supplement the State’s Subdivision Map Act. Title 21 includes:
 A ministerial process for the creating a Parcel Map for four or fewer parcels or condo units;
 A discretionary process for Tentative Maps for creating five or more parcels or condo units;
 Condo conversion regulations; and
 Design requirements, procedures for lot line adjustments and subdivision improvement requirements.

Existing Condominium Conversion Ordinance (BMC Chapter 21.28)4 2 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/21.28
3 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/21
4 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/21.28

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

Berkeley’s Condominium Conversion Ordinance lays out the procedures, fees, and required tenant protections for applicants proposing to convert existing dwelling units into condominiums. It also includes the city’s annual limit on allowable condo conversions.

Generally, BMC Chapter 21.28 requires:
 Payment of a Condo Conversion Mitigation Fee;
 Tenant protections, including notice, relocation assistance, and right of first refusal.

Since 1992, the City of Berkeley has imposed a Condo Conversion Housing Mitigation Fee. Revenues from the fee accrue to the Berkeley Housing Trust Fund to help finance construction and rehabilitation of permanently affordable housing in Berkeley.

The fee is calculated by dividing the difference between the costs of owning the unit as a condominium less the rental costs by the current fixed mortgage rate. The following is an example of a fee calculation from the city’s Residential Condominium Conversion Packet.5
 Rental Costs = $1,500 per month x 12 months/year = $18,000 annually  Ownership Cost (including principal, interest, taxes, insurance, and homeowners’ association dues) = $2,700 per month x 12= $32,400
 Assume a mortgage rate of 6.5 percent.
 Increased housing cost due to ownership conversion of the unit = $32,400 - $18,000 = $14,400
 Mitigation Fee = $14,400/0.065 = $221,538
In addition, Berkeley’s Condo Conversion Housing Mitigation Fee is designed to encourage property owners to extend protections to their tenants. Owners providing additional tenant protections specified in the Condo Conversion Ordinance receive a decrease in the amount of the fee, which is capped at 8% of the total sales price, or 4% of the total sales prices for 2-unit properties.

Berkeley Rent Ordinance (BMC Chapter 13.76)6
Under Berkeley’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance, units with a Certificate of Occupancy issued after June 30, 1980, are generally exempt from rent ceiling controls. Most ADUs 5 City of Berkeley, Residential Condominium Conversion Packet, Updated: July 1, 2022. https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Condo%20Packet%2007-01- 2022_Posted%20Online.pdf
6 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/13.76

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

fall into this “new construction” exemption, though they still must follow just-cause eviction rules (BMC § 13.76.130).

Policy Questions for Planning Commission Discussion
1) Regulation of ADU Condos.

Should ADU condos be treated as any other condominium under Chapter 21.28— including payment of the Condominium Conversion Mitigation Fee, tenant protections, and discretionary approval for five or more units—or should the city create a streamlined path for ADU condominiums (as San Jose does)? 2) Right of First Refusal.

Should an AB 1033 ordinance require a right of first refusal for any tenant occupying an ADU that is being sold as a separate condominium? If so, should the right be the same as the current Condo Conversion Ordinance (i.e., one year to respond) or should it include a different timeline for ADU condominiums?
ADU Letter from California Housing and Community Development Department On May 3, 2024, HCD sent a letter regarding the ADU Ordinance (Attachment 2), and the city responded on June 3, 2024 (Attachment 3). The letter included a set of findings which called for policy consultation with the Planning Commission, which are included below.

Number of ADUs Permitted
In its letter of May 3, 2024, HCD found that BMC Chapter 23.306 did not permit as many Section 66323 ADUs as required under state law. Currently, Table 23.306-1 (Unit Allowance) permits one ADU and one Junior ADU on a parcel with an existing single- family dwelling. HCD asserted that Government Code Section 66323 permits a homeowner, who meets specified requirements, to create one converted ADU; one detached, new construction ADU; and one JADU, for a total of three Section 66323 ADUs.

This is consistent with the latest HCD ADU Handbook (January 2025)7, which explains that on single-family lots specifically, local agencies must allow Category (a)(1) (converted ADU) and Category (a)(2) (detached ADU) together, plus one JADU (also described in Gov. Code § 66323(a)(1)).

Originally, BMC Section 23.306.020(B) was drafted based on HCD’s December 2020 ADU Handbook, which stated that the two new ADU/JADU categories under former 7 California Housing and Community Development Department, Accessory Dwelling Unit Handbook, January 2025. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/policy-and-research/adu-handbook- update.pdf

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

subdivision (e) “are not required to be combined.” At that time, it appeared an applicant seeking to build both an ADU and a JADU would have to choose between a single- family ADU+JADU “conversion configuration” or “detached configuration,” rather than do both. However, in July 2022, HCD updated its guidance to clarify that the four statutory categories of ADUs “may be combined”—meaning a local government “must allow (A) and (B) together or (C) and (D) together.”
Question for the Planning Commission: Should the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) be amended to clearly allow up to three units on a single-family property: one interior/converted ADU, one detached new-construction ADU, and one JADU? Conversion of Accessory Structures
In its letter of May 3, 2024, HCD found that the city must amend the BMC to remove the words “legally established” from BMC Section 23.306.030(A)(3), related to the conversion of accessory structures.

BMC Section 23.306.030(A)(3) states “An ADU converted from a legally established accessory building or accessory structure is allowed to maintain non-conformity to the same location and dimensions of the existing accessory building or accessory structure….”
Question for the Planning Commission: Should the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) be amended to remove the requirement that an accessory building or structure be “legally established” to be eligible for conversion to an ADU?
JADUs and Enclosed Uses
BMC Section 23.306.030(B) allows JADUs “within an existing or proposed single family dwelling or its attached garage….” It is later defined in Section 23.502.020(A)(4)(a) as, “A unit that is contained entirely within the walls of an existing or proposed single family dwelling, or a single-family dwelling unit’s attached garage.” In its letter of May 3, 2024, HCD found that Government Code Section 66333 provides a broader allowance, stating “For purposes of this subdivision, enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family residence,” and that the BMC must allow JADUs in other enclosed uses not limited to the single-family residence and an attached garage.

City staff interprets the existing BMC language to already include other enclosed areas of the single-family dwelling. Specifically, the BMC definition of “accessory uses” (BMC Section 23.502.020(B)(2)(a)) is broad and extends beyond just the attached garage (e.g., storage rooms, basements). There is no instance staff could envision where an enclosed space would be excluded from conversion under the current definition.

Question for the Planning Commission: Should the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) be amended to explicitly expand eligibility to all “enclosed uses”?

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

Deed Restriction
BMC Section 23.306.040 states that “A completed [ADU] application must include evidence of compliance with this Chapter, including development standards, deed restrictions, and neighborhood noticing.”
In its letter of May 3, 2024, HCD found Government Code section 66317, states, “No local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the delay or denial of a building permit or a use permit under this section,” and therefore the city may not condition approval of an ADU application on the recordation of a deed restriction.

Under the ADU Ordinance, the requirement that a deed restriction be recorded is not a condition of approval; it is a requirement for a completed application. City staff does not interpret this provision as allowing the city to delay or deny a permit solely for lack of a recorded deed restriction.

Question for the Planning Commission: Should the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) be amended to remove the deed restriction requirements for a completed application? JADU Rental Term
BMC Section 23.306.040(C)(3) states that a JADU cannot be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days. In its letter of May 3, 2024, HCD found that while Government Code section 66333 allows the city to adopt an ordinance to provide for the creation of JADUs, and includes the provisions that can be included in the ordinance, the provisions do not include requiring a minimum rental term of 30 days. Therefore, HCD states that the 30-day rental term minimum for JADUs must be removed. The current 30-day minimum rental term for ADUs complies with state law.

Question for the Planning Commission: Should the Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) be amended to remove the 30 days minimum rental term for JADUs? Senate Bill 1211
SB 1211 (signed on September 19, 2024) allows up to eight detached ADUs on a lot with an existing multifamily dwelling (subject to certain limits). Staff intends to incorporate this statutory update into the upcoming State Law and Technical Edits (SLTE) Zoning Amendments package that will come before the Planning Commission for public hearing this Spring.

SB 1211 also includes a provision which prohibits the City from imposing objective development or design standards on Section 66323 ADUs beyond what is authorized in state law. There are two provisions in the BMC which may conflict with this provision. 1) ADUs in the Front Setback: BMC Chapter 23.306.030(A)(4) prohibits the placement of ADUs in the front setback unless the only location on a lot that can accommodate an

ADU Condominium Ordinance and State/HCD ADU Updates Planning Commission Staff Report March 5, 2025

800 square foot ADU is within the front setback. The section also includes specific front setback requirements that apply only to ADUs that qualify to be located within the front setback. State law currently permits only the establishment of side and rear setbacks for Section 66323 ADUs, not front setbacks. SB 1211 could be interpreted to limit the city’s ability to prohibit Section 66323 ADUs in the front setback even if an ADU could be located elsewhere on a lot.
2) ADU Building Separation: BMC Chapter 23.306.030(A) includes basic development standards for ADUs, which include building separation standards. State law currently only permits the establishment of side and rear setbacks for Section 66323 ADUs.

There is no provision for the establishment of building separation standards, nor is there any explicit prohibition. The building separation requirement was adopted by the City Council to address concerns about fire safety and firefighter access to buildings on a property. State law provides the establishment of side and rear setbacks “for fire safety,” but does not specifically mention building separation requirements for Section 66323 ADUs.

Question for the Planning Commission: Should BMC Chapter 23.306.030 be amended to remove the front setback and building separation provisions for Section 66323 ADUs, or should those provisions be removed for all ADUs?

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with this informational report.

NEXT STEPS
Staff is currently reviewing HCD’s comments and exploring policy options to meet state requirements, particularly regarding separate ADU conveyance and other statutory changes. With Planning Commission’s input, we will incorporate them into draft amendments, solicit public feedback, and move forward with the required steps for final adoption of any Zoning Ordinance amendments.

CONTACT PERSON
Branka Tatarevic, Planning and Development Department, 510-981-7472

ATTACHMENTS

1. Referral to Implement AB 1033

2. HCD ADU Ordinance Review Letter

3. City’s Response to HCD’s Letter

4. San Jose ADU Condominium Ordinance

STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
May 3, 2024
Jordan Klein, Director,
Department of Planning and Dev
elopment
City of Berkeley
1947 Center St, 2nd Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704
Dear Jordan Klein:

RE: Review of B
erkeley’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance under State ADU Law (Gov. Code, §§ 66313 - 66342)
Please Note: As of March 25, 2024, with the Chaptering of Senate Bill (SB) 477 (Chapter 7, Statutes of 2024), the sections of Government Code relevant to State ADU and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) Law have been re-numbered (Enclosure 1).

Thank you for submitting the Cit
y of Berkeley (City) accessory dwelling unit (ADU)
Ordinance No. 7,888-N.S. (Ordinance), adopted October 10, 2023, to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD has reviewed the Ordinance and submits these written findings pursuant to Government Code section 66326, subdivision (a). HCD finds that the Ordinance does not comply with State ADU and JADU Laws in the manner noted below. Under Government Code section 66326, subdivision (b)(1), the City has up to 30 days to respond to these findings. Accordingly, the City must provide a written response to these findings no later than June 3, 2024.

HCD notes that HCD’s previous ADU Ordinance review letter, dated October 17, 2022, raised the issue of the Ordinance’s restrictions on ADUs in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Upon review of the City’s Ordinance 7,888-N.S. and supporting evidence, HCD has determined that the City addressed HCD’s findings.

The Ordinance addresses many statutory requirements; however, HCD finds that the Ordinance does not comply with State ADU Law in the following respects:

1. Table 23.306-1 – Unit Allowance –
The Ordinance states a single-family
dwelling is permitted, at maximum, “1 ADU and 1 Junior ADU.” However, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a) states, “Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322, inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone to ATTACHMENT 4

Jordan Klein, Director, Department of Planning and Development

create any of the following: (1) One accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling…( A) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure.” Subdivision (a)(2) permits, “[o]ne detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four- foot side and rear yard setbacks.” The use of the term “any” followed by an enumeration of by-right ADU types permitted indicate that any of these ADU types can be combined on a lot zoned for single family dwellings.

This permits a homeowner, who meets specified requirements, to create one converted ADU; one detached, new construction ADU; and one JADU. Thus, if the local agency approves an ADU that is created from existing (or proposed) space, and the owner subsequently applies for a detached ADU (or vice versa) that meets the size and setbacks pursuant to the subdivision, the local agency cannot deny the application, nor deny a permit for a JADU under this section.

Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to permit all by-right combinations required by State ADU Law.

2. 23.306.030 A.1 – 150 Sq. ft. Expansion – The Ordinance states “ADU Development Standards is allowed a physical addition of no more than 150 square feet.” However, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a)(1)(A) allows, an “expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress.” The statute intends for this expansion only with the conversion of an existing accessory structure.

Therefore, the Ordinance allowing expansion for all building conversions is inconsistent with State ADU Law. The City must amend the Ordinance to limit the expansion only in conjunction with the conversion of existing accessory structures.

3. 23.306.030 A.2 – “Main Building” and Conversion – The Ordinance states that for a duplex or multifamily building, “Interior ADU(s) must be created entirely through non-habitable residential portions of the existing main building that are not within the living space of a dwelling unit (e.g. basement, attic, garages, storage room).” The term "main building" is problematic as Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a)(3)(1), allows “Multiple accessory dwelling units within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space….” The term “the existing main building” refers to a single building, whereas State ADU Law refers to “existing multifamily dwelling structures.” As worded, the Ordinance could lead to confusion as many multi- family projects could have multiple building with units within them.

Additionally, the adjective “main” is not objective, especially in situations wherein multiple dwelling structures occupy a single lot. Government Code

Jordan Klein, Director, Department of Planning and Development

section 66314, subdivision (b)(1) requires the use of “objective standards” for ADUs, which are defined in Government Code section 66313, subdivision (h) as “standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal.” The use of such a subjective term is inconsistent with State ADU Law.

In summary, the City must amend the Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law.

4. 23.306.030 A.3. – Accessory Conversion – The Ordinance states “An ADU converted from a legally established accessory building or accessory structure is allowed to maintain non-conformity to the same location and dimensions of the existing accessory building or accessory structure….” However, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a)(1)(A) allows, an “expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to allow for the expansion of an accessory structure for ingress and egress.

5. 23.306.030 A.8, 23.306.040 A, 23.324.060 (C) – Zoning Certificate – The Ordinance states that, generally, “An application for an ADU or Junior ADU shall be allowed with a Zoning Certificate. Review must be completed within 60 days of submission of a completed application.” It also provides more specific conditions that engage with a zoning certificate, stating “Attached ADUs with height up to 25 ft. allowed with a Zoning Certificate,” allowing specific ”…alterations of a lawful nonconforming existing structure or building that is an existing ADU or proposed to be converted to an ADU are permitted with a Zoning Certificate,” and allowing new windows or doors with “…a lawful nonconforming existing structure or building that is an existing ADU or proposed to be converted to an ADU… with a Zoning Certificate.”

The Ordinance states that the “review” will be completed within 60 days. The Ordinance does not specify that the review will end with an approval or denial within the 60-day period. The term “Zoning Certificate” is not defined or explained in Section 23.502.020, and it is unclear whether the review process is ministerial or discretionary. Government Code section 66317, subdivision (a) requires, that a “A permit application for an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be considered and approved ministerially without discretionary review. The permitting agency shall either approve or deny the application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the permitting agency receives a completed application.” Subdivision (b) further states that “If a permitting agency denies an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory

Jordan Klein, Director, Department of Planning and Development

dwelling unit pursuant to subdivision (a), the permitting agency shall, within the time period described in subdivision (a), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to specify ministerial approval or denial within 60 days and add provisions for a denial process according to State ADU Law.

6. 23.306.030 B – JADU Entry – The Ordinance states “A Junior ADU shall be contained entirely within an existing or proposed single family dwelling or its attached garage and have no more than 500 square feet in floor area.” However, Government Code section 66333, subdivision (e) states, that local JADU ordinances must “Require a permitted junior accessory dwelling unit to include a separate entrance from the main entrance to the proposed or existing single-family residence.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to require a separate entrance to the JADU.

7. 23.306.030 B, 23.502.020 A.4.a – JADUs and Enclosed Uses – The Ordinance allows JADUs “within an existing or proposed single family dwelling or its attached garage….” It is later defined in Section 23.502.020 (A)(4)(a) as, “A unit that is contained entirely within the walls of an existing or proposed single family dwelling, or a single-family dwelling unit's attached garage.” However, Government Code section 66333, subdivision (d), provides a broader allowance, stating “For purposes of this subdivision, enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family residence.” The City must therefore allow JADUs in other enclosed uses not limited to an attached garage. The City must amend the Ordinance accordingly.

8. 23.306.040 A and C – Deed Restriction – Ordinance section 23.306.040 A states “A completed application must include evidence of compliance with this Chapter, including development standards, deed restrictions, and neighborhood noticing.” Section 23.306.040 C states, “The property owner shall file a deed restriction with the Alameda County Recorder which states… 2. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the main building unless the conditions of BMC 23.306.040(0) ADUs Developed by a Qualified Nonprofit Developer are met; 3. The ADU… shall not be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days.”

However, Government Code section 66317, subdivision (c) states, “No local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the delay or denial of a building permit or a use permit under this section,” and section 66315 states “Section 66314 establishes the maximum standards that a local agency shall use to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in Section 66314, shall be used or imposed….” Section 66314 does not require a deed restriction for a building permit; therefore, this section

Jordan Klein, Director, Department of Planning and Development

of the Ordinance is not consistent with State ADU Law. The City may not give condition approval of an ADU application on the recordation of a deed restriction. Although the City may have other authority by which to require a deed restriction, this requirement may not be the basis of delay or deny an ADU application and the issuance of a building permit. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance accordingly.

Pursuant to Government Code section 66333, subdivision (c) the City shall, “[r]equire the recordation of a deed restriction, which shall run with the land...” The deed restriction is limited to the provisions of subdivision (c)(1) and (c)(2).

The deed restriction for JADUs do not include a minimum 30-day rental term.

Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance accordingly.

9. 23.306.040 B – Neighbor Noticing – The Ordinance states “Notice of an ADU application shall be mailed to tenants of the subject property, and owners and tenants of the adjacent, confronting, and abutting properties, within ten working days of submission of the building permit application to the City… Notice shall provide the address of the project, allowable hours of construction, a link to the City's ADU webpage, and information for tenants of the subject property on how to contact a Rent Board Housing Counselor by e-mail or phone and any other resource information deemed relevant.”

However, Government Code section 66317, subdivision (c) states, “No local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the delay or denial of a building permit or a use permit under this section,” and section 66315 states “Section 66314, establishes the maximum standards that a local agency shall use to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in Section 66314, shall be used or imposed….” Section 66314 does not require neighbor noticing for an ADU building permit. Therefore, the City must remove this section.

10. 23.306.040 C.2 – Separate Sale – The Ordinance states “The ADU shall not be sold separately from the main building unless the conditions of BMC

23.306.040(D) ADUs Developed by a Qualified Nonprofit Developer are met….” Please note that Government Code section 66342 states “a local agency may also adopt a local ordinance to allow the separate conveyance of the primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit or units as condominiums…” which are then subject to the standards listed in that section.

11. 23.306.040 C.3 – JADU Terms – The Ordinance states “The ADU and/or Junior ADU shall not be rented for a term that is shorter than 30 days….” However, Government Code section 66333 provides, “Notwithstanding Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314), a local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of junior accessory dwelling units in single-family residential zones. The ordinance may require a permit to be obtained for the creation of a junior accessory dwelling unit and shall do all of the following:” The section then

Jordan Klein, Director, Department of Planning and Development

lists the provisions that are required to be in the JADU ordinance. The provisions do not require a minimum rental term of 30 days. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance accordingly.

12. 23.306.040 C.4 – JADU Owner Occupancy – The Ordinance requires that the “Junior ADU or the Single Family Dwelling in which the Junior ADU is located shall be owner-occupied.” However, Government Code section 66333, subdivision (b) states, “Owner-occupancy shall not be required if the owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.” Therefore, the City must note the exception.

In response to the findings in this letter, and pursuant to Government Code section 66326, subdivisions (b)(2)(A) and (b)(2)(B), the City must either amend the Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law or adopt the Ordinance without changes. Should the City choose to adopt the Ordinance without the changes specified by HCD, the City must include findings in its resolution that explain the reasons the City finds that the Ordinance complies with State ADU Law despite the findings made by HCD.

Accordingly, the City’s response should provide a plan and timeline to bring the Ordinance into compliance.

Please note that, pursuant to Government Code section 66326, subdivision (c)(1), if the City fails to take either course of action and bring the Ordinance into compliance with State ADU Law, HCD may notify the City and the California Office of the Attorney General that the City is in violation of State ADU Law.

HCD appreciates the City’s efforts in the preparation and adoption of the Ordinance and welcomes the opportunity to assist the City in fully complying with State ADU Law.

Please contact Mike Van Gorder, of our staff, at (916) 776-7541 or at [email protected] if you have any questions or would like HCD’s technical assistance in these matters.

Sincerely,

Jamie Candelaria
Senior Housing Accountability Unit Manager
Housing Policy Development Division

Enclosure

State ADU/JADU Law Statutory Conversion Table
New Government Code Sections Previous Government Code Sections Article 1. General Provisions
66310 65852.150 (a)
66311 65852.150 (b)
66312 65852.150 (c)
66313 General Definition Section
65852.2 (j)
65852.22 (j)
Article 2. Accessory Dwelling Unit Approvals
66314 65852.2(a)(1)(A), (D)(i)-(xii), (a)(4)-(5)
66315 65852.2 (a)(8)
66316 65852.2 (a)(6)
66317 65852.2 (a)(3), (a)(7)
66318 65852.2 (a)(9), 65852.2 (a)(2)
66319 65852.2 (a)(10)
66320 65852.2 (b)
66321 65852.2 (c)
66322 65852.2 (d)
66323 65852.2 (e)
66324 65852.2 (f)
66325 65852.2 (g)
66326 65852.2 (h)
66327 65852.2 (i)
66328 65852.2 (k)
66329 65852.2 (l)
66330 65852.2 (m)
66331 65852.2 (n)
66332 65852.23.

Article 3. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
66333 65852.22 (a)
66334 65852.22 (b)
66335 65852.22 (c)
66336 65852.22 (d)
66337 65852.22 (e)
66338 65852.22 (f)-(g)
66339 65852.22 (h)
Article 4. Accessory Dwelling Unit Sales
66340 65852.26 (b)
66341 65852.26 (a)
66342 65852.2 (a)(10)

ATTACHMENT 5

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUS): AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS) TO ALLOW SEPARATE SALE OF ADUS, AND
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 23 (ZONING) TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW

AND ENCOURAGE ADU DEVELOPMENT
The public may participate in this hearing by remote video or in-person.

The Department of Planning and Development is proposing an Ordinance to 1) adopt proposed amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions Ordinance) to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1033 by establishing local regulations for the separate sale of ADUs as condominiums; and 2) adopt proposed amendments to Title 23 (Zoning) to bring the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations into compliance with recent changes to State law, to incorporate feedback from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), and encourage ADU development.

The hearing will be held on, July 29, 2025 at 6:00 pm in the School District Board Room, located at 1231 Addison Street, Berkeley CA 94702.

A copy of the agenda material for this hearing will be available on the City’s website at https://berkeleyca.gov/ as of July 17, 2025. Once posted, the agenda for this meeting will include a link for public participation using Zoom video technology, as well as any health and safety requirements for in-person attendance.

For further information, please contact Branka Tatarevic, Associate Planner at 510-981- 7472.

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

Communications to the Berkeley City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service or in person to the City Clerk. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk at (510) 981-6900 or [email protected] for further information.

Published: Friday, July 18, 2025 - The Berkeley Voice
BMC 23.412.050 and Govt Code 65853; notice provided according to Govt Code 65090 and BMC 23.404.040.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on July 17, 2025.
__________________________________
Mark Numainville, City Clerk

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

PUBLIC HEARING
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Terrance Davis, Director, Public Works
Subject: Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Carleton Street from Westerly Terminus Extending 381.23 Feet Easterly

RECOMMENDATION

1. Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, adopt the second reading of the Ordinance voted upon at the July 22, 2025 City Council meeting vacating a 381.23-linear-foot (27,449 square foot) portion of the public right-of-way on Carleton Street, located at the westerly terminus of Carleton Street.

2. Upon adoption of the second reading of the Ordinance, authorize the City Manager to execute a deed quit claiming that portion of the right-of-way of Carleton Street and conveying to the adjacent property owner, Bayer Healthcare LLC ("Bayer").

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
There is no negative fiscal impact to the City of Berkeley from adopting this ordinance.

Bayer has paid the appropriate fees related to processing this street vacation. The street vacation reduces City maintenance and public service costs as well as increases Bayer’s property tax due to increase of their parcel.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The 381.23-linear-foot segment of Carleton Street proposed for vacation, as described in Exhibit A (attached) and shown on Exhibit B (attached), is a dead-end right-of-way.

Bayer owns all properties adjacent to the proposed vacated section, including on the north, south, and west sides of the subject roadway segment. Therefore, Bayer submitted a request for the City to vacate the dead-end portion of Carleton Street to improve internal circulation and enhance facility security.

The City is currently responsible for maintaining this segment of Carleton Street. In addition, the City is liable for any incidents and accidents that may occur in this section of the right-of-way. By vacating this segment, the City eliminates maintenance responsibility and liability while allowing Bayer to move the effective western terminus of Carleton Street eastward to improve site circulation and security.

Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Carleton Street from PUBLIC HEARING Westerly Terminus Extending 381.23 Feet Easterly July 29, 2025

BACKGROUND
Pursuant to Division 9, Part 3, Chapter 3 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, a local agency may vacate a public right-of-way of a street or highway when the street is unnecessary for present or prospective public street uses. The Streets and Highways Code allows the initiation of public street vacation by the City Council by the adoption of a Resolution of intention, the fixing of a date for a public hearing, and the publication and posting of notice as required therein. On July 8, 2025, Council adopted Resolution 71,882-N.S., for this purpose. On July 22, 2025, Council conducted a public hearing and first reading of the Ordinance for street vacation and scheduled the second hearing and reading for this July 29, 2025, Council meeting.

Notices for the hearings have been published and posted in accordance with the Streets and Highways Code.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Vacating a portion of Carleton Street decreases the amount of right-of-way available to motor vehicles which reduces the amount of pollution they produce. Similarly, maintenance activities that may have negative environmental impacts, such as street repaving and concrete sidewalk replacement, would be reduced.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed vacation pursuant to the California Streets and Highways Code §§ 8320, 8322, 8323, 8324 and determined that the segment is "unnecessary for present or prospective public use." This segment of the right-of-way is not identified as (1) a major, collector, or local residential street in the General Plan; (2) as a current or future part of the City's bicycle network in the Bicycle Plan; (3) as a primary or secondary transit route; or (4) as an emergency evacuation route. This portion of Carleton Street provides access to only Bayer's campus, and the vacation of this portion of the street is similar to others the City has adopted in the immediate area in connection with Bayer's campus.

City staff also determined that the vacation will not negatively impact emergency services or utility access. Bayer will preserve the right of the City of Berkeley and utility providers including but not limited to Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), and American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) to maintain, repair, and perform other activities related to their infrastructure in the vacated right-of-way per Section 8340 of the California Streets and Highways Code.

In addition, approval of this vacation allows the City to avoid maintenance costs and liability on a portion of Carleton Street that provides access to only one property owner (Bayer).

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The alternative course of action is to deny the request for street vacation. The City would continue to be responsible for maintaining this portion of Carleton Street and hold

Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Carleton Street from PUBLIC HEARING Westerly Terminus Extending 381.23 Feet Easterly July 29, 2025 liability for any incidents that may occur despite this area being surrounded on three sides by Bayer-owned properties.

CONTACT PERSON
Ronald A. Nevels, Manager of Engineering, Engineering Division (510) 981-6439 Vincent Chen, Supervising Civil Engineer, Engineering Division (510) 981-6409 Attachment:
1: Ordinance
Exhibit A: Street Vacation Area Legal Description
Exhibit B: Street Vacation Area Plat
2: Public Hearing Notice
ORDINANCE NO. –N.S.

Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Carleton Street from PUBLIC HEARING Westerly Terminus Extending 381.23 Feet Easterly July 29, 2025

VACATION OF A PORTION OF CARLETON STREET BETWEEN THE WESTERLY

TERMINUS OF CARLETON STREET AT THE BAYER CAMPUS AND A POINT APPROXIMATELY 381.23 FEET EASTERLY THEREOF
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. Vacation of Portion of Right-of-Way
That pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 8320 et. seq., the City of Berkeley hereby vacates the following portion of the public right-of-way of Carleton Street located at the westerly terminus of Carleton Street at the Bayer Campus, more specifically described in Exhibits A and B, on the basis of the following findings:
a. That the public right-of-way described above is a dead-end street providing street access to one single property, that being the Macaulay Foundry located at 811 Carleton Street;
b. That the owner of the Macaulay Foundry site, Bayer Healthcare LLC, has requested the City vacate that portion of Carleton Street providing access to the Macaulay Foundry site, such owner having established legal access to public streets through property located west and adjacent to it;
c. That the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B is not identified as a present or prospective major, collector, or local residential street in the City's General Plan;
d. That the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B is not a current or future part of the City's bicycle network in the Bicycle Plan; e. That the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B is not identified as a present or prospective primary or secondary transit route in the City's General Plan; f. That the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B is not identified as a present or prospective emergency access and evacuation route in the City's General Plan;
g. That the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B causes the City to incur maintenance and other public services costs necessary to keep this portion safe and in good repair;
h. That the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B is, for the foregoing reasons, unnecessary for present or prospective public street uses; i. That there are public utility facilities that are in use, but they would not be affected by the vacation of the public right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B because the City's

Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Carleton Street from PUBLIC HEARING Westerly Terminus Extending 381.23 Feet Easterly July 29, 2025 quitclaim of interests reserves sufficient easement rights for the benefit of affected utility providers to maintain, repair, and otherwise to affect their utility infrastructure; and j. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause a certified copy of this ordinance of vacation, attested by him under seal, to be recorded in the Office of the Recorder for Alameda County, California.

Said vacation shall except and reserve therefrom, pursuant to the provisions of Section 8340 of the Streets and Highways Code, and for the benefit of the City itself, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), and American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T), the permanent, non-exclusive easement and right at any time, and from time to time, to excavate for, construct, maintain, operate, replace (of initial or any other size), remove, inspect, use, renew and enlarge public utility facilities, including but not limited to line of pipe, conduits, cables, poles, wires and other convenient structures, equipment and fixtures for the operation of communication lines, electrical transmission distribution lines, natural gas lines, water lines, sanitary and storm sewers, stormwater infrastructure, and communication facilities, including ingress, egress, access and the right to keep the property free from inflammable material and wood growth, including without the limitation the right to trim and cut down trees and other vegetation, and protect the same from all hazards, in, upon, over and across those portions of Carleton Street so vacated and abandoned. Areas above, below, and within 8 feet of such public facilities shall be kept open and free of new buildings, structures, wells, and other obstructions. For the purposes of this section, a fence shall not constitute a new building, structure, well, or other obstruction.

Section 2. Conveyance of Property
That the City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute a quitclaim deed, conveying the City’s interests in the portion of the right-of-way described in Exhibits A and B to the adjacent property owner Bayer Healthcare LLC; and That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause the executed quitclaim deed to be recorded in the Official Records of Alameda County, California.

Section 3. Posting
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.

Exhibits
A: Street Vacation Area Legal Description

Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Carleton Street from PUBLIC HEARING Westerly Terminus Extending 381.23 Feet Easterly July 29, 2025 B: Street Vacation Area Plat

March 5, 2025
EXHIBIT “A”
VACATION DESCRIPTION
CARLETON STREET

A L L  O F  T H A T  R E A L  P R O P E R T Y  S I T U A T E  I N  T H E  C I T Y  O F  B E R K E L E Y ,  A L A MEDA  COUNTY,  STATE  OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEING  A  PORTION  OF  CARLETON  STREET,  AS  SAID  STREET  BEING  LABELED  AS  CARLTON  STREET  AND SHOWN ON THE “MAP OF BYRON JACKSON IRON WORKS PROPERTY” FILED O N JULY 14TH, 1909 IN BOOK 24 OF MAPS AT PAGE 84, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING  A T  T H E  I N T E R S E C T I O N  O F  T H E  N O R T H E R L Y  R I G H T  O F  W A Y  L I N E  O F  C A R L ETON  STREET WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 7 TH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID “MAP OF BYRON JACKSON IRON WORKS PROPERTY”;  THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CARLETON STREET, SOUTH 72°14'00" WEST 240.54 FEET, TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE D E E D  T O  J O H N  A L L E N  A N D  K E N  D A V I D ,  R E C O R D E D  MARCH  18,  2004 AS  DOCUMENT  NUMBER  2004‐ 113321,  SAID  POINT  ALSO  BEING  THE  POINT  OF  BEGINNING ;  THENCE  CONTINUING  ALONG  THE N O R T H E R L Y  R I G H T  O F  W A Y  L I N E  O F  CA R L E T O N  S T R E E T ,  SOUTH  72°14'00"  WEST  381.23  FEET,  TO  THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CARLETON STREET AS DESCRIBED IN O RDINANCE 6618‐N.S., CITY OF BERKELEY,  ALAMEDA  COUNTY;  THENCE A L O N G  S A I D  W E S T E R L Y  R I G H T  O F  W A Y  L I N E  O F  C A R L E T O N STREET, SOUTH 17°46'00" EAST 72.00 FEET, TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF CARLETON STREET; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF CARLETON STREET,  SOUTH 72°14'00" WEST 381.23 FEET, TO A POINT WHICH WO ULD BE INTERSECTED BY A LINE D RAWN SOUTHERLY AND AT RIGHT ANGLE FROM THE POINT OF  BEGINNING, SOUTH 17°14’00 EAST 72 .00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

CONTAINING AN AREA OF 27,449 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.

ATTACHED HERETO IS A PLAT ENTITLED EXHIBIT “B” FOR REFERENCE ONLY.

END OF DESCRIPTION

PREPARED BY:

_______________________                             M a r c h   5 ,   2 0 2 5 V I N C E N T   J .   D ’ A L O                          D A T E LS 4210

CARLETON STREET
7TH STREET

CARLETON STREET
Civil Engineers
Traffic Engineers
Surveyors
Aliquot Associates, Inc.
1390 S. Main St. - Ste. 310
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 476-2300
Fax: (925) 476-2350

EXHIBIT B
LEGEND

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL

CARLETON STREET VACATION
The public may participate in this hearing by remote video or in-person.

Bayer Healthcare, LLC (Bayer) has requested the city vacate a portion of Carleton Street public right-of-way from its westerly terminus extending 381.23 feet easterly and conveying the vacated portion to Bayer. See attached legal description and plat of the proposed vacation.

The proposed street vacation will be pursuant to Division 9, Part 3, Chapter 3 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.

A public hearing and first reading of an ordinance is scheduled for the Tuesday, July 22, 2025 City Council meeting, with a second hearing and reading scheduled for Tuesday, July 29, 2025. The location of the hearings is the School District Board Room – 1231 Addison Street, Berkeley, CA 94702. City Council meetings commence at 6:00PM.

A copy of the agenda material for the July 22, 2025 hearing will be available on the City’s website at https://berkeleyca.gov/ as of July 10, 2025. A copy of the agenda material for the July 29, 2025 hearing will be available on the City’s website at https://berkeleyca.gov/ as of July 17, 2025. Once posted, the agendas for these meetings will include links for public participation using Zoom video technology, as well as any health and safety requirements for in-person attendance.

For further information, please contact Vincent Chen at [email protected], 510- 981-6409.

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

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

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

I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on July 10, 2025.
__________________________________
Mark Numainville, City Clerk

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

INFORMATION CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Henry Oyekanmi, Director of Finance
Dave White, Deputy City Manager
Subject: Status Report - Berkeley’s Financial Condition (FY 2012 – FY 2021):

Pension Liabilities and Infrastructure Need Attention

INTRODUCTION
On May 24, 2022, the City Auditor submitted a Financial Conditions audit report1 to City Council with recommendations to build on the City’s financial strengths in order to: (1) help address the City’s unfunded capital and deferred maintenance needs and pension liabilities; (2) help the City prepare for unforeseen economic challenges by assessing the risk of the reserves, and ensuring that enterprise funds can balance and avoid recurring shortfalls; and (3) to update the City’s debt policy to help strengthen the City’s ability to assess its general obligation debt capacity.

The purpose of this information item is to update City Council on the status of implementation of the audit report’s recommendations. This is the fourth status report regarding this audit. A status report was previously issued on June 25, 2024.2

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Auditor’s report included five recommendations. As of the writing of this report, three recommendations have been partly implemented, one recommendation has been started, and one recommendation has been implemented. Please see Attachment 1 for a detailed table of audit report recommendations and implementation progress. The next status report to Council is expected to be presented in June 2026. 1 Audit-Berkeley's Financial Condition (FY 2012 - FY 2021): Pension Liabilities and Infrastructure Need Attention: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-05- 24%20Item%2018%20Berkeley%E2%80%99s%20Financial%20Condition.pdf 2 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2024-06- 25%20Item%2061%20Status%20Report%20-%20Berkeley%E2%80%99s%20Financial%20Condition.pdf

Audit Recommendation Status - Berkeley’s Financial Condition INFORMATION CALENDAR July 29, 2025

BACKGROUND
The audit provides a high-level overview of the City’s financial condition over 10 fiscal years. By broadening the scope of financial reporting to incorporate long-term financial trends, financial condition analysis can introduce long-term considerations into the budgeting process, clarify the City’s fiscal strengths and weaknesses, and help highlight financial risks that the City needs to address including its unfunded capital and pension liabilities.

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

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The City Manager’s Office will continue to work on implementing the various recommendations, including conducting a new risk assessment of the General Fund reserve in the next five years and developing recommendations regarding appropriate fund balance for the various enterprise funds. The Finance Department will continue to assess the debt capacity threshold and update the debt management policy as needed.

In addition, the City Manager’s Office, in tandem with the Finance Department, will continue to assess Council fiscal policies and make recommendations regarding long- term funding strategies to address the City’s pension and capital infrastructure liabilities.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The audit recommendations are intended to build on the City’s financial strengths and help mitigate risks associated with the City’s unfunded liabilities.

CONTACT PERSON
David White, Deputy City Manager, 510.981.7000
Henry Oyekanmi, Finance Director, 510.981.7200
Attachments:

1. Audit Findings, Recommendations, and Status Updates

Finding Department Last period: status Current status update Audit Title: Berkeley’s Financial Condition (FY 2012-FY 2021): Pension Liabilities and Infrastructure Need Attention Issue Date: May 5, 2022
Recommendation
The COVID-19 pandemic slowed the City’s
progress toward its 2027 reserve funding goal.

1.1 To better prepare the City for unforeseen economic challenges, we recommend that the City Manager complete the risk assessment required by the City’s reserve policy as scheduled and propose to the City Council a plan to replenish the Stability and Catastrophic Reserves based on the results of the assessment. This may include revising the funding goal for 2027 to align with the City’s financial reality and projected risk level.

City Manager Partly implemented. The City contracted with GFOA to complete a risk assessment of its General Fund Reserve
Policy. According to the Finance Department and Budget
Office, the Budget and Finance Committee recommended a
change to the long term reserve goal from 30 percent of General Fund revenues to 20-30 percent, and the City
Council will consider updating the reserve policy on July 29, 2025. Our office will re-assess this recommendation once this has taken place.

Partly implemented.

Started. According to the Budget Office, staff is assessing a policy option for enterprise funds.

The City’s limit for general obligation bond debt is
set at 15 percent of total assessed property value.

2.1 To strengthen the City’s debt management, we recommend that the Finance Department update the Debt Management Policy. The Finance Department may consider revising its current general obligation bond threshold of 15 percent of assessed property value or building upon the City’s existing general obligation bond debt limit by considering additional debt capacity factors such as debt per capita, debt to personal income, and/or debt service payments as a proportion of General Fund revenues.

Finance Department
Started.

Implemented.

All of the City’s enterprise funds faced at least one
annual shortfall between FY 2016 and FY 2021.

1.2 To ensure the City’s enterprise funds can balance and avoid recurring annual shortfalls, we recommend the City Manager assess the appropriate fund balance for each of the City’s enterprise funds, report findings to the City Council and explore financial policy options to manage enterprise fund balances.

City Manager
Partly implemented. The City adopted fiscal policies to fund the Section 115 Trust as part of the FY 2023/24 biennial budget process, but was not able to meet its contribution goal in FY 2025 due to budgetary reasons.

The City reported $1.2 billion in unfunded capital
and deferred maintenance needs in FY 2021.

4.1 To address rising costs for unmet capital needs, we recommend that the City Manager collaborate with the Department of Public Works to implement a funding plan aimed at 1) reducing the City’s unfunded capital and deferred maintenance needs, and 2) ensuring regular maintenance of city assets to prevent excessive deferred maintenance costs in the future. This may include prioritizing capital assets that generate the highest deferred maintenance costs.

City Manager Partly implemented. Berkeley voters passed Measure FF, which is estimated to generate approximately $15 million annually for 14 years. The City has not yet developed a plan for prioritizing funds for capital and deferred maintenance.

Partly implemented.

Partly implemented.

The City has taken steps to increase pension
funding.

3.1 To maximize the benefit of the Section 115 Trust, we recommend that the City Manager present a plan for adoption by the City Council to assure sufficient contributions to the Trust. This may include taking the steps proposed by the Budget and Finance Committee to increase contributions to the Trust. It may also include a strategy to ensure that the City is able to meet its yearly contribution goals, such as allocating contributions at the beginning of the budget cycle.

City Manager

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/

INFORMATION CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Commission on Labor
Submitted by: Joseph (Joey) Flegel-Mishlove, Chair
Subject: Commission on Labor Fiscal Year 2026 Work Plan

INTRODUCTION
The City of Berkeley Commission on Labor hereby submits its work plan for Fiscal Year 2026, which was adopted at the May 21, 2025, Commission on Labor meeting.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On May 21, 2025, the Commission on Labor adopted the attached work plan through the action detailed:

Action: M/S/C (Arbaugh/Scantlebury) to adopt the Fiscal Year 2026 Work Plan formed by the commission during a public meeting.

PASSED
Vote: Ayes: Arbaugh, Flegel-Mishlove, Phillips, and Scantlebury. Noes: None.

Abstentions: None. Absent: Bowen (unexcused), Delfin Polk (excused)

BACKGROUND
In 2016, the City Council adopted direction to commissioners to submit a work plan annually.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There is no identifiable environmental sustainability or climate impact associated with the adoption of this work plan.

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
None.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
None.

Commission on Labor Fiscal Year 2026 Work Plan INFORMATION CALENDAR July 29, 2025

CONTACT PERSON
Emily Rose, Commission Secretary, HHCS, 510-981-7551
Attachments:
1: Commission on Labor Fiscal Year 2026 Work Plan

Commission on Labor
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-5400 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-5450 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: https://berkeleyca.gov/ WORK PLAN for Fiscal Year 2026
Commission on Labor for the City of Berkeley
Research and gather information to report to City Council and support Commission’s Recommendations to City Council:
a. Develop policies for recommendation to City Council in formal coordination with other City of Berkeley commissions to maximize the availability of subject matter experts and identify connections between labor and other relevant issues including, but not limited to, economic development and human rights. b. Examine City’s policies and practices regarding workplace sexual harassment, and other forms of discrimination and harassment.
c. Examine how City policies can promote the retention and interests of City workers during the budgetary deficit.
d. Review and monitor Fair Workweek Ordinance implementation. e. Review the Community Workforce Agreement with the Alameda County Building and Construction Trades Council and examine opportunities for local workforce development
f. Examine workforce development opportunities and the First Source Program g. Review and recommend updates to the Labor Bill of Rights. h. Examine development of the City of Berkeley Just Transition Residential Electrification Pilot Project.
i. Examine and develop policies to promote employee ownership models of business.

Education:
a. Facilitate education of workers in Berkeley about their rights and the process for addressing workplace sexual harassment.
b. Facilitate education of children and young adults in Berkeley about the benefits and opportunities of organized labor.
c. Facilitate workforce development pre-apprenticeship opportunities working with Berkeley Unified School District.

Local labor disputes:
a. Hold public hearings on labor disputes as requested/required b. Submit recommendations to Council based on information gathered from both sides of disputing parties.

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

INFORMATION CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Landmarks Preservation Commission
Submitted by: Denise Hall Montgomery, LPC Chairperson
Subject: Annual Report on Landmarks Preservation Commission Actions

INTRODUCTION
The Landmarks Preservation (LPC) has prepared a report on its activities during the period June 2024 through May 2025; see Attachment 1, “Annual Report on Landmarks Preservation Commission Actions.” Reports on the Commission’s activities are required on an annual basis, in accordance with Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.24.090 - Annual Report Required.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On June 5, 2025, the Commission voted to approve the attached report and to forward it to City Council. Vote: 7-0-0-1; Yes: Enchill, Finacom, Leuschner, Hall Montgomery, Orbuch, Plese, Schwartz; No: none; Abstain: none; Absent: Crandall.

BACKGROUND
Staff prepared a draft report summarizing LPC’s actions and then presented it for the Commission’s consideration at the meeting on June 5, 2025. The Commission received the report favorably and voted to adopt it and to forward it to City Council in accordance with the BMC requirement.

The Commission held a total of 12 meetings during this reporting period. Among numerous accomplishments, the Commission:
 Added eight properties to the local register.
 Granted nine Structural Alteration Permits for new development, improvements, additions or expansions within City Landmark properties.  Received six demolition referrals from the Zoning Adjustments Board.

Annual Report on Landmarks Preservation Commission Actions INFORMATION CALENDAR July 29, 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Historic preservation practices encourage the adaptive re-use and rehabilitation of cultural resources within the City. The rehabilitation of these resources, rather than their removal, achieves construction and demolition waste diversion, and promotes investment in existing urban centers.

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The LPC will continue to submit an annual report on its activities in accordance with the BMC requirement.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this reporting activity.

CONTACT PERSON
Anne Hersch, Acting Secretary, Landmarks Preservation Commission, 510-981-7411, [email protected]
Allison Riemer, Senior Planner, 510-981-7433, [email protected] Attachments:
1: Annual Report of Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) Activities

ATTACHMENT 1

L A N D M A R K S

P R E S E R V A T I O N

C O M M I S S I O N
R e p o r t t o c i t y c o u n c i l
1947 Center Street, 2nd fl., Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7420

Annual Report on
Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC)
Actions
Reporting Period: June 2024 through May 2025
Due Date: June 30, 2025
Presented to City Council
By the LPC Secretary
On behalf of the LPC Chairperson and the Commission
In accordance with Berkeley Municipal Code Section 3.24.090 Table of Contents
Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Meetings Held
Part 3: Actions Undertaken in Accordance with
Regulatory Compliance
Part 4: Discussions Held

ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ACTIONS
JUNE 30, 2025 Page 2 of 5
Part 5: Presentations Received
Part 1: Introduction
In accordance with Berkeley Municipal Code Section 3.24.090, the LPC shall report its actions to City Council on an annual basis. The report must arrive not later than June 30 of each year.

Herein City Council will find summaries of all LPC activities for the current reporting period. The summary lists are arranged in categories reflecting LPC’s compulsory duties, such as public meetings and quasi-judicial reviews, as well as other efforts that further cultural resource preservation in Berkeley.

Part 2: LPC Meetings Held
Meeting Body Date
June 6, 2024
July 8, 2024
August 1, 2024
September 5, 2024
October 7, 2024
November 7, 2024
December 5, 2024
January 6, 2025
February 6, 2025
March 6, 2025
April 3, 2025
Landmarks Preservation Commission
(LPC)
May 1, 2025

ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ACTIONS
JUNE 30, 2025 Page 3 of 5
Part 3: LPC Regulatory Actions
Activity Property Address Application Number Action Date 2227 Parker Street LMIN2024-0001 July 8, 2024
2436-2442 Haste Street LMIN2024-0002 September 5, 2024
2500-2512 San Pablo
Avenue/1094-1098 Dwight
Way
LMIN2024-0004 December 5, 20241
2138 Kittredge Street LMIN2024-0006 February 6, 20252
2231 McKinley Avenue LMIN2024-0005 March 6, 2025
21 Mosswood Road LMIN2024-0007 March 6, 2025
2425 Durant Avenue LMIN2024-0008 March 6, 20253
Landmark & Structure of Merit
Designations
BMC Section 3.24.150
2845 Woolsey Street LMIN2024-0001 April 3, 2025
8 Greenwood Commons LMSAP2024-0001 June 6, 2024
2276 Shattuck Avenue LMSAP2024-0005 July 8, 2024
2000 Kala Bagai Way LMSA2024-0002 July 8, 2024
1614 Sixth Street LMSAP2024-0003 August 1, 2024
1310 University Avenue LMSA2024-0001 December 5, 2024
2201-2205 Blake Street and
2517 Fulton Street LMSAP2024-0004 February 6, 2025
3332 Adeline Street LMSAP2025-0001 February 6, 2025
2138 Cedar Street LMSAP2024-0008 March 6, 2025
Structural Alteration Permits
BMC Section 3.24.240
1947 Center Street LMSAP2025-0007 May 1, 2025
2530-2538 Bancroft Way ZP2023-0126 September 5, 2024
2100-2108 Milvia Street ZP2023-0163 October 7, 2024
1663-1687 Shattuck
Avenue/2109 Virginia Street ZP2024-0066 October 7, 2024 1900-Block Shattuck
Avenue/2074-2079 University
Avenue
ZP2023-0040 January 6, 2025
2655 Shattuck Avenue ZP2024-0057 February 6, 2025
Use Permit Demolition Referrals
BMC Section 23.326.070
2700-2724 Shattuck Avenue ZP2024-0058 April 3, 2025
Mill Act Contract Applications 1401 Le Roy Avenue #LMMA2024-0001 Favorable Action to
City Council on July
8, 2024
1 Appealed to City Council January 31, 2025. Council dismissed the appeal and affirmed the LPC decision at the May 20, 2025 hearing.
2 Appealed to City Council February 6, 2025. Appeal hearing scheduled for July, 2025. 3 Appealed to City Council April 15, 2025. Appeal hearing scheduled for July, 2025.

ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ACTIONS
JUNE 30, 2025 Page 4 of 5
Activity Property Address A
pplication Number A
ction Date
60 Panoramic Way #LMMA2023-0001
Favorable Action to
City Council on
August 1, 2024
City Council Resolution 59,355
7 Greenwood Common #LMMA2024-0002
Favorable Action to
City Council on
August 1, 2024
Zoning Officer Referrals
BMC Section 23.202.070(G)(1)
59 Arden Road ZP2022-0127 September 5, 2024
Final Design Review
BMC Section23.406.070(D)(3)

N/A N/A N/A
3192 Adeline Street DRSL2024-0006 November 7, 2024Design Review Referrals BMC Section23.406.070(F)(1)(a) 2428-2430 Bancroft Way DRSL2024-0005 December 5, 2024 2012-2024 Ashby Avenue N/A No action, January
6, 2025
1708 Harmon Street/3240
Ellis Street N/A No action, January
6, 2025
1750 Sacramento Street
(North Berkeley BART) N/A No action, May 1,
2025
Section 106 Referrals
National Preservation Act
1429 Delaware Street (North
Berkeley BART) N/A No action, May 1,
2025
Part 4: LPC Agenda Discussions Held
Topic Discussion Outcome Date(s)
2128 Oxford Street – Notice of
Availability of Draft
Environmental Impact Report
for Use Permit at 2128 Oxford
(#ZP2022-0135)
Planning staff presented
information and solicited
comments and/or
correspondence related to the
environmental report for a
development project that
includes the demolition of the
Thomas Block Building at 2132-
2154 Center Street.

Chairperson Twu
submitted a letter
on the
Commission’s
behalf
summarizing
LPC’s comments
on the Draft EIR
and the project.

June 6, 2024

ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMISSION ACTIONS
JUNE 30, 2025 Page 5 of 5
Part 5: LPC Agenda Presentations Received
Topic Presenter Date
San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan
– Receive a presentation and
provide comments on the current
effort to conduct and complete the
San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan.

Planning staff presented information on
the current efforts to complete the San
Pablo Avenue Specific Plan.

September 5, 2024
Gilman Gateway Environmental
Impact Report
Planning staff presented information
and solicited comments regarding the
Draft Environmental Impact Report.

November 7, 2024
1095 University Avenue/1976 San
Pablo Avenue
Commissioner Finacom presented
correspondence about a vacant West
Berkeley bank building originally
completed in 1906.

February 6, 2025

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/

INFORMATION CALENDAR
July 29, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Zero Waste Commission
Submitted by: Christienne de Tournay Birkhahn, Chair
Subject: Zero Waste Commission Fiscal Year 2025-26 Work Plan

INTRODUCTION
The Zero Waste Commission (ZWC) considers and advises City Council on solid waste policy and goals, including refuse, composting, and recycling services, budgets, and other decisions relating to solid waste. The ZWC adopted the FY 2024-25 Work Plan on May 15, 2025.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Zero Waste Commission prioritizes solid waste policy and goals, which is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to provide state-of-the-art, well- maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities. Additionally, The City is enacting important changes and improvements to its Zero Waste services and long-term plans, including:
• Continuing the process to design the re-build of the Solid Waste & Recycling Transfer Station (SW&RTS),
• Implementing various local ordinances and state laws to reduce the generation of discarded products, packaging and materials, and to increase the recycling of organic materials such as food scraps,
• Developing a division-level strategic plan for zero waste.

BACKGROUND
Zero Waste Strategic Plan: Development of the draft plan began in 2023 and is continuing. It is anticipated that the draft plan will be ready for Council consideration of adoption in 2024.
• SB 1383 - Food Recovery and Organics Diversion: This State of California law requires substantial effort by local governments to reduce the landfilling of compostable materials and to increase the recovery of otherwise discarded edible food, as a way to reduce climate change effects associated with methane emissions resulting from the landfilling of organic (carbon-containing) materials.

Zero Waste Commission Fiscal Year 2025-26 Work Plan INFORMATION CALENDAR July 29, 2025

• Zero Waste Ordinances: The City has adopted various zero waste ordinances over time. Now that their effects are being observed in practice, some of them may merit modifications to improve their effectiveness. In addition, some new zero waste ordinances may be helpful in guiding businesses and residents toward following zero waste practices as standard operating procedures.

Accepted Materials in City Collection Programs: Periodically, the list of accepted materials in City collection programs deserves review. Recycling tends to subject the City to the vagaries of international commodity markets, with considerable swings in demand and prices, changes in product specifications, ability to track custody and supply chains, and end uses. Composting is not a panacea for the large variety of hard/controversial-to-compost products and packaging, such as plastic-lined paper and potentially compostable plastics. As with recycling, composting processors’ specifications and end uses can change over time. Meanwhile, some harder-to- recycle materials potentially could be added to City collection services, such as batteries.
• Proposed State Legislation: The City may take positions that could influence the outcome of proposed State of California legislation regarding zero waste.

The Zero Waste Commission voted to adopt this Work Plan and inform Council at the May 15, 2025 Meeting.

Action: Adoption of the 2025-2026 Zero Waste Commission with a subsequent Information Report to Council
Motion: Commissioner Sherman
Second: Commissioner Curtis
Ayes: 6; Abstain: 0; Nays: 0; Absent: 2

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Potential to reduce the disposal of products, packaging, and other materials via waste reduction, re-design, reuse, repair, recycling, and composting.

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
Future Action Items that ZWC may send to City Council include:
• Resolution to support adoption of a new Zero Waste Strategic Plan; • Resolutions to support adoption of modifications that strengthen existing ordinances and to adopt new ordinances that further zero waste efforts. • Other zero waste-related recommendations to City Council.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The Zero Waste Strategic Plan will contain numerous recommendations that have potential fiscal impacts, particularly infrastructure upgrades, compliance requirements, and program service expansion.

Zero Waste Commission Fiscal Year 2025-26 Work Plan INFORMATION CALENDAR July 29, 2025

CONTACT PERSON
Julia A. Heath, Zero Waste Commission Secretary, Public Works, (510) 981-6357 Attachments:
1: Zero Waste Commission Work Plan Matrix

Zero Waste Commission
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 WORK PLAN
The following goals and activities have been identified for fiscal year 2025-26:

Goal Resources Program Activities Outputs Outcomes
Development
of Zero Waste
Strategic Plan
Consulting
team, City staff
Various public
presentations and
workshops.

Distribute
information to
increase public
input.

Recommendations
to Council as
needed.

Support for the
development of a
comprehensive,
detailed strategic
plan to achieve
City’s zero waste
goals.

Compliance
with SB1383--
Food
Recovery and
Organics
Diversion
City staff,
community
partners
Continue updates
from staff, explore
community
compost
opportunities,
invite community
partners and
related resources
to discuss their
efforts with
Commission.

Recommendations
to Council as
needed.

Help in achieving
compliance with
SB1383
requirements and to
promote local
resiliency.

Strengthening
existing and
adopting new
zero waste
ordinances
City Staff,
consulting
team, Ecology
Center, UC
Berkeley/
Cal Zero
Waste,
BUSD
Through sub
committees and
then the
commission as a
whole, evaluate
and recommend
ways to
strengthen
existing City
ordinances and to
adopt new ones
that further efforts
to achieve zero
waste goals.

Recommendations
to Council as
needed.

Support for
strengthened and
new zero waste
ordinances.

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 1 Review and
assessment of
accepted
materials:

Inclusion or
exclusion in
City collection
services
City staff,
Urban Ore,
CCC,
Ecology
Center, CAW,
NCRA,
CPSC,
StopWaste,
Others
Presentations at
ZWC by
community
partners,
specialists.

Review list of
accepted
materials, and
recommend
changes, if any.

Commission on
feedback.

To help Council
have an accurate
understanding of
City’s collection
services and the
extent to which they
align with the City’s
goals.

Review of
regional and
State
proposed
legislation
City Staff,
Californians
Against Waste,
California
Product
Stewardship
Council,
Northern
California
Recycling
Association
Presentations by
outside
organizations to
help ZWC track
and understand
proposed
legislation, for the
purpose of
advising Council.

Recommendations
to Council as
needed.

To help establish
effective, fiscally
prudent laws that
support City’s zero
waste goals

Communications

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. Click the “Search” button

5. Communication packets matching the entered criteria will be returned

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