Berkeley City Council
October 28, 2025

Contract for Construction (Bauman CONSENT CALENDAR
Landscape and Construction Inc.) and
Contract Amendment for Engineering Services (Diablo Engineering Group) October 28, 2025 for the Ohlone Greenway Modernization and Safety Project

2: Site Map
3: Abstract of Bids

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

CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION
(BAUMAN LANDSCAPE AND CONSTRUCTION, INC.) AND

CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
(DIABLO ENGINEERING GROUP) FOR

THE OHLONE GREENWAY MODERNIZATION AND SAFETY PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Ohlone Greenway Modernization and Safety Project will provide operational and safety improvements to the Ohlone Greenway multi-use pathway from the Virginia Gardens crossing to the Santa Fe Avenue crossing; and WHEREAS, the Project is in alignment with the 2017 Berkeley Bicycle Plan, 2020 Vision Zero Action Plan, and 2016 Berkeley Strategic Transportation (BeST) Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has received $1.271 million in grant funding from the Alameda County Transportation Commission and $3 million in grant funding from Bay Area Rapid Transit for these transportation improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City’s design team developed conceptual designs, conducted public outreach and engagement, reviewed and evaluated public feedback, and finalized the design by preparing plans, specifications, and estimates; and WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, the City released an Invitation for Bids (Specification No. 26-11748-C) for the work of the Ohlone Greenway Modernization and Safety Project; and
WHEREAS, bids were opened on September 23, 2025 and Bauman Landscape and Construction, Inc. was found to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; and WHEREAS, funding for construction is available in the Local Grants Fund (307) and the Measure BB Streets & Roads Fund (134); and
WHEREAS, the City’s design team determined that additional funding will be needed for engineering design-related services during the construction phase, which will require an amendment to Diablo Engineering Group Contract No. 32300026 to increase the not-to- exceed amount by $100,000 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $650,000; and WHEREAS, $40,000 for design-related services during construction is available in the Measure BB Bike & Pedestrian Fund (135), with additional funding up to $60,000 to be identified and appropriated at the time that additional services are needed, if applicable; and

October 28, 2025

WHEREAS, due to planned contingency funds, no other funding is anticipated to be required for this Project.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the plans and specifications for the Ohlone Greenway Modernization and Safety Project (Specification No. 26-11748-C) are approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley accepts the bid of Bauman Landscape and Construction, Inc. as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments, extensions, and change orders until completion of the Ohlone Greenway Modernization and Safety Project in accordance with the approved plans and specifications with Bauman Landscape and Construction, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $3,782,000, which includes a 10 percent contingency for unforeseen circumstances. A record signature copy of said agreement and any amendments will be on file in the Office of the City Clerk; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager to execute an amendment to Contract No. 32300026 with Diablo Engineering Group to provide engineering design-related services during the construction phase of the Project, increasing the contract amount by $100,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $650,000. A record signature copy of said amendment will be on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Terrance Davis, Public Works Director
Subject: Contracts: Interface Engineering, Inc. and Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc. for On-Call Electrical Engineering Services

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt two Resolutions authorizing the City Manager to execute contracts and any amendments with the following firms for on-call electrical engineering services for capital improvement projects, each for a period of November 1, 2025, through June 30, 2028:

1. Interface Engineering, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $150,000.

2. Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $150,000.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Initial funding for both on-call contracts is available in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 through 2026 budget, as follows:

Fund Amount
511 (T1) $90,000
501 (Capital Improvements) $210,000
Funding for FY 2027 through 2028 is subject to appropriation in future fiscal years’ capital improvement budget and will be identified as projects arise.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Departments of Public Works and Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront (Parks) require electrical engineering consulting services to assist in implementing the City’s T1 Program and the Capital Improvement Program. The City’s current on-call electrical engineering service contracts will expire on December 31, 2025.

Without consultant support, staff will be unable to meet the electrical engineering needs of ongoing and upcoming projects, leading to further deterioration of City facilities.

These contracts will provide planning, design, inspection and construction phase expertise in areas pertaining to electrical engineering. The services provided by these

Contracts: Interface Engineering, Inc. and Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc. for On-Call Electrical Engineering Services CONSENT CALENDAR October 28, 2025

consultants will support the Strategic Plan goal to provide state-of-the-art, well- maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities.

These on-call contracts will be shared between Public Works and Parks.

BACKGROUND
On May 22, 2020, the City issued a Request for Qualification (RFQ) for On-Call Electrical Design Services (Specification No. 20-111364-C) for capital improvement projects. On February 23, 2021, by Resolution Nos. 49-727-N.S. and 49-728-N.S., Council approved the award of two $150,000 contracts for the period of April 21, 2021 through December 31, 2024. These contracts were extended to their expiration date of

December 31, 2025.

Requests for Qualifications (RFQ) were issued on May 8, 2025, (Specification No. 25- 11719-C) seeking qualified firms or individuals to provide on-call Electrical Engineering services for capital improvement projects.

On June 10, 2025, the City received five proposals from electrical design engineering firms, which were evaluated by a review panel consisting of City staff in the Public Works and Parks, Recreation and Waterfront departments. Interface Engineering, Inc. and Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc. were determined to be the best qualified to meet the City’s needs.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Work performed under this contract will assist the City in upgrading aging electrical systems and support the City’s ongoing efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by improving energy efficiency in City facilities, undertaking distributed energy projects, and expanding EV charging stations to support electrification of the City’s fleet vehicles.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Electrical engineering services are required for ongoing and future projects as the City does not have in-house expertise to complete this specialized engineering work.

Currently, Public Works does not employ an electrical engineer as staff member. As a result, consultant services to provide this expertise are mandatory. The recommended firms both assembled highly qualified teams with the expertise the City requires. This contract will complement the personnel and capacity available in Public Works.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
No alternatives were considered, since the City does not have existing employee expertise or resources to perform electrical engineering design work.

CONTACT PERSON
Wahid Amiri, Deputy Director, Department of Public Works (510) 981-6396 Ronald Nevels, Manager of Engineering, Department of Public Works (510) 981-6439 Elmar Kapfer, Supervising Civil Engineer, Department of Public Works (510) 981-6435

Contracts: Interface Engineering, Inc. and Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc. for On-Call Electrical Engineering Services CONSENT CALENDAR October 28, 2025

Uriel Gonzalez, Assistant Civil Engineer, Department of Public Works (510) 981-6627 Attachments:
1: Resolution: Interface Engineering, Inc.
2: Resolution: Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc
3: Abstract of Bids

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

CONTRACT: INTERFACE ENGINEERING, INC. FOR ON-CALL ELECTRICAL

ENGINEERING SERVICES
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2025, the City released a Request for Qualifications (Specification No. 25- 11719-C) seeking firms or individuals to provide on-call electrical engineering services; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025, the City received five submissions, which were reviewed and rated; and
WHEREAS, the submission from Interface Engineering, Inc. has been found to be fully qualified and responsive to the City’s request; and
WHEREAS, funding will be identified and requested for appropriation as projects arise.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to execute a contract and any amendments with Interface Engineering, Inc. for on-call electrical engineering services for City-owned facilities from November 1, 2025 to June 30, 2028 for an amount not to exceed $150,000 with the option to extend for two additional one-Year terms. A record signature copy of said contract and any amendments to be on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

October 28, 2025

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

CONTRACT: SALAS O’BRIEN ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ON-CALL ELECTRICAL

ENGINEERING SERVICES
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2025, the City released a Request for Qualifications (Specification No. 25- 11719-C) seeking firms or individuals to provide on-call electrical engineering services; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025, the City received five submissions, which were reviewed and rated; and
WHEREAS, the submission from Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc. has been found to be fully qualified and responsive to the City’s request; and
WHEREAS, funding will be identified and requested for appropriation as projects arise.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to execute a contract and any amendments with Interface Engineering, Inc. for on-call electrical engineering services for City-owned facilities from November 1, 2025, through June 30, 2028 for an amount not to exceed $150,000 with the option to extend for two additional one-Year terms. A record signature copy of said contract and any amendments to be on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

City of Berkeley
Abstract of Bid Worksheet
Finance Department For: On Call Electrical Engineering Services General Services Division Spec. 25-11719-C
Bidders Local
Vendor WC NF OS SC LW EBO
1 YEI Engi
neers, INC. x x x x x x
2 Salas O'Brien x x x x x x
3 Interface Engineering x x x x x x
4 Advance Design Consultants, INC. x x x x x x
5 Blueberry, INC. x x x x x x
6 7
8 9
10 Bid Recorder: Tanisha Gainer DATE
Bid Opener: Sherri Segnan DATE
Project Manager: DATE
DATE: 06/10/2025
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7320 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7390 E-mail: [email protected]
Tanisha Gainer (Jun 10, 2025 15:28 PDT)
Tanisha Gainer
06/10/2025
06/10/2025
06/23/2025

25-11719-C - Abstract (1)
Final Audit Report 2025-06-23
Created: 2025-06-10
By: Talia Stewart ([email protected])
Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAIrb2RxjgeMuTw9y898zpiqi4Cyu8ATwD "25-11719-C - Abstract (1)" History
Document created by Talia Stewart ([email protected]) 2025-06-10 - 10:27:38 PM GMT
Document emailed to Priya Chopra ([email protected]) for signature 2025-06-10 - 10:27:41 PM GMT
Document emailed to Sherri Degnan ([email protected]) for signature 2025-06-10 - 10:27:42 PM GMT
Document emailed to Tanisha Gainer ([email protected]) for signature 2025-06-10 - 10:27:42 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Tanisha Gainer ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2025-06-10 - 10:28:21 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by Sherri Degnan ([email protected])
2025-06-10 - 11:31:32 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Sherri Degnan ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2025-06-10 - 11:32:12 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by Priya Chopra ([email protected])
2025-06-23 - 6:54:26 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Priya Chopra ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2025-06-23 - 6:55:11 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed.
2025-06-23 - 6:55:11 PM GMT

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Terrance Davis, Director of Public Works
Subject: Final Map of Tract 8651: 2403-2407 San Pablo Avenue

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the final map of Tract Map 8651 for a 37-unit condominium project consisting of 36 residential units and 1 commercial unit at 2403- 2407 San Pablo Avenue.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
There is no cost to the City. The applicant paid the appropriate fees with the submission of their tract map application.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Planning Commission approved the tentative map on November 1, 2023, and that map is valid for 24 months from the approval date. Prior to the sale of any condominium units, State law and City Ordinances require the owner to submit a final map to Council for approval. The owner duly submitted a final map for this project within the required 24-month timeframe and is now seeking Council approval.

BACKGROUND
On November 1, 2023, the Planning Commission voted to approve the application of Berkeley Moshav LLC (owner of the 2403-2407 San Pablo Avenue property) for a 37- unit condominium project as described above.

Section 21.20.100 of the Berkeley Municipal Code requires Council approval of all final map subdivisions. In addition, pursuant to Section 66474.1 of Division 2 of the Government Code, a legislative body must approve such a final map if it finds it to be in substantial compliance with the approved tentative map.

All conditions of approval have been completed to the satisfaction of the Public Works and the Planning and Development Departments. Staff have examined the final map, and determined it to be in substantial compliance with the approved tentative map.

26

Final Map of Tract 8651: 2403-2407 San Pablo Avenue CONSENT CALENDAR October 28, 2025

The final map is meant to provide a record of the underlying property survey, and does not constitute approval of a proposed or existing structure upon the property. Separate action is required for this approval, which has been obtained by virtue of use permits and building permits.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
This project complies with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen).

CALGreen is California’s green building code to improve public health, safety, and general welfare through enhanced design and construction of buildings utilizing concepts which promote a positive environmental impact and sustainable construction practices.

The Planning and Development Department issued Use Permit ZP2021-0220 to demolish the existing building and construct the new development. One of the CEQA findings in the Use Permit is that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA per Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to Section 66474.1 of Division 2 of the Government Code, the City Council must approve the final map if it finds it to be in substantial compliance with the approved tentative map. Staff has reviewed the map and finds it to be in substantial compliance with the tentative map.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
No other alternative course of action is recommended.

CONTACT PERSON
Wahid Amiri, Deputy Director, Public Works (510) 981-6396 Ronald Nevels, Manager of Engineering, Public Works (510) 981-6439 Vincent Chen, Supervising Civil Engineer, Public Works (510) 981-6409 Attachment:
1: Resolution
2: Exhibit A: Tract Map 8651

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

FINAL MAP OF TRACT 8651: 2403-2407 SAN PABLO AVENUE
WHEREAS, Design Review Committee approved DRCF2024-0003 on April 18, 2024 for a 4-story co-housing building with 36 units, ground floor retail space, and garage parking; and
WHEREAS, the Berkeley Planning Commission has determined that the tentative map of Tract 8651 conforms to the requirements of the City’s subdivision Ordinance, and the California Subdivision Map Act, and approved the tentative map of Tract 8651 on November 1, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Department have certified that the final map of Tract 8651 substantially conforms to the conditionally approved tentative map, as required by the California Subdivision Map Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the final map of Tract 8651 for a 37-unit condominium project consisting of 36 residential units and 1 commercial unit at 2403-2407 San Pablo Avenue, is hereby approved.

Exhibits
A: Tract Map 8651

BEING A MERGER OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 OF THE HIGGINS TRACT FILED FOR RECORD ON DECEMBER 12, 1907, IN MAP BOOK 23, PAGE 56,

OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY
BEING ONE LOT FOR 36 RESIDENTIAL AND 1 COMMERCIAL

CONDOMINIUM UNITS

CITY OF BERKELEY ALAMEDA COUNTY CALIFORNIA SCALE: NONE MAY 2025 TRACT MAP 8651
7901 STONERIDGE DR.,
SUITE 360
PLEASANTON, CA 94588
(925) 396-7700
www.bkf.com SHEET 1 OF 4

OWNER'S STATEMENT

THE UNDERSIGNED, BERKELEY MOSHAV LLC, DOES HEREBY STATE THAT IT IS THE OWNER OF THE LAND

DELINEATED AND EMBRACED WITHIN THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARY LINES ON THE HEREIN EMBODIED MAP ENTITLED "FINAL MAP 8651," CITY OF BERKELEY, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA; THAT SAID OWNERS ACQUIRED TITLE TO SAID LAND BY VIRTUE OF THE GRANT DEED RECORDED ON NOVEMBER 26, 2019, AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2019242842, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA; THAT SAID OWNER DOES HEREBY CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND FILING OF THIS MAP.

IN WITNESS THEREOF I HAVE HEREUNDER SET MY HAND THE DATE HEREUNDER WRITTEN.

AS OWNER(S): BERKELEY MOSHAV LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BY: DATE:

ROGER STUDLEY

MANAGER

OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE

INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS.

COUNTY OF     )
ON    ,    , BEFORE ME    , A NOTARY PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED     WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY

EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND

ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES)

AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S) OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

WITNESS MY HAND.

SIGNATURE:

NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR PRINTED NAME

SAID COUNTY AND STATE
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS:

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:

COMMISSION NUMBER OF NOTARY:

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STATEMENT

I, ANIKA CAMPBELL-BELTON, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF

CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY STATE THAT CERTIFICATES HAVE BEEN FILED AND DEPOSITS HAVE BEEN MADE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTIONS 66492 AND 66493 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DATED:  ANIKA CAMPBELL-BELTON

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BY:

DEPUTY CLERK

SOILS REPORT
A GEOTECHNICAL INVESTICATION REPORT FOR FINAL MAP 8651 HAS BEEN PREPARED BY A3GEO, PROJECT NUMBER 1166-1A, DATED NOVEMBER 8, 2019, AND IS ON FILE IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY.

VICINITY MAP

UNIVERSITY

CITY OF BERKELEY, ALAMEDA COUNTY

SAN PABLO

ALLSTON

CHANNINGBYRON
DWIGHT

CARLETON
SIXTH
SITE
APN: 056-1928-027-01

TRUSTEE'S STATEMENT

OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE UNDER THAT CERTAIN SHORT FORM DEED OF TRUST AND ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS RECORDED NOVEMBER 26, 2019, AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2019-242843, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY.

BY: DATED:

NAME:

TITLE:

CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT

I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND THE SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN IS SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS IT APPEARS ON THE TENTATIVE MAP (IF ANY) AND APPROVED ALTERATIONS THEREOF.

DATED RONALD A. NEVELS, R.C.E. 62524

CITY ENGINEER, CITY OF BERKELEY

CITY CONSULTANT SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
THIS MAP CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCES. I, PATRICK M.

REI, HEREBY STATE THAT THIS MAP HAS BEEN EXAMINDED BY ME, OR UNDER MY DIRECTION BY CITY OF BERKELEY STAFF, AND I AM SATISFIED THAT IT IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT.

DATED:

SIGNATURE
NAME: PATRICK M. REI
LICENCE: P.L.S. 8178

CITY CONSULTANT SURVEYOR

CITY OF BERKELEY

CITY CLERK'S STATEMENT

I, MARK NUMAINVILLE, CITY CLERK OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY STATE THAT THE HEREIN EMBODIED MAP ENTITLED “FINAL MAP 8651” WAS PRESENTED TO

THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY, AT A MEETING THEREOF, HELD ON , 202__, AND THAT SAID CITY COUNCIL, BY RESOLUTION NUMBER DID APPROVE SAID MAP;

THAT SAID CITY COUNCIL FINDS THAT THE ZONING OF THIS PROPERTY PERMITS THIS USE, AND THE SALES OF THE INDIVIDULA UNITS WILL BE PERMITTED.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND THIS OF , 202__.

MARK NUMAINVILLE, CITY CLERK AND CLERK OF

THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY,

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT

THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEY IN

CONFORMANCE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF BERKELEY MOSHAV LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, IN FEBRUARY, 2022. I HEREBY

STATE THAT THIS MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE APPROVED OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP, IF ANY. ALL MONUMENTS ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY THE POSITIONS INDICATED AND ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED.

BY: DATE:

DAVIS THRESH, P.L.S. 6868
[email protected]

RECORDER'S STATEMENT
FILED THIS DAY OF , , AT   .M., IN
BOOK  OF MAPS AT PAGE              THROUGH PAGE              INCLUSIVE, AT THE REQUEST OF OLD REPUBLIC TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY.

SERIES NO.:  MELISSA WILK

COUNTY RECORDER IN AND FOR THE

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FEE: $ BY:

DEPUTY COUNTY RECORDER

BASIS OF BEARINGS
THE BEARING OF NORTH 13°13'46" WEST ALONG THE MONUMENT LINE OF SAN PABLO AVENUE, BETWEEN FOUND CITY OF BERKELEY MONUMENTS B0877 ("A") AND B0282 ("B"), WAS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS. THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, CCS83, ZONE 3, EPOCH 2017.50, AND ESTABLISHED LOCALLY BY FIELD-OBSERVED TIES RELATIVE TO CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE NETWORK STATIONS "SRB1" AND "EBMD", IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE, SECTIONS 8801-8819. STATION VALUES (NAD83) AND ACCURACIES AS PUBLISHED BY THE CSRC. ALL LINEAR MEASUREMENTS ARE IN US SURVEY FEET.

DISTANCES ARE GRID-BASED AND ARE IN REFERENCE TO THE CONTROL POINTS AND COORDINATES SHOWN BELOW. DIVIDE BY THE COMBINED SCALE FACTOR SHOWN TO APPROXIMATE GROUND DISTANCES. SEE STATION DIAGRAM FOR VECTOR TIES.

STATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE
"A" 37°51'89.1202" -122°17'28.0928"

ELLIPSOID HEIGHT
-55.68

CONVERGENCE COMBINED FACTOR

0.99993386-01°05'47.73"
"B" 37°51'30.7519" -122°17'18.9550" -57.47
STATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE ELLIPSOID HEIGHT LATITUDE σ LONGITUDE σ HEIGHT σ SRB1 37°32'04.262657" 122°16'01.016821" 180.9941 0.006788 0.006575 0.01977 EBMD 37°48'54.022568" 122°17'01.652191" -50.2187 0.006604 0.006440 0.01860

STATION DIAGRAM
BEING A MERGER OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 OF THE HIGGINS TRACT FILED FOR RECORD ON DECEMBER 12, 1907, IN MAP BOOK 23, PAGE 56,

OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY
BEING ONE LOT FOR 36 RESIDENTIAL AND 1 COMMERCIAL

CONDOMINIUM UNITS

CITY OF BERKELEY ALAMEDA COUNTY CALIFORNIA SCALE: NONE MAY 2025 TRACT MAP 8651
7901 STONERIDGE DR.,
SUITE 360
PLEASANTON, CA 94588
(925) 396-7700
www.bkf.com SHEET 2 OF 4
NOTES

1. IN GENERAL, COORDINATES AND TIES TO CSRN STATIONS SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A PRIMARY BASIS FOR SUBSEQUENT BOUNDARY RETRACEMENT. COORDINATES AND TIES ARE PROVIDED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCE CODE AND PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT.

2. DATE OF FIELD SURVEY: OCTOBER 2021.

3. ALL UNITS ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF.

4. ALL TIES ARE PERPENDICULAR UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

REFERENCES
R1 GRANT DEED TO BERKELEY MOSHAV LLC RECORDED NOVEMBER 26, 2019, DOCUMENT NUMBER DN 2019-242842.

R2 MAP OF THE HIGGINS TRACT, BERKELEY, CAL., FILED DECEMBER 12, 1907, BOOK 23 OF MAPS AT PAGE 56.

R3 RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 3081, FILED FEBRUARY 25, 2021, BOOK 47 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY AT PAGE 37.

R4 CITY OF BERKELEY MONUMENT CARDS:
(A) B0877, MONUMENT CARD _80041+
(B) B0880, MONUMENT CARD _80111+
(C) B0369, MONUMENT CARD 80259
(D) B0879, B0322, MONUMENT CARD 80333+O
(E) B0316, MONUMENT CARD _80151
(F) B0282, MONUMENT CARD _80197
(G) B0323, B0324, B0325, B0326, MONUMENT CARD _80334
(H) B0370, MONUMENT CARD _80260F+
(I) B0371, MONUMENT CARD _80261F+
R5 RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 2002, FILED JUNE 23, 2006, BOOK 31 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY AT PAGE 12-27.

PARCEL A

0.53 ACRES ±
23,096 SQ. FT.±
40 scale 1" = 40'
0 40
feet
80 LEGEND

FOUND MONUMENT, AS NOTED

FOUND PIN MONUMENT, AS NOTED
SET MAG NAIL W/TAG STAMPED L.S. 6868

CITY OF BERKELEY MONUMENT IDENTIFIER
(SEE TABLE ON THIS SHEET)

SUBJECT PARCEL BOUNDARY

INTERNAL PARCEL BOUNDARY

ADJOINING PARCEL BOUNDARY

MONUMENT LINE

SURVEY TIE

BOB BASIS OF BEARINGS

CR CALCULATED FROM RECORD DATA

CL CENTER LINE

DN DOCUMENT NUMBER

FND FOUND

M MAP

MON MONUMENT

NTS NOT TO SCALE

OR OFFICIAL RECORDS

P PROPORTIONED

PT POINT

RS RECORD OF SURVEY

SFNF SEARCHED FOR NOT FOUND

ABBREVIATIONS

MONUMENT MONUMENT CARD DESCRIPTION
B0877 3/8" BRASS PIN IN MONUMENT WELL

CITY OF BERKELEY MONUMENT DESCRIPTIONS
B0880 2" BRASS DISK (NO PUNCH MARK)

IN MONUMENT WELL
B0369
B0879
B0322 2 1/8" CA DOT BRASS DISK W/PUNCH

IN MONUMENT WELL
B0316 2 1/8" CA DOT BRASS DISK W/PUNCH

IN MONUMENT WELL
B0282
2" CITY OF BERKELEY BRASS DISK W/PUNCH
STAMPED B0282 PLS6392

IN MONUMENT WELL
B0323 3/4" BRASS PIN W/PUNCH IN MONUMENT WELL
B0324 3/4" BRASS PIN W/PUNCH IN MONUMENT WELL
B0325 3/4" BRASS PIN W/PUNCH IN MONUMENT WELL
B0326 3/4" BRASS PIN W/PUNCH IN MONUMENT WELL
B0370 3/4" IRON PIN IN MONUMENT WELL
B0371 3/4" IRON PIN IN MONUMENT WELL
2 1/8" CA DOT BRASS DISK W/PUNCH

IN MONUMENT WELL
2 1/8" CA DOT BRASS DISK W/PUNCH

IN MONUMENT WELL
TRACT MAP 8651
7901 STONERIDGE DR.,
SUITE 360
PLEASANTON, CA 94588
(925) 396-7700
www.bkf.com SHEET 3 OF 4
NOTES:

1. ALL UNITS ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF.

2. ALL TIES ARE PERPENDICULAR UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

BEING A MERGER OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 OF THE HIGGINS TRACT FILED FOR RECORD ON DECEMBER 12, 1907, IN MAP BOOK 23, PAGE 56, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY BEING ONE LOT FOR 36 RESIDENTIAL AND 1 COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS

CITY OF BERKELEY ALAMEDA COUNTY CALIFORNIA SCALE: AS SHOWN MAY 2025

PARCEL A

0.53 ACRES ±
23,096 SQ. FT.±

TRACT ONE
DN 2019-242842
(LOTS 1 & 2, 23 M 56)

TRACT TWO
DN 2019-242842
(LOTS 3-6, 23 M 56)
1" = 20'scale
20 0 20
feet
40 LEGEND

SUBJECT PARCEL BOUNDARY

BOB BASIS OF BEARINGS

CR CALCULATED FROM RECORD DATA

CL CENTER LINE

DN DOCUMENT NUMBER

FND FOUND

M MAP

MON MONUMENT

NTS NOT TO SCALE

OR OFFICIAL RECORDS

P PROPORTIONED

PT POINT

RS RECORD OF SURVEY

SFNF SEARCHED FOR NOT FOUND

ABBREVIATIONS

SUBJECT PARCEL BOUNDARY

INTERNAL PARCEL BOUNDARY

ADJOINING PARCEL BOUNDARY

MONUMENT LINE

SURVEY TIE

FOUND MONUMENT, AS NOTED

FOUND PIN MONUMENT, AS NOTED
SET MAG NAIL W/TAG STAMPED L.S. 6868

CITY OF BERKELEY MONUMENT IDENTIFIER
(SEE SHEET 3 FOR DESCRIPTIONS)

SUBJECT PARCEL BOUNDARY

CITY OF BERKELEY ALAMEDA COUNTY CALIFORNIA SCALE: AS SHOWN MAY 2025 TRACT MAP 8651
7901 STONERIDGE DR.,
SUITE 360
PLEASANTON, CA 94588
(925) 396-7700
www.bkf.com SHEET 4 OF 4
NOTES:

1. ALL UNITS ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF.

2. ALL TIES ARE PERPENDICULAR UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

RESOLUTION NOTES:

1. MONUMENT LINES ALONG SAN PABLO AVENUE (BASIS OF BEARINGS), CHANNING WAY, BYRON STREET AND DWIGHT WAY ESTABLISHED BY RECOVERY OF CITY OF BERKELEY MONUMENTS (R4) (SEE SHEET 2).

2. BLOCK BOUNDARIES ESTABLISHED BY CITY OF BERKELEY RECORD OFFSETS (R4) OF ESTABLISHED MONUMENT LINES.

3. RECORD PARCELS PROPORTIONED BASED ON RATIO OF MEASURED BOUNDARY OF BLOCK TO ORIGINAL RECORD MEASURES (R2).

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Civic Arts Commission
Submitted by: Lisa Bullwinkel, Policy Subcommittee Chair, Civic Arts Commission Subject: Referral Request to Rescind Incorrect Information Related to Turtle Island Monument

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to City Manager to draft a resolution to send to Council for adoption that would correct the historical record found in three Council Resolutions (attached). In the first of these resolutions issued in 2003 the City conducted a procurement process utilizing an artwork title “Turtle Island Monument” (an artwork concept originally created by Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson in the 1990s and recast as a new project by the City) resulting in another artist being contracted in 2006 to unwittingly create artwork for the City using this same title. The 2023 Resolution, related to an aspect of an attempted collaborative redesign of Turtle Island Monument involving the original artists, does not have an executed contract and should be rescinded.

Those three resolutions are:
 2005 Contract Authorization for Scott Parsons (Contract executed and completed) Attachment 1
 2006 Contract Amendment Authorization for Scott Parsons (Contract executed and completed) Attachment 2
 2023 Contract Authorization for Scott Parsons (Contract never executed) Attachment 3

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Turtle Island Monument is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing the City of Berkeley’s goal to provide state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and

27

Referral Request to Rescind Incorrect Information CONSENT CALENDAR Related to Turtle Island Monument October 28, 2025
facilities. Turtle Island Monument should be the centerpiece of Civic Center Park and instead has sat unused as a fountain and in a state of disrepair for over three decades.

BACKGROUND
In 1991, Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson, artists who are Native American, made a proposal to the City of Berkeley to create Turtle Island Monument in Civic Center Park at the historic fountain which had been broken for decades. The proposed monument was designed to recognize Native American history throughout the Americas commemorating the end of 500 years of resistance and the beginning of 500 years of rebuilding.

The fountain site was dedicated as the location for the future Turtle Island Monument by Council Proclamation (Attachment 4) during the first Indigenous Peoples Day in 1992.

During the 1990s, the monument proposal was reviewed by various Commissions and Council and was revised by the artists many times in response to those reviews, but the monument was never approved to be built and the artists were never placed under contract with the City during this time. The 1997 Historic Landmark Designation application for Civic Center Park included a written description of Turtle Island Monument as it would be installed at the fountain.

In 2003, without contacting the original artists, who had by then moved out of state, the City erroneously issued a Call for Artists (Attachment 5) to complete the project with elements not proposed in the original Turtle Island Monument design. Scott Parsons, a non-native artist, was selected through a competitive proposal process and was issued a contract to create eight medallions to represent different tribes of the Americas and four bronze turtles as part of the creation myth of Native American culture. Mr.

Parsons’s original proposal included snapping turtles (Attachment 6) however he was directed by the City to change them to sea turtles. Scott Parsons was not aware that he was producing artwork with an appropriated title because he was doing so in response to the Request for Proposals that the City issued. This is a mistake that the City of Berkeley made. Scott Parsons created the proposed art elements which were delivered to the City but not installed at the fountain. Instead, the medallions were placed in storage and the four bronze turtles were put on ‘temporary’ display in the Civic Center building at 2180 Milvia Street.

Years passed and in 2018 several community members, who were frustrated by the lack of a functioning fountain/sculpture in Civic Center Park, took it upon themselves to initiate yet another concept for the fountain. This triggered the realization that the City needed to resume contact with the original artists of Turtle Island Monument, Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson. City staff engaged the original artists in a listening session, after which they agreed to participate in a design charrette for the Turtle Island Monument project that would include artist Scott Parsons. On March 30, 2023, the City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission gave approval to the Turtle Island Monument design developed from the Design Charrette that included input from Lee

Referral Request to Rescind Incorrect Information CONSENT CALENDAR Related to Turtle Island Monument October 28, 2025
Sprague, Marlene Watson, Scott Parsons, and others. However, shortly after this approval, tensions emerged, missteps were made, feelings were hurt, and trust was broken.

It was in this context that the City of Berkeley determined that contract negotiations with the artists had reached an impasse and in July 2025 notified the Civic Arts Commission of its intention to cancel the project (Attachment 7). Members of the Civic Arts Commission as well as members of the Native American community who were present at that commission meeting expressed a desire to rectify these missteps and hurt feelings to see Turtle Island Monument through to completion by the original Native American artists, Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson. It is with this intention that this referral is requested. The artists have indicated the desire to go forward, if corrections are made. City staff have also indicated a desire to see this project to completion.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
None.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Civic Arts Commission wants to foster a positive relationship with the Native community, and it is their intent is to have Turtle Island Monument completed in the heart of Berkeley’s Civic Center.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CITY MANAGER
The City manager concurs with the Commission’s goal to update the record and will work with staff to report back to council if the item is approved.

CONTACT PERSON
Jennifer Lovvorn, Civic Arts Commission Secretary, 981-7533 Attachments:

1. 2005 Contract Authorization for Scott Parsons (executed and completed)

2. 2006 Contract Amendment Authorization for Scott Parsons (executed and completed)

3. 2023 Contract Authorization for Scott Parsons (never executed) 4: 1992 Council Proclamation

5. 2003 Call for Artists

6. Parsons original proposal

7. July 2025 Information Report to Civic Arts Commission

Parks Recreation & Waterfront
Department

CIVIC CENTER PARK FOUNTAIN

TURTLE ISLAND MONUMENT
ARTWORK BUDGET - $35,000

PUBLIC ART OPPORTUNITY

CALL FOR ARTISTS
2003

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

LOCATION
In the Civic Center Historic District, at the center o f Civic Center Park. The pa rk is bordered by Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd., Allston Way, Center Street and
Milvia Street. This project is part of a rehabilitation of the existing park and fountain.

ELIGIBILITY
This is a Call for Artists. This project is open to all artists in the United States. We encourage experience
in public art and Native American culture.

The Turtle Island Story
Long, long, time ago, a great tree in the Sky World had been uprooted and an empty hole took it’s place. One day, Sky Woman was peeking into that empty hole to a place far below. She fell into the hole and tumble d rapidly down. At the world below there was only water and water animals. The first to see her falling were the graceful geese. They spoke amongst themselves saying: “Why is she falling straight into the water so fast that she will surely die!” So they flew beneath her and spread their wings that it might slow her descent; and it did.

Down upon the water, some animals called out to a Giant Turtle because his back was the strongest thing in the watery world. The Giant Turtle placed himself directly beneath the falling being, and so ever so gently Sky Woman landed upon his back. But there was barely room for her long slender legs and arms, her feet and hands fell into the water.

The animals all knew that deep beneath the water was something firmer, brown and gloppy. So one by one, the y
dove deep beneath the water trying to bring mud up to the turtle to make more room for poor Sky Woman.

None were successful until finally Muskrat, with his dying breath, came out of the water with a tiny bit of mud in his tail. The animals spread this mud all around the turtle, it began to spread all on it’s own, and then they brought up more. And when Sky Woman had fallen from her lofty world, there had been seeds from the Great Tree which caught in her skirts; these seeds fell upon the mud and grew. And soon the world which had been just water, was very different; it was Turtle Island. It grew and nurtured the native people for many generations.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Turtle Island Monument is dedicated to all
indigenous people of the hemisphere whose
societies flourished centuries before Columbus
arrived. Some societies continue to this day, some
are extinct. The Turtle Island Monument is base
d
on ancient American Indian legend, which is
described below. The monument will consist of 4
turtles placed on the true north, south, east an
d
west axis, mounted in the lower pool of an existing
historic fountain; and 8 medallions incorporate
d
into the surrounding plaza surface. At least 1 turtle
should have a map of the Americas on its back.

The medallions represent different tribes of the
Americas, both flourishing and extinct. These
medallions shall also be on axis with the turtles.

The City of Berkeley reserves the right to not award any contracts for this project.

This Call for Artists does not constitute an agreement to fund artworks for the site described above.

For more information on this project, please visit the Parks Recreation & Waterfront website at http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/parks/PlanDesignnews.html
and click on the link to Civic Center Park.

APPLICATION DEADLINE
Applications must be received by the
Project Manager or postmarked by
October 15, 2003
Late applications and faxed applications will not
be accepted. Send all information and
applications to:

Mark Mennucci
City of Berkeley
Park Recreation & Waterfront Department
2121 Allston Way, 1st Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704
Estimated Time line

Process begins August 15, 2003
Applications Due October 15, 2003
Final Selection Begins November 15, 2003
Final Artist Selected January 2004
Fabrication Begins Spring 2004
Project Completed TBD

Please note that this is an estimated timeline and may be substantially revised to reflect changes based upon the availability of panelists.

COMMUNITY PROFILE
The Civic Center Historic District and Civic Center Park define the political, architectural and social heart of the City. Civic Center Park is the site for numerous social events and celebrations throughout the year, including Indigenous People’s Day, Farmers Market, Earth Day and “How Berkeley Can You Be”.

Located in the center of Berkeley’s downtown business and civic core, Civic Center Park is a highly visible, active location, characterized by its variety of uses. Local business and residential neighborhoods surround the Park. Center Street, the busiest pedestrian thoroughfare in Berkeley, runs from the park, east, to UC Berkeley.

Up to 1 million pedestrians use the sidewalks of Center Street, annually. Berkeley High School students use the park heavily on a daily basis when school is in session.

In 1992, Berkeley City Council dedicated the fountain and plaza area as the location of the future Turtle Islan d
Monument. The Civic Center District, including the park, was later landmarked in 1997. The current Turtle Island Monument, as approved by the community and Berkeley City Council, is designed to honor an d recognize Native American history commemorating the end of 500 years of resistance and the beginning of 500 years of rebuilding.

This public art project aspires to illustrate this hist ory, while simultaneously integrating with the historic architecture of the existing Moderne fountain.

GENERAL Terms

ARTWORK SPECIFICATIONS
Any medium appropriate for use on the project site will be considered. The artwork in the plaza must be designed to meet the City’s safety and Americans with Disabilities Act standards. Artwork must be durable, graffiti and stain resistant, slip resistant, easily maintainable, and not a public safety hazard. The Artwork must also withstand submersion in water, since it will be located within a fountain, and interaction from people of all ages climbing in the fountain.

Artist must coordinate with the Project Design Consulta nt on details describing the Artwork connection to the fountain floor, and medallion inset into plaza surfacing. These details will be required for inclusion in the contract document plan set, for permit approval. Artwork plans and details should be stamped by a licensed engineer or architect.

BUDGET SPECIFICATIONS
The specified budget amount for this project is $35,000. This must cover all costs associated with design, fabrication, permit approval, any required licensed engin eer drawings, public review, shipping, oversight of the artwork installation, and travel expenses. In the event that finalists are requested by the Selection Panel to make a model, each finalist will receive an honorarium of up to $500. For the selected artist, $5,000, from the budget, will be allocated to cover any cost attributed to transportation & lodging for the purpose of further public presentation and construction oversight in the City of Berkeley.

SELECTION PROCESS

All applications submitted by the deadline will be reviewed for selection. The candidate’s slides and background materials will be screened by a Selection Panel made of 7 members representing the following groups: Berkeley Parks Staff (1), Parks and Recreation Commission (1), Landmarks Preservation Commission (1), Civic Arts Commission (1), and members of the Native American Community (3). This will be done in lieu of presenting in front of the Civic Arts Commission.

The Selection Panel will then select up to three (3) finalists to develop design proposals and maquettes. The finalists will receive an honorarium of $500 for further development of the proposed concept and maquette. The proposed concept shall also include a detailed material list and detailed budget. The finalists will be required to present to the Selection Panel at a future time to be determined. The Panel will then select a single artist to complete the Artwork.

Public review of the Selected Artist design proposals and maquettes shall consist of a maximum of three (3) public meetings. These meetings will occur after the Selection Panel has selected the artist. The artist will be required to present their proposal to the Park and Recreati on Commission, the Arts Commission, and the Landmarks Preservation Commission. Approval by the LPC will designate notice to proceed with fabrication of full scale Artwork.

All Selection Panel, Committee, and Commission meetings are open to the public. For additional information contact Mark Mennucci, Project Manager at (510) 981-6436 or E-mail [email protected].

SELECTION CRITERIA
Artists will be selected to develop proposals based on:
• Artistic merit as evidenced by representation of relevant past work in slides and other supporting material. • Appropriateness of the artist’s medium, style, and previous experience as those relate to the project goals and setting.
• Experience with projects of a similar scale and scope including familiarity with public works projects, the public review process, and/or collaboration with City agencies and community groups. Artists must have good communication skills and be able to work with diverse City representatives. • Extensive knowledge of Native American culture illustrated in past works and submitted proposal.

PUBLIC ART PROGRAM COMMISSIONS
Artists interested in reading this document electronically are encouraged to visit the Parks Recreation & Waterfront website at http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/parks/PlanDesignnews.html and click on the link to Civic Center Park. For interest in learning about other public art opportunities, visit the Public Art Program web site at http://www.cityofberkeley.info/civicarts/publicart.htm or to call the Civic Arts Program Recorded Information Line at (510) 981-7543. Information is updated whenever new opportunities arise.

ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSALS
The Selection Panel reserves the right to reject all design proposals.

MODEL POLICY

In the event that you are asked to develop a model of your proposal, the following policy shall apply. The Selection Panel shall:

1. At its sole discretion, the City of Berk eley will have the unconditional right to own any model selected for evaluation, as part of commission awards or may alternatively choose to retain all such models until completion and approval of project implementation.

2. Require that all proposals and/or models submitted are original and unique.

All artists of all ethnicities and genders are encouraged to apply.

All information contained herein does not constitute either an expressed or implied contract and these provisions are subject to change.

For further information about the Turtle Island Monument Project, please contact Mark Mennucci, Project Manager (510) 981-6436, FAX (510) 981-6390 Parks Recreation & Waterfront Department
2121 Allston Way, 1st Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704
E-mail: [email protected].

Parks Recreation & Waterfront
Department
City of Berkeley 2002/2003 Public Art Projects
Application Form
Log #____________________
For office use only
A. Name(s)_____________________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________ City & State________________________________ Zip______________ Phone_____________FAX______________Email___________________ Website address ______________________________________________

B. Submitting for the project:

[] Turtle Island Monument Project, Deadline, Wednesday, October 15, 2003.

C. Application checklist: Have you enclosed the following? To apply, please submit the following:
[] A plastic slide sheet containing six (6) slides of relevant previous work, numbered, fully labeled, including artist’s name, title of work, date completed, media, dimensions and with a red dot in the lower left corner of each slide.
[] Two (2) copies of a one-page corresponding slide list including title, date, media, dimensions, location, and other pertinent information deemed useful in orienting the Selection Panel to your work.
[] A self-addressed, correctly sized and stamped envelope for the return of slides and other materials.
[] OPTIONAL: One or two relevant printed materials such as catalogues, articles, etc. that might assist the selection panel in understanding applicant’s work. All materials should clearly indicate the portion(s) for consideration.

Please submit ten (10) complete, one-sided, collated sets of the following written materials:

Each set should contain one of each of the following, in the order given .

Please do not bind materials and do not submit in plastic sleeves, folders or binders. [] Artist’s statement of interest, briefly noting relevant past experience, conceptual approach for this design, related materials and budget, and other information you wish to highlight about your work and career (1 page maximum).

[] A thumbnail sketch of your proposed idea.
[] Resume (two pages maximum).
[] Names, addresses and phone numbers of three (3) professional references.

Incomplete or incorrectly assembled applications may not be accepted. Regretfully, neither the Selection Panel, or City of Berkeley Staff, cannot be responsible for lost, missing or damaged materials. The Selection Panel will endeavor to return the originals of application materials to the applicants following the selection.

Submit materials to:

Mark Mennucci – Project Manager
City of Berkeley, Parks Recreation & Waterfront Department 2121 Allston Way
Berkeley CA 94704
E-mail: [email protected] (510) 981-6436 FAX (510) 981-6390

REGIONAL LOCATION MAP

CITY MAP

CIVIC CENTER PARK SITE MAP (PREFERRED PLAN)

FOUNTAIN LAYOUT

T urtle Island Monument

T urtle Island Monument
A Public Art Proposal and Collaboration
presented by Scott Parsons
February 16, 2005
Designed to honor and recognize Native American history commemorating the end of 500 years of resistance
and the beginning of 500 years of rebuilding.

The Turtle Island Story
L
ong, long, time ago, a great tree in the Sky
World had been uprooted and an empty hole
took it’s place. One day, Sky Woman was
peeking into that empty hole to a place far below.

She fell into the hole and tumbled
rapidly down. At the world below there was only
water and water animals. The first to see her falling
were the graceful geese. They spoke amongst
themselves saying: “Why is she falling straight into
the water so fast that she will surely die!” So they
flew beneath her and spread their wings that it
might slow her descent; and it did.

Down upon the water, some animals called out to a
Giant Turtle because his back was the strongest
thing in the watery world. The Giant T urtle placed
himself directly beneath the falling being, and so
ever so gently Sky Woman landed upon his back.

But there was barely room for her long slender legs
and arms, her feet and hands fell into the water.

The animals all knew that deep beneath the water
was something firmer, brown and gloppy. So one by
one, they dove deep beneath the water trying to
bring mud up to the turtle to make more room for
poor Sky Woman.

None were successful until finally Muskrat, with his
dying breath, came out of the water with a tiny bit
of mud in his tail. The animals spread this mud all
around the turtle, it began to spread all on it’s own,
and then they brought up more. And when Sky
Woman had fallen from her lofty world, there had
been seeds from the Great Tree which caught in her
skirts; these seeds fell upon the mud and grew. And
soon the world which had been just water, was very
different; it was Turtle Island. It grew and nurtured
the native people for many generations.
/ornament38

Table of Contents
Abstract .................................................1 Concept .................................................2 Fabrication.............................................3 Installation.............................................3 Maintenance ..........................................4 Plan View...............................................5 Turtle Designs ........................................7 Medallion Designs .................................9
Timeline ...............................................13 Budget..................................................14 Artists Biographies ...............................15
Scott Parsons’ Resume .........................18

1 The Beginning
Once a woman fell from the sky…
Once she told him the stars spoke a language
akin to the plains of her home,
a language like rocks.”
Joy Harjo, “The Woman Who Fell From the Sky”
Abstract
“This Monument will consist of four turtles placed on the true north, south, east and west axis, mounted in the lower pool of an existing historical fountain; and eight medallions incorporated into the surrounding plaza surface.”
All of the medallion images will be made by living Native artists. This circle of contemporary images with traditional references will serve to make a connection to the turtle sculptures which will have historical images and maps of the Americas on their shells. I am designating the inner circle as one to honor the past peoples and ancestors. The medallions are a way of thinking about and honoring the past as tangible and immediate, in the here and now—serving as a connection or bridge for those who will visit this park and come to learn, maybe unexpectedly, but to learn from these images the story of Turtle Island.

Foremost to this project is a vision of reconciliation that is living, honest, and authentic. The connection of First Peoples to the land and the creation of Turtle Island is primary. This proposal offers an unprecedented multi-visionary approach to the making of this public art monument. Eight contemporary Native artists will create the medallions, each to commemorate his or her own people, the beauty of, and the survivability of Turtle Island. Scott Parsons will sculpt the four turtles and coordinate the overall project.

The Turtles
The connection to history and to water.

The four turtles represent the ancient record. Each turtle will be sculpted and cast in stone. Stone is a very traditional medium, it is an ancient material, it connects the artwork to the historic fountain, to geologic time, and to the earth itself. Each turtle will be approximately four feet in length and weigh 2600 pounds.

2 The turtles are based on the large alligator snapping turtle represented in Plains and Woodlands cultures as a symbol of power and defense. The snapping turtle is both a land and water turtle, capable of navigating under water for more than twenty minutes between breathes. It can weigh 180 pounds or more and live for more than 100 years. The claws of a helper turtle in some traditions of the Turtle Island story describe how the crevices and carved landscapes still seen today were made made when the smaller turtle applied mud to the Great Turtles shell.

The Turtle Island story is a very old story. It has been told many times and in many ways. The challenge is to make the story current with meaning and to recreate the turtles so they are different and come alive and draw people in with interest. The base for each turtle will be slightly below water level. All four turtles will stand with their legs in the water. Three of the four turtles will be taking a drink of water. Their mouths and tongues connecting one to another.

The fourth turtle will be posed leaving his platform with his front legs on the exterior lower wall of the fountain.

The shells of the turtles will contain both cast and carved images. The surfaces will be manipulated in a creative, poetic way using an iconography of resistance, such as the double-headed key motif which was brought back into use by the women of Kotyiti during the Pueblo revolts of the 1680s and recalls an even more ancient use of this symbol. The cast images will be cast from separately in stones of different colors. All the imagery on the turtle shells as well as the ring of turtles are part of the ancient record of the Americas.

The Medallions
The connection to First Peoples and the land.

The medallions in turn, connect the present with the past. They form a larger concentric ring, a living circle of contemporary artists’ expressions of their traditional cultures’ beliefs and artwork. These medallions serve as a way to connect the present to the past and then to make the connection to the pr esent again real and lived. Each medallion will be designed by a separate artist and cut from stone, principally granite, with some marble and other stone inlays.

Each medallion will measure three feet in diameter and be in the form of a circle.

The circle of medallions is a symbol of unity and protection for the land and native cultures. Several medallions contain imagery from painted drum heads which recall songs, stories, dancing and ceremonies. The drum resides as a sacred element of the universe, past and present. Other imagery includes shields for the protection of the land and culture. The imagery expresses an interest in physical bodies, animals, elements, the lay of the land, and silhouettes. T ogether these images are meant to honor the past with a shared vision of the present.

3 Creating the Turtles
The first turtle will be sculpted in Plastilina or clay. The Plastilina sculpture will be the basis for the four cast turtles. A steel armature will be created inside each casting—this is an epoxy-coated steel that will reinforce the cast stone. Casting is done from a single mold. The stone mix is pressure-injected and consists of carefully graded and washed natural gravel and sands combined with crushed graded stone such as granite, marble, quartz or limestone. The stone is formed in an accelerated natural stone formation process with a polymer added to strengthen the resulting stone to 10,000 psi—which is well above marble, right up there with granite—and capable of supporting kids and adults alike whom might take to climbing on them. Pigments will be introduced into the stone mix to naturally color each turtle in (subtle) colors of the four directions: white, black, red and yellow.

There will be some intentional variation between the four turtles to make them more alive and interesting, positioning the legs, neck and head differently. I will rework each shell so that each turtle shell will be unique and contain different designs in their shells. Some of these designs will be sculpted in the Plastilina.

Other geometric motifs will be cast with a second or third color of stone. These cast stone symbols will be cast first, and then the entire turtle will be cast around these designs. This will allow the integrity of the shell to be continuous in form, across different colors and surfaces.

Constant exposure to water is no problem, there are many cast stone pieces which are permanently installed underwater.

Creating the Medallions
The medallions will be digitally redrawn from the original designs and converted into cad files. The medallions will be cut by a waterjet machine which cuts the stone from a concentrated stream of water and ruby powder.

The larger stone shapes will have a thermal or flamed (textured) exterior surface. Some small areas of the design may have a polished or smooth sur face to the stone pieces. All of the cut stones will be epoxied together, so that each medallion can be installed as a single disk unit on site.

Installing the Turtles
Artworks Foundry in Berkeley will be contracted to install the turtles. Each turtle will weigh approximately 2,600 pounds. We will use a forklift to lift each sculpture into place on their base. Each piece will be gently set and marked for precise fitting, then lifted while holes are cut in the base and then reset and epoxied into position. This specification may change to meet the City of Berkeley’s requirement for removability. Final specs will be drawn by a licensed engineer and approved by the City of Berkeley prior to installation.

4 Installing the Medallions
I will coordinate with the City’s design consultant and contractor for the installation. I would prefer to obtain some of the paver flagstone material beforehand and have the circle shapes cut into these surrounding stone pieces at the same time the medallions are waterjet cut. This will facilitate a perfectly cut circle surrounding each art medallion.

A licensed tile and flooring contractor will be subcontracted for the installation.

An industry standard dry-pack concrete technique will be used to permanently bond each medallion to the dry-pack and subfloor beneath as a single solid piece. The medallions will be 36 inches in diameter and 3⁄4 to 1-1⁄4 inch thick
stone slab. Some tile pieces may also be used.

Maintenance
The cast stone turtles should remain maintenance free. They are as hard as granite and will weather as stone. The geometric patterns on the turtles’ shells are cast stone as well, and will not fade or peel, or wear off.

Regular cleaning is required for the medallions. Spills should be cleaned when they occur. Dirt may be hosed off with water or a pressure washer. Gum and other debris must be scraped and removed, consistent with the maintenance schedule for the rest of the Park. Colored liquids, like coffee, soda, or oil, left to dry on the surface of the stone will stain the medallions. A periodic treatment of the stone with a color enhancer and sealer is suggested to maintain the vivid coloration of the stone. Long-term: maintenance of the grout may r equire re- grouting in 15–20 years time.

5 Not to scale

6 To scale

7 The Northern Turtle
As the migrations began to end, the record of the people’s wanderings was left engraved on rocks over the face of the land. The people at Gila Bend, Arizona, were on their third round when this symbol was inscribed, but stayed for some time, as indicated by the connecting line.

The Southern Turtle
This is the oldest known art in the Americas. These
marks were carved in a stone about the size of your
palm. They are believed to be part of a horizon just
at 12,000 years ago, from the Gault site in Texas. I
drew the design from an actual cast of the piece.

This is absolutely the oldest art we have in the
New World. The Clovis culture dates to
11,500–11,600 years before the present..

Frank Waters, The Book of the Hopi, 1972

8 The Eastern Turtle
Based on a 19th-century solidly beaded Arapaho moccasin design.

The five squares in quincunx on a white ground are a turtle.

The Western Turtle
Based on a 19th-century solidly beaded Arapaho moccasin design. The center square is the life symbol (hiiteni). The red triangles touching hiiteni are tipis.

The small squares are rabbit tracks in snow. The triangular figures represent seats (çioku´utaana
n).

Alfred Kroeber, The Arapaho, 1902–1907

9 Choctaw/Delaware
David Jones (Buffalo Horn)
David Jones is from the Turtle Clan, his
Father, a Choctaw; and his Mother, a full
blood Delaware, were of the Turtle Clan.

This design comes from a hand drum he
painted. The Drum Head is in the shape of
a medicine wheel. In most tribes, the
Medicine Wheel is for the “four directions”
North, South, East & West. Many of the
colors chosen are colors used by the
Choctaw tribe. The red and black lines are
the colors of the Warrior. In the Delaware
beliefs, the Turtle was a symbol of Mother
Earth and the first of all living things. The
upper left and lower right are the Mound—
“Nanih Wiya”, from which the Great Spirit
created the first of their Choctaw people,
who then crawled through a cave into the
light of day. The brown granite is meant to
be the color of rawhide, a light tan.

Cheyenne River Lakota Tribe (Hohwoju)
Harley Zephier (Wanbli Hoksila)
The hand represents a human being’s
commitment to his people. Spiritual powers were
asked to accompany the man on his jour ney.

The spiral is our path through the Creator’s
world. All life crosses our path. The stripe is the
people's presence on earth. We were visible, then
we seem to have disappeared, but are now
protecting our future.

The Lakota Oyate (People), a spiritual existence
on Unci Maka (Grandmother earth). Within the
Creator’s circle, they lived with all beings.

The world was in balance and a wonderful
civilization flourished. Preserving culture,
tradition and nature became our responsibility.
commitment to the people’s needs first, was asked
of many. These human beings would risk their
lives in service to this way of life.

10 Mapuche Kultrung (drum)
Painted drum head design, early 20th
century, from Chile, which refers to
the four directions of the world.

Ohlone
Linda Ohlone
Linda Yamane and I will select an historical
Ohlone basket design for this medallion. This is
one example. These baskets were originally
made of little, circular shell beads which were
attached into the coil stitch on the surface. In
between the beads were stitched in feathers of
the red acorn woodpecker and green Mallard
feathers on the exterior. The Ohlone nation are
the original inhabitants of the area now known
as Berkeley.

National Museum of the American Indian, Native Universe, 2004

11 Shoshone-Bannock
Ramon Murillo
“Star Drum”
Upper half: Natural stars in dark blue
background represents the universe.

Center green horizontal thin rectangle
represents mother earth.

Lower center black thin lines
connected to a circle represents rain-
clouds.

Bottom half: Red-brown triangles
surrounded by yellow ochre represent
mountains.

Cochiti Pueblo
Mateo Romero
Tewa shield design created for this
project.

12 Shoshone-Bannock
Ramon Murillo
“Shoshone Hand Drum”
Vertical center: The red-brown triangle
represents a mountain and tipi, and
when repeated makes a classic hour-
glass design found in bead work of the
1800s Plains designs.

The six black lines represent the six
direction (four cardinal points, mother
earth, and the Great Spirit).

The horizontal light blue rectangles
represent the sky and water.

Absaloka
TR Glenn (Pretty Elk)
This design commemorates the
relationship between the Hidatsa and
Absaloka (Crow Agency, MT) nations
who were once one people.

The Absaroka and Hidatsa both utilize
the sun symbols depicted in this design.

The thin vertical triangles represent the
two nations lodges: the Absaroka tipi
and the Hidatsa earthen lodge.

The four black squares symbolize the
unique four-pole construction of the
lodges. Four is the most sacred number
to both nations.

The Absaloka acquired horses during
their migration and shared them with the
Hidatsa during their reunion. This event
is symbolized in the red horse tracks on
the left and right.

15 Artist Bios
M
ateo Romero (Cochiti Pueblo) grew up in Berkeley, California and hung out in the “Park” while attending high school at Berkeley High. Mateo is collected by many museums, including the Denver Art Museum and was part of the “Reservation X” exhibit at the Hood Museum and elsewhere. His mfa is from the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe. He currently resides at the Pueblo of Pojoaque in New Mexico.
“I am always looking. Through catalogues, Museum shows galleries, newspapers, and other artist’s studios. I am looking for art that is central, forceful, honest. Things that are true about life, elements of a larger human condition, to view, absorb, ingest, and remake as artwork. As I believe in myself, and my need to do this, I also believe in a reconstructive agenda for art and that ultimately things can get better.”
M
y name is Mary Longman and my Aboriginal name is Aski-
Piyesiwiskwew. I am Saulteaux and a member of Gordon
First Nation in Saskatchewan. I have received a dfa at the Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design in Vancouver, a mfa at the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design in Halifax, and currently, I am a Ph.D. candidate in the Faculty of Education at the University of Victoria. My dissertation topic is: “Deconstructing Colonial Ideology: Contemporary First Nations Art in Canada.”
As a professional artist, I have been exhibiting my art work consistently for the past twelve years. Some of the galleries that I have exhibited my work in are; the National Gallery of Canada, the Vancouver Art Gallery, the Canadian Museum of Civilization, and the Smithsonian, National Museum of the American Indian.

TR
Glenn (Pretty Elk) is a Master Jeweler who fabricates exquisite contemporary jewelry featuring traditional Crow designs using overlay and inlay techniques on silver and gold.

Pretty Elk is able to replicate distinctive Crow color design using semi-precious stones, ivory, shell, and buffalo horn. He works out of his studio on the Crow reservation in south central Montana.

Years ago Pretty Elk was relocated to Redwood City, California, as part of a government program, and later moved to San Jose. He attended the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe. His son is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California at Berkeley.

16 R
amon Murillo is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock tribe.

His Native American heritage permeates his imagery. Tribal and personal symbols derived from his dreams and participation in various ceremonies lead him on a continual journey depicting life as a human being living in harmony with the Earth and Spirit World.

The 1992 show entitled “Decolonizing the Human Mind”
(Seattle, Washington) describes Ramon as having produced profound images that convey the changes he believes is the body and spirit of Indian Country and himself, which is a major test to any peoples’ vision.

Ramon received his mfa in Printmaking from the University of Oregon, and bfa from Idaho State University. He is the first Native art instructor to be employed full-time by Northwest Indian College.

H
arley Zephier is an enrolled member of the Cheyenne
River Lakota Tribe (Hohwoju) in South Dakota. He
lives near Thunder Butte, the north west portion of the Cheyenne River reservation. Harley is also of the Yankton Dakota people of southeastern South Dakota.

Harley has a love and respect for the plains, her peoples, the Lakota/Dakota traditions, and cultures. He envisions all peoples working together, communicating, and practicing in balance with one-another. Being a self-taught artist has allowed him to create unique works of art. His art is
created through his heart’s appreciation of the peoples he comes from. The hands are gifts of expression. The senses enrich the finished piece of work. Harley seeks knowledge and direction from the Creator. His greatest influence in pursuing ways of his people was his maternal grandmother.

She instilled pride, and gave life lessons to follow his hear t.

Harley uses earth-given mediums from Creation, as artful expression. To authentically represent the works of the people, he thanks you for your pursuit of art and life.

Pilamiya, (Thank You)
Mitakuye Oyasin (All My Relatives)

17 L
inda Yamane, Ohlone basketweaver, singer and
storyteller, traces her ancestry to the Rumsien
Ohlone, the native people of the Monterey area. She has been active in researching and retrieving Rumsien
language, song, folklore and basketry. Traditions that
were once thought lost. Linda works as a freelance
writer, illustrator and graphic designer, and is the
newsletter editor for the California Indian Basketweavers Association. She is also a contributing editor to News
From Native California magazine.

Linda is the author of Weaving a California Tradition
and co-author of In Full View- Three ways of Seeing
California Plants. She has researched, compiled and
illustrated two collections of Ohlone stories, When the World Ended, How Hummingbird Got Fire and How
People Were Made and The Snake That Lived in the
Santa Cruz Mountains & Other Ohlone Stories.

Her thirty years of experience in enrichment education
has included training classes for teachers and docents
throughout the San Francisco and Monterey Bay areas,
six years as an outdoor education teacher for the Youth Science Institute in San Jose, classroom programs and
school assemblies, gate art teacher for San Jose Unified School District, guest speaker in college and university courses, and UC Santa Cruz Extension Instr uctor.

D
avid Jones is my Christian name. My Choctaw name is Buffalohorn. My family’s Choctaw name is Hardwood. We are of the Turtle Clan; I am a full-blood Choctaw/Delaware Indian and a registered artist of the Choctaw Nation of Southern Oklahoma. I spent 17 years in the Marine Corp; several years as the Director of Emergency Medical Services on the Navajo Nation.

My life changed in a single day sixteen years ago, when I was reflecting on my tribal heritage. The inspiration came to me that I was to make a pipe. I did not know where to begin, but I began by finding Catlinite, the red stone generally used for pipe bowls. Having no mentor, and being self-taught was a long process.

Since then I have studied and researched the many different styles of Native American Art, including but not limited to pipes, dance rattles, the breast plate, the pipe axe and other items, most generally used by the Choctaw nation. My work has been distributed around the world and is on display in museums and Universities.

All of my pieces are original, made with my own hands and personal tools. I use only genuine materials.

All of my art comes from inspiration—there are no patterns for anything I cr eate.

18 Scott Parsons
I am an artist who creates metaphors that open the experience of the built environment to new understandings of history, siting, and the flow of people and their relationship to a site. I received an mfa from the University of Colorado at Boulder in 1990. My experience in public art includes percent-for-art and private commissions for museums, research facilities, university buildings and transportation centers. I work in precast concrete, stone, light (solstice markers), glass, ceramic mosaic, terrazzo and stone in walls, floors, sidewalks and plazas. My design experience includes 3D pre-visualization, fabrication, design-team collaboration and early integration public art planning. My work is reviewed in Art in America, Sculpture, Art Papers, and Public Art Review.

Scott Parsons
[email protected]
802 Santa Fe Drive, Unit 4, Denver, CO 80204 USA
303-902-0625
|Bibliography
2004 The Sourcebook of Architectural and Interior Art 19, Madison: The Guild 2003 NTMA, “Honor A ward: Job of the Year,” Architectural Record,September “2002 in Review: Public Art,”Art in America,August
2002 Jacob Stockinger, “Exhibit Turns Spotlight on Percent for Art,”Wisconsin Week,November 20 Jacob Stockinger, “ A Pittance for Beauty,” The Capital Times,October 30 Karen Rivedal, “Science Into Art,” Wisconsin State Journal,July 10 2001 “Recent Projects,” Public Art Review 25,Fall/Winter Roberta Bloom, “ Art in Public Places,” Colorado Visions,Fall Mary Voelz Chandler, “‘101 Vampires’ a Mouthful,” Rocky Mountain News,October 5 Michael Paglia, “Summertime Views,” Westword,July 26
Mary Voelz Chandler, “Gallery Stages ‘Group Portrait’,” Rocky Mountain News,July 13 Judith Reynolds, “ Artwork Shines at flc Solstice Celebration,” Durango Herald (front page), June 22
“Best Bets,” Denver Post,June 22
2000 Roberta Bloom, “Our Public Art Collection: An Expression of Colorado,”Colorado Visions,Spring 1999 Scott Parsons, “ Artist’s Statement” Leonardo,mit Press, 32:3 The Sourcebook of Architectural Art 14, Madison: The Guild 1998 Joe Miller, “Stereotype This: Concrete Amnesia,” Art Papers,November/December “Recent Projects,” Public Art Review 19,Fall/Winter
Art in Public Places 1977–1998(incl. cover image), Colorado Council on the Arts “Commissions-in-Brief,” Sculpture, October
“Biomatrices,” Colorado Visions,Fall
“Recent Projects,” Public Art Review 18,Spring/Summer
Romalyn Tilghman, “ Around and About,” Arts Rag, January Roberta Kaserman, “ Art in Public Places,” Colorado Visions,January 1997 Lucy R Lippard, The Lure of the Local: Place in a Multicentered Society, New York: The New Press Deborah Karasov, “ American Grounding: Comments on the Art of Elegy,” Public Art Review 17, Fall/Winter
Jeff Bradley, “Stories Spice Walkway’s Dedication,” Denver Post, October 22 Helen Davis, “Stars Under Their Feet,” Denver Post (front page), October 21 David Gregg, News 4, kcnc-tv Denver, October 20
David Gregg, First News, kcnc-tv Denver, September 29
1994 Steven Rosen, “Grants a Reward to Colorado Artists for Creative Innovation,” Denver Post, November 20
Ed Greene, “Interview with Jacquie Creazzo,” kcnc-tv Denver, April 22 Kathy Kaiser, “Panorama Picks: The Lure of the Local,” Boulder Weekly, April 7 1993 Julie Jargon, “Eerie ‘Hallow’s Eve’ Exhibit Opens at umc Galleries,” Campus Press, October 21–27
Tom Noel, “ Aim Aims to End Columbus Day Clashes with Aspen in Civic Center,” Denver Post, October 16
“Día de las Brujas,”Silver & Gold Record,October 14
Mark A Sills and Glenn T Morris, Eds, Indigenous Peoples’ Politics, Denver: University of Colorado
Lucy R Lippard, “Sniper’s Nest: Folding the T ents,” Z Magazine, May Denise Uyehara, “Counter-Memorial,” High Performance,Spring Mary Motian-Meadows, “Reflections on Native American Art in Colorado,” Colorado Arts, December–January
1992 Glenn T Morris, “ American Indian Movement of Colorado Stops Columbus Day Parade in Denver,” American Indian Anti-Defamation Council Newsletter,December Ken Abbott, “T epee Display Symbolizes Indian Massacre,” Chronicle of Higher Education, October 28
“Burnt Offering,” Colorado Daily,October 21
“Tepees of Protest,” Boulder Daily Camera, October 20
“In the Spirit of Crazy Horse,” Campus Press (CU-Boulder), October 15 CNN, October 13
Gemma Lockhart, “ A Day to Come Together,” usa Today,October 12 Patrick O'Driscoll, J Sebastian Sinisi, Jim Carrier, “Columbus Parade Canceled,” Denver Post, October 11
Ward Merchant, “Columbus Parade Canceled,” Associated Press, October 11 Michael Mehle, “T epee Skeletons to Haunt Parade Route,” Rocky Mountain News,October 10 Jim Carrier, “Marchin’ Orders Out for Parade,”Denver Post,October 10 Mosaic: Special on the Quincentenary, kcnc-tv Denver, October 10 kcnc-tv News, kusa-tv News, kmgh-tv News, Denver, October 9–10 “Indians, Italians Discuss Parade,” Associated Press,September 23 Jim Carrier, “Collision Course for Parade, T epees,” Denver Post (front page), September 22 Doug Detisch, “Professor Captures Life through Photos,” St. Peter Herald,February 6 1990 Manu Ghasfari, “Latin American News”, kgnu-Boulder Radio, August 5 Carmen Atilano, “Images of El Salvador,” Quinto Sol, March 1987 Charles Nauman, “Painter Depicts Struggle, Hope in Latin America,” Rapid City Journal, September 20
|Public Art
2006 Boehnen Memorial Museum and Visitor’s Center
60 ft. dia. outdoor granite plaza.

Mitchell Prehistoric Indian Village, Mitchell, SD
Group II, pc
2002 Algorithmic Tapestry
Engineering Centers Building
10,200 sq. ft. terrazzo floor.

University of Wisconsin, Madison
Kohn Pederson Fox Associates, pc, and Flad, pc
Wingscape
Hurst Hall
175 ft. stone frieze; 13,000 piece ceramic tile murals.

Western State College, Gunnison, CO
Davis Partnership, pc
Community, Technology, and Innovation
The National Cable T elevision Center and Museum
Five 50 x 12 ft. digital output murals.

University of Denver, Denver, CO
2000 Solstice Window
Center of Southwest Studies
Precast concrete window aligned to the summer
solstice sunrise.

Ft. Lewis College, Durango, CO
Klipp Colussy Jenks DuBois Architects, pc
1998 Biomatrices
T wo 17 ft. diameter stone floor rosaces
Laboratory and Radiation Services Building
Colorado Department of Public Health
and the Environment, Denver, CO
The Davis Partnership, Architects, pc
1997 Ha-no-oo: Star Calendar
500 sq. ft. outdoor granite sidewalk
16th & California Street Light Rail Station
Regional T ransportation District, Denver, CO
1992 Quincentenary Project
100 burnt tipis and 29 historical markers
Denver Civic Center Park and State capitol lawn
Fourth World Center, UCD, Denver, CO and the American
Indian Movement of Colorado
Reconciliation Project
22 burnt tipis and 9 historical markers
Nobel Institute Peace Prize Forum
Augustana College, Sioux Falls, SD

|Education
1995 Computer Graphics
Platt College, CO
Highest Honors
1990 MF A—Painting
University of Colorado at Boulder, CO
Magna cum laude
1987 BA—Spanish, Art and Anthropology
Augustana College, Sioux Falls, SD
Magna cum laude
1986 Latin American Studies in Bogotá, Colombia
Hamline University
|Awards
2004 Golden T rowel A ward
International Masonry Institute
2002 Job of the Year
National T errazzo and Mosaic Association
2001 Work Sample Finalist
Creative Capital
2000 Research Grant: The Lost Medicine People:

A Northern Arapaho Oral History
Colorado Endowment for the Humanities
1999 Artist Project Grant: The Colorado Powwow Highway
Colorado Council on the Arts
1998 Open Studio: The Arts Online
Colorado Council on the Arts
Annual Show—Award of Excellence
Art Directors Club of Denver, CO
1996 Tier III A ward
Scientific and Cultural Facilities District, Denver, CO 1995 COVisions Project Grant
Colorado Council on the Arts
1994 Fellowship
Art Matters, Inc, NY
1992 Quincentenary A ward
Chinook Fund, Denver, CO
Lakota Wopila—Honoring Dance
American Indian Movement of Colorado
1987 Harold Spitznagle Medal of Fine Art
Augustana College, Sioux Falls, SD
1972 International Lego Building Contest
Third Place (Age 7)
1970 International Lego Building Contest
Tenth Place (Age 5)
|Teaching
1996–2005Platt College, Aurora, CO
Art History, Computer Graphics, Drawing, Illustration, Multimedia, Web, Typography
1995 Denver School of the Arts, Denver, CO
Photography
1994–95 Denver Public Schools, CO
Art, Spanish (Substitute T eacher)
1992–93 Gustavus Adolphus College, St Peter, MN
Drawing, Painting, Photography, Screenprinting
1988–90 University of Colorado at Boulder, CO
Drawing (Graduate Part-time Instructor)
|Languages
English, Spanish, Northern Arapaho
|Exhibitions
2003 Museum of New Mexico: Museum of Fine Arts, Santa Fe, NM William Havu, Denver, CO
2002 Gallery of Design, UW-Madison, WI
2001 William Havu, Denver, CO
GOOG, Denver, CO
1999 Dulaney Architecture, Denver, CO (one-person show) 1998 Art Directors Club of Denver Annual Show, CO
Dulaney Architecture, Denver, CO (one-person show)
Arts on Vine, Denver, CO
Canyon Crossing Gallery, Brattleboro, VT
1997 Iac Contemporary Art, Albuquerque, NM
1996 William King Regional Arts Center, Abingdon, V A
Guadalupe Fine Art, Santa Fe, NM
1995 Nicolaysen Art Museum, Casper, WY
Eide/Dalrymple, Sioux Falls, SD
Hays Arts Center, Hays, KS
Robert A. Peck Arts Center, Riverton, WY
1994 Umc Gallery, Boulder, CO
1993 Umc Gallery, Boulder, CO
Core Gallery, Denver, CO
Long Island Arts Council, Freeport, NY
1992 Gustavus Adolphus College, St Peter, MN (one-person show) Umc Gallery, Boulder, CO
1991 Core Gallery, Denver, CO
1990 Cu Art Galleries, Boulder, CO (one-person show)
Rocky Mountain Peace Center, Boulder, CO
Pirate 2/C, Denver, CO
Chicano Humanities & Arts Council, Denver, CO
Sioux City Arts Center, Sioux City, IA
1989 Rochester Fine Arts Center, Rochester, MN
Colorado Institute of Art, Denver, CO
1987 Dahl Fine Arts Center, Rapid City, SD
Gallery 306, Sioux Falls, SD
Augustana College, Sioux Falls, SD
|Lectures
2002 Beyond Bricks & Mortar, School of Human Ecology, UW-Madison, October 27
Wisconsin Tile & T errazzo Expo, International Masonry Institute, Milwaukee, August 16
2001 Gallery Talk, William Havu Gallery, Denver, June 30 1999 Phantoms of the High Plains, SD Humanities Council, Augustana College, May 7
Scott Parsons
[email protected]
802 Santa Fe Drive, Unit 4, Denver, CO 80204 USA
303-902-0625

INFORMATION REPORT TO CIVIC ARTS COMMISSION
Meeting Date: July 23, 2025, 6pm
Subject: Turtle Island Monument Project – Contract Negotiation Impasse Prepared by: Jennifer Lovvorn, Chief Cultural Affairs Officer

SUMMARY
Following extensive and years-long discussions with Indigenous artists Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson regarding the Turtle Island Monument (TIM) project, negotiations have reached an impasse.

Regrettably, the gap between artists' demands and reasonable municipal contract terms cannot be bridged and therefore, the City has concluded that the Turtle Island Monument project cannot proceed with these artists due to the negotiation impasse under current circumstances. Despite multiple proposal iterations and significant accommodation efforts, the gap between the artists’ stated requirements and municipal contracting capabilities has proven insurmountable. This report documents the most recent negotiation process, proposals offered, and factors leading to this decision.

PROJECT BACKGROUND
Historical Context
In the
1990s, the Turtle Island Monument (TIM) project was first proposed to the City by Lee Sprague as artist and Marlene Watson as project designer. Both Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson worked with the City of Berkeley and Indigenous communities internationally to develop the monument's design – merging an Indigenous ethic and aesthetic with the requirements provided by the City and its Commissions.

On July 7, 1992, Berkeley City Council approved the recommendation from the Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission for "the creation of the Turtle Island Project, as the native Nation's monument within the Peace Wall circle at Martin Luther King Civic Center Park, as adopted by the Berkeley City Council in the Resistance 500 Task Force Proposal and with the support of the Landmarks Preservation and the Civic Arts Commissions." Also in 1992, the City of Berkeley became the first city in the U.S. to declare and institute Indigenous Peoples Day, to coincide with the 500th anniversary of the arrival of Columbus in the Americas on October 12, 1492.

The original proposal for the Turtle Island Monument project dated 1992 included "a round base of granite with entry from the East. In the center of the circle will be a bronze turtle … Around Turtle Island will be a circle of water… round tiles with the names of Indigenous nations and people engraved on them. Many of the tiles will be blank, to represent the people who are no longer with us, languages that are not heard anymore, and nations that have ceased to exist since 1492." In 1997, the City of Berkeley Landmark Preservation Commission initiated a Landmark Application of Civic Center Park1, and the general concept of the Turtle Island fountain/monument was further described in it as such: "In recent years, the "Turtle Island" fountain design has been revised to incorporate some of the concentric ring arrangement of the current fountain, and reduce the size of the composition to the center of the terrace rather than the entire terrace space. Water would flow outwards and pathways would lead inward, representing the migration of peoples to the Americas across the surrounding oceans.” In the Landmark Application, this concept is attributed to Lee Sprague, Potawatomie from Michigan, of the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, as the original Turtle Island Monument artist.

As stated in the Landmark Application of Civic Center Park, the park has been the site of numerous cultural and civic events of importance to Berkeley's history. Civic Center Park was renamed Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park in 1983, and the park is listed on the National Register under this name.
2 Previous Challenges
The project faced significant delays and complications over the past three decades, including:

Late 1990s-Early 2000s:
• Following initial approvals, there was a long delay in advancing the project, during this time Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson left the Bay Area to pursue work elsewhere, while the fountain constructed in 1942 remained inoperable.
• There were numerous project approvals related to the Turtle Island Monument (TIM) in the 1990s and then an appeal of the proposed project was filed as part of EIR process on March 22, 2002). City Council dismissed the appeal on July 9, 2002, after which the project left the domain of public documents.
1 Landmarks Preservation Commission, Notice of Decision for Meeting on November 3, 1997. Landmark Application for “Civic Center Park, Civic Center Plaza, Provo Park” dated August 27, 1997. Records available for viewing by request to the Planning Department.
2Access the National Register listing of Berkeley’s Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park online:
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/123858157, National Archive Identification District Number (NAID): 123858157.

2003-2006:
• 2004: The City of Berkeley approved a master plan for a renovation of the Martin Luther King Jr.

Civic Center Park with construction of TIM to start in the park. • Instead of notifying the original TIM artists Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson, the City sought new artists and architects to work on a revised redesign for the Turtle Island Monument at the park’s existing (inoperable) fountain.
• 2005: The City underwent a public procurement process to commission artist Scott Parsons to create four bronze oceanic turtle sculptures and facilitate the creation of eight stone art medallions by North, Central and South American Indigenous artists and international tribal representatives.
• 2006: Artist Scott Parsons created and delivered four bronze turtles and eight stone medallions, but they were never installed at the TIM site because the project was paused due to funding shortages.
• Since delivery, in 2006 the eight stone medallions (art pieces) have been in storage at City facilities (Corp Yard and currently 2180 Milvia storage) and the four bronze turtles have been on display at 2180 Milvia Street (Lobby and 5th Floor) waiting to be installed as part of the Turtle Island Monument at Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park. 2017-2021 Turtle Island Garden Efforts:
• 2017-2018: Three Berkeley community members conducted advocacy (which consisted largely of visiting many City of Berkeley Commissions and Councilmembers) to convert the inoperable 1942 fountain into "Turtle Island Garden,", a new design that did include the four turtles and eight stone medallions delivered by artist Scott Parsons, but did not include water. • At the time, City staff were not aware of the prior 1990s "Turtle Island Monument" design by artists Sprague and Watson.
• On December 4, 2018, the Berkeley City Council adopted a resolution directing the City Manager to develop a plan for the "Turtle Island Garden" located in the same place as the Turtle Island Monument (the inoperable fountain in Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park). • On March 21, 2022, the City received a $591,666 Clean California Local grant from CalTrans for the "Turtle Island Garden" and upper civic center plaza improvements.3 The funding for the grant included a date of June 30, 2024, by which the project was originally to be completed. 3 CalTrans, Clean California Local Grant Projects, District 4, Online: https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-4/d4- popular-links/d4-clean-california/d4-local-grants

• When the City held an initial "Indigenous stakeholder meeting" for the garden project, a fundamental problem emerged: the project was built on an Indigenous concept but was proposed by non-Indigenous people.
• After realizing the problem through the course of the stakeholder meetings, City staff re- engaged artists Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson for a listening session, after which Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson agreed to participate in a design charrette for the Turtle Island Monument (TIM) project.
2022-2023: TIM Design Development and Emerging Conflict:
• August 18 & 19, 2022: Design charrette held for development of TIM design which PGA Design was engaged to draw Lee and Marlene’s vision into design documents that could be reviewed by the City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission, and other departments (including the Parks Recreation and Waterfront department) ultimately for permitting and construction. • It was established that Turtle Island Monument was Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson's intellectual artistic property, as reported to Civic Arts Commission on December 7, 2022.4 • March 30, 2023: The City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) grants approval of Turtle Island Monument design developed through the Design Charrette that included input from Lee Sprague, Marlene Watson, Scott Parsons, PGA Design, and others.5 • June 2023: Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson requested additional design changes to the LPC approved plan, for TIM which included adding another boulder for the "Turtle Island creation story".
• August 25, 2023, the design team consisting of Parks Recreation and Waterfront Capital Project staff, Civic Arts staff, Scott Parsons, and City’s contracted landscape architect for the Civic Center Upper Plaza Improvement Project, met with Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson to attempt to reconcile the proposed design changes, with the approved design and the project schedule.

However, the scope of possible changes was limited due to the funding deadline imposed by the Cal Trans Grant. The meeting ended without agreement on feasible design changes. 4 City of Berkeley, Civic Arts Commission, Staff Report to Civic Arts Commission, December 7, 2022, Item 5 a. Online:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/legislative-body-meeting- attachments/Civic%20Arts%20Commission%20Meeting%20Late%20Attachments%2012-7-22.pdf

5 City of Berkeley, Landmarks Preservation Commission, Meeting Minutes, March 30, 2023, Item 7. Online:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/legislative-body-meeting-minutes/2023-03- 30_LPC_Action%20Minutes_FINAL.pdf

2023-2025: Project Crisis Attempted Resolution and Continued Challenges:
• September 2023: Lee Sprague disavowed the design he and Marlene Watson had helped create and accused the City of violating the Indian Arts and Crafts Act by falsely representing Scott Parsons' artwork under his name.
(November 2023-December 2024):
• November 2023: Outside consultants (Kristen Bennett and Jackie De La Cruz) were brought in to work with Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson to resolve issues so that contracts could be agreed to.
• Late 2023 – early 2024: The Upper Civic Center Park improvements are separated from the TIM project to ensure that the CalTrans grant funding was not lost. • Late 2023 – early 2024: CalTrans grants an extension to June 30, 2025, for project completion.

The park improvements include bringing stubbed utilities to the fountain site in preparation for when a contract with the TIM artists (Sprague and Watson) could be executed. • October 2024: Construction contract for Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park - Upper Plaza Improvements Project is authorized by City Council.6
• While the consultants and artists reviewed many proposed contracts over these years, no contract agreements with the TIM artists were reached during this time. By December 2024, the project entered "hibernation" status with no resolution.

RECENT NEGOTIATION TIMELINE
Recent Reengagement (April-May 20 25)
In April 2025, the City made renewed efforts to reengage with the TIM artists to identify a viable path forward for project completion. Following email negotiations between Jennifer Lovvorn and the TIM artists, staff presented and emailed new "path forward" proposal iterations to the artists (Sprague and Watson) and met twice on Zoom (May 2 and May 9, 2025).

As
negotiations progressed, a significant gap emerged between the artists' demands and what the City could reasonably accommodate. The meetings became increasingly contentious and uncomfortable, with the artists issuing a public press release (May 12, 2025 – Attachment 1) alleging violations of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act and presenting additional conditions for creating the TIM artwork that substantially exceed the City's capacity to fulfill.

Additional Requirements demanded by the artists Included:
6 Berkeley City Council, Item 12, October 29, 2024.

• Establishment of a City of Berkeley certification policy relative to the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (communicated verbally May 9, 2025)
• Formal apology from the City (communicated by email May 8, 2025, and verbally May 9, 2025) In late May 2025, staff discussed with City leadership options for resolution, including discussion of a “path forward plan” dated May 21, 2025 (Attachment 2) that addressed many of Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson’s concerns and represented a viable path for project completion.

Key points of “Path Forward Plan” Proposals Offered by the City (dates October 2024 – May 2025) Comprehensive Project Implementation Plan
• Resolution Correction: Formal rescission of incorrect historical attributions • Project Control: Artists' primary role in design development with City providing implementation support
• Procurement for landscape architect for Turtle Island Monument design documents with extensive familiarity and experience working with Indigenous communities

• The exclusion of Scott Parson’s artwork elements (four bronze turtles, eight mosaics) from Turtle Island Monument, as they were not part of the original Turtle Island Monument concept created by Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson in the 1990s.

Multiple Plan Iterations were developed with the Initial plan development starting October 2024 and continuing with multiple revisions through May 2025 addressing artist feedback. The “path forward plan” and the preceding multiple plan iterations always put forth a comprehensive approach centering addressing artistic vision and compensating the artists fairly while maintaining City requirements.

The final path forward plan shared with Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson on June 27, 2025 included a generous fee at a fixed amount to mitigate the risk of not reaching an agreed upon fee with the artists should the amount be determined at a later point in the project:
• Artist Compensation: Fixed $100,000 per artist for consultation during development of Turtle Island Monument. This amount is inclusive of fee and travel.

Some of Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson listed concerns and demands were not included in the “path forward plan” because they were outside the purview of a public art contract negotiation. City leadership determined that the artists' expanded requirements could not be accommodated within standard municipal contracting procedures and despite good faith efforts on behalf of the City, the negotiations had reached an impasse with no realistic path to working successfully with these artists on this project.

DECISION FACTORS
Demands Outside Contract Scope
The
artists' expanded requirements included elements beyond the scope of municipal contract negotiations:
• Indian Arts and Crafts Act Certification Policy: Request for City to establish certification policy relative to IACA compliance – A new certification policy would require broader municipal policy modifications rather than project-specific contract terms • Formal City Apology: Request for official municipal apology for past handling of the project. This would be a decision that is beyond the scope of contract negotiations.

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS
Project Status
The
Turtle Island Monument project is formally concluded due to a negotiation impasse - the inability to reach mutually acceptable contract terms between the artists and the City despite extensive good faith negotiations. The City sent notification to the artists regarding the project conclusion on June 27, 2025 (Attachment 3).

City's Position
• The City respects the artistic vision and contributions of Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson • Multiple reasonable proposals were developed and offered through extensive iterations from October 2024 through May 2025, in addition to efforts undertaken in the years prior (2022- 2024)
• Certain artist demands fell outside the scope of contract negotiations and required broader policy changes beyond project parameters
• The decision reflects procedural limitations rather than lack of commitment to the vision of these artists for a Turtle Island Monument in Berkeley
Public Process
This Information Report provides public transparency about the negotiation process and decision factors. The artists have been invited to participate in public comment during this meeting should they wish to provide their perspective.

No Commission action is required, as this is provided for informational and transparency purposes.

Meeting Information: July 23, 2025, 6pm – Agenda posted July 16, 2025 Public Comment is available for input on this matter in writing ahead of the meeting or at the meeting

Attachments:

1. Turtle Island Monument Press Release issued by John Curl (May 12, 2025)

2. Turtle Island Monument “Path Forward” Project Plan (May 21, 2025)

3. Correspondence with artists (June 27, 2025)

1 From: Turtle Island Monument Committee
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 12, 2025
Contact: John Curl, press liaison, (510) 847-3431
The artists Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson are available for interviews.

Berkeley's Turtle Island Monument Fountain, dedicated to Native America 33 years ago, will finally replace the broken Civic Center Fountain, but Council must remove the last obstacles by acknowledging and correcting the City's past violation of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.

As public art, the Turtle Island Monument is the artistic and intellectual property of Indigenous artists Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson, protected under the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (IACA) of 1990, and cannot be credited to another artist. Yet that is exactly what the City flagrantly tried to do in 2005. Today we are still undoing the damage and misconceptions caused by the misappropriation of Sprague and Watson's original design.

History and Future of Berkeley's Turtle Island Monument F ountain (TIM)

1992: Mayor Hancock dedicated the Turtle Island Monument, honoring Native America and representing the highest values of the people of Berkeley, at the first Indigenous Peoples Day celebration, which touched off the movement that has since spread around the country and the world. The old fountain had not been in operation for over a decade, and was viewed by all as an eyesore. The artists Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson, both Native people, presented the preliminary architectural drawings with a central turtle presenting the vision, bearing the American continents on its back. The project was enthusiastically approved by the necessary commissions and unanimously by City Council.

1996-1997: Voters approved a $49 million bond measure which included funds for TIM. But the project was undercut when the entire historic Civic Center was landmarked to prevent unwanted development. During the long delay, Lee and Marlene both eventually left the Bay Area to pursue work elsewhere, while the old fountain remained dysfunctional.

2003-2006: The City approved a master plan for park renovation with construction of TIM to start in 2004. But, instead of making any attempt to notify the artists Sprague and Watson, the

2 City sought new non-Native artists and architects to work on a revised redesign, in violation of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act, which protects the rights of Indigenous artists. TIM had been a 100% Indigenous concept and design, but the City in 2005 awarded a commission for four bronze turtles, which were not part of the original design, to a non-Native artist. Native people were now entirely excluded from the project, but it was then paused again due to funding.

2017-2018: Council directed the City Manager to develop a plan, staff began to re-engage, and a group of non-Native people presented a new idea involving plants and gardens, but the City still made no attempt to contact the artists Sprague and Watson.

2021-2023: City of Berkeley and a non-Native landscape architectural firm began devising another TIM project design when the City finally reached out to contact Sprague and Watson.

Lee and Marlene did not give consent to the latest design by the City, but shared their original concept and meaning of the central turtle design of the TIM project. The City passed another misdirected resolution naming the same non-Native artist from 2005 as primary artist for the TIM project to purchase granite stone for the center water fountain. The City needs to acknowledge and remove the four bronze sea turtles already built from any association to the TIM project and MLK Civic Center Park

2024-2025: But the project remains stalled. All past City Resolutions misappropriating TIM to this same non-Native artist need to be rescinded by Council before the TIM project can move forward again. This will open the way after over three decades to finally complete the Turtle Island Monument Fountain project with its original concept and artists, destined to become the beautiful, powerful and profound center of our city.

3 TIM Concept 1992

TIM Concept 2023

4

5 Turtle Island Monument artists Marlene Watson & Lee Sprague.

(Photo: Marc Kolsters, Digital Media Services)

"Our original designs connect the indigenous peoples from Turtle Island to the moment when Berkeley recognized indigenous Peoples Day, the first city in the world to do so. Marlene and I worked with Berkeley residents beginning 33 years ago. We are looking forward to seeing water flowing at the fountain at Civic Center, which has faced 50+years of administrative delays.

Water is Life. Through our art, the unseen powers, the great mysteries, guide our footsteps and recognize Berkeley's creation of the first Indigenous Peoples Day as a shared dream for generations to come."
Lee Sprague

Mr. Sprague and Ms. Watson are available for interviews.

John Curl, press liaison, (510) 847-3431

TURTLE ISLAND MONUMENT (TIM) PROJECT PLAN
May 21, 2025

Transition of Authority:
• The Civic Arts Program has authority over the project with Artwork Design Approval by the Civic Arts Commission (per Municipal Code 6.14.050) and approval of any alterations to the Fountain by Landmarks Preservation Commission (per Municipal Code 23.402.050). • Jennifer Lovvorn will serve as project manager.
• These changes support a commitment to honor Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson's original artistic vision.

Plan to Address the Resolution Issue:
• Prioritize the research on rescinding the resolutions that incorrectly named Scott Parsons as the Turtle Island Monument artist
• Jennifer Lovvorn to prepare a draft resolution for Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson’s review that:
o Explicitly acknowledges Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson as the original and current artists of Turtle Island Monument or TIM.
o Corrects the historical record regarding the artistic vision rooted in the Historic Landmark Designation.
o Outlines the commitment to implement the artists’ (Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson)vision going forward.
• Jennifer Lovvorn to share the timeline for bringing this to the Civic Arts Commission and then to Council.
• Jennifer Lovvorn to utilize already gathered archive of historical documents pertaining to Turtle Island Monument dating back to the 1990s.
• Jennifer Lovvorn to remove the four sea turtles created by Scott Parsons from the Civic Center building located at 2180 Milvia Street.
• Once Resolution is approved, Jennifer Lovvorn to establish a Turtle Island Monument project webpage with regular updates that credit Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson as the original and current artists of TIM.

Project Approach:

This project plan, now framed clearly under Civic Arts management, includes the following elements to directly address Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson’s concerns:
• New landscape architect with extensive familiarity and experience working with Indigenous communities.

• Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson’s primary role in design development. • The exclusion of Scott Parson’s artwork elements from Turtle Island Monument. • The use of dedicated Civic Arts funds that don’t have spending deadlines to allow the project the time it needs to move forward.

Turtle Island Monument Scope of Project

1. Working with Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson as the artists and with a Landscape Architect (TBD):
• Complete design of Turtle Island Monument
• Design approvals and permits as needed
• Construction Document Package for Bidding
• Conduct Construction and Specialty Artwork Fabrication Bidding

2. Adding Construction Contractor and Specialty Artwork Fabricator to the team to complete the project with consultation from Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson and Landscape Architect:
• Construction of Turtle Island Monument
• Fabrication and Installation of Specialty Artwork Elements

Project Implementation.

1. City to establish Budgets and Council authorization for contracting and Landscape Architect RFP.

2. Lee Sprague & Marlene Watson to be placed under Sole Source Artist Contracts for $100,000 each covering all project related expenses including travel to consult and guide the development of the Turtle Island Monument, and consultation during construction and fabrication of the Turtle Island Monument. Their scopes of work would be consulting and the artist contracts would not hold any subcontracts. The contract would include the narrative description of Turtle Island Monument from the 1997 Landmark Application language as the basis for the design work.

3. Artwork Foundry to be placed under Sole Source Contract (for Design Phase only) with the City so that their model maker can work with Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson during the design phase to create a model of the central turtle and its relationship to the fountain under Lee Sprague and Marlene Watson’s creative guidance.

4. City to go out to bid for a Landscape Architect with extensive familiarity and experience working with Indigenous communities. The Landscape Architect’s scope of work would be: Working with Lee Sprague & Marlene Watson as advisors throughout entire scope from approvals, through development of Construction Bid Documents and review during construction.

5. Approvals:
a. All phases of Artwork Design must by approved by Civic Arts Commission. b. Any structural alterations to the historic fountain must be approved by Landmarks Preservation Commission.
c. All contracts over $50,000 must be authorized by City Council.

6. Bid Documents: Once all approvals are obtained, development of Construction Bid Documents used to bid for the construction of Turtle Island Monument and separate Specialty Artwork Element Construction Documents to bid the fabrication of any specialty artistic elements such as the central bronze turtle and any pavers.

7. Construction Bidding

8. Artwork Fabrication Bidding

9. Council authorization of contracts

10. Award Construction Contract

11. Award Artwork Fabrication Contract

12. Construction of Turtle Island Monument

13. Fabrication and Installation of Specialty Artwork Elements

14. Dedication Ceremony

Civic Center Site – Current Conditions:

The Upper Plaza Improvement Project is currently moving forward as a capital project managed by the Parks Recreation and Waterfront Department with an anticipated completion date of June 2025. The footprint of the fountain has been excluded from the Upper Plaza Improvement Project and reserved for the future Turtle Island Monument to be implemented according to an agreed upon Turtle Island Monument Project Plan. As part of the scope of work of the Upper Plaza Improvement Project, utilities and infrastructure to support the implementation of the Turtle Island Monument are being provided:
capped irrigation line for any future plantings, empty electrical conduit for future electrical needs, empty conduit sleeves under the pavers leading to fountain edge for any other needed utilities at the fountain, and the tunnel under the fountain can be utilized for any other needed utilities for the Turtle Island Monument.

1 Lovvorn, Jennifer
From: Lovvorn, Jennifer
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2025 5:49 PM
To: Lee Sprague; Marlene Watson
Cc: John Curl
Subject: Turtle Island Monument Project - Conclusion of Contract Negotiations Attachments: Turtle Island Monument Path Forward Plan 5-21-25.pdf Dear Lee and Marlene,

Over the past couple months, I have been excited to reengage with you both to explore how we might move the Turtle Island Monument (TIM) forward aŌer more than three decades. As you know, the City has made substanƟal efforts to address your concerns and develop a viable path for project compleƟon.

I was hopeful that the proposed "path forward plan" shared with you starƟng in October 2024 and developed through many iteraƟons unƟl May 2025 had sufficiently addressed your concerns. There were, however, certain addiƟonal concerns and demands, such as the establishment of a City of Berkeley cerƟficaƟon policy relaƟve to the Indian Arts and CraŌs Act and a formal apology from that City that you made verbally (May 9, 2025) and by email (May 8, 2025), which are not in the purview of a contract negoƟaƟon. Because these concerns and demands are not in the purview of a contract negoƟaƟon, I cannot feasibly address them. Correspondingly, your concerns and demands asking for the establishment of a City of Berkeley cerƟficaƟon policy relaƟve to the Indian Arts and CraŌs Act and a formal apology from that City, cannot be included in the plan. What is included in “path forward plan” (aƩached) is a feasible approach to move the project forward. It aligns with the spirit of the project as described in the press release that John Curl distributed on May 12, 2025.

Please note that the aƩached plan is substanƟally the same as the version that was shared with you on May 6, 2025 with the excepƟon of the arƟst fee determinaƟon, which changed from “a yet to be determined” amount to a fixed amount, the text changes are indicated in underline below: Lee Sprague & Marlene Watson to be placed under Sole Source ArƟst Contracts for $100,000 each covering all project related expenses including travel to consult and guide the development of the Turtle Island Monument.

AŌer extensive discussion and careful consideraƟon of your posiƟon and addiƟonal requirements relaƟve to what the City can reasonably accommodate through our standard municipal contracƟng processes, there remains too significant a gap between your demands and what the City can realisƟcally provide.

While I had hoped we could reach an agreement that would allow this important project to move forward in alignment with what the City can responsibly deliver, I must unfortunately inform you that we will not be able to proceed with the Turtle Island Monument (TIM) public art project at this Ɵme.

As part of our commitment to transparency and public process, I will be presenƟng an InformaƟon Report about the conclusion of these negoƟaƟons to the Civic Arts Commission at their meeƟng on July 23, 2025, at 6pm. This meeƟng is open to the public and includes an opportunity for public comment. Should you wish to parƟcipate in public comment, either remotely via Zoom or in person, please let me know and I will arrange the appropriate connecƟon details. The agenda will be posted on the Civic Arts Commission Agenda webpage by July 16, 2025.

I want to acknowledge the significance of this project and your long-standing commitment to it. The City's decision reflects the pracƟcal realiƟes of municipal contracƟng requirements and our responsibility to follow established procedures for public projects, rather than any lack of respect for your arƟsƟc vision or contribuƟons.

2 I am aƩaching the most recent project implementaƟon plan that was under discussion for your reference.

If you have any quesƟons about the Civic Arts Commission meeƟng or the public comment process, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Respecƞully,
Jennifer Lovvorn
Chief Cultural Affairs Officer
City of Berkeley
AƩachment: Turtle Island Monument Project Plan (May 21, 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/

SUPPLEMENTAL

AGENDA MATERIAL
Meeting Date: October 28, 2025
Item Description: Remove Pre-Transfer Eligibility Restriction of the Transfer Tax Rebate for Wildfire Hardening
Submitted by: David Sprague, Fire Department
Following direction from the Budget & Finance Committee and in coordination with the Disaster Fire and Safety Commission, Staff have amended the Ordinance to:
• Provide a five-year pre/one-year post transfer eligibility timeline. • Limit eligibility to High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. • Clarify what types of vegetation mitigation are eligible. • Establish a requirement that eligible parcels must not only be located within the High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones designated by the City of Berkeley but also have a property sales value less than $3,000,000, as adjusted by the City.
• Include other minor language clean up to clarify intent and process.

28

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

AMENDING SECTION 7.52.060 OF THE BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE; REAL

PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX EXCEPTIONS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code 7.52.060, Real Property Transfer Tax Exceptions, Sub-section L, is amended to read as follows:

BMC 7.52.60 Sub-section L
L. 1. Up to one-third of the tax imposed by this chapter shall be rebated, on a dollar for dollar basis, for all expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2025, to "wildfire home harden" either any structure which is used exclusively for residential purposes, or any mixed-use structure which contains two or more dwelling units.

Multiple rebate applications may be submitted for a partial rebate of the tax paid.

However, the total rebate for any combination of seismic retrofit and/or wildfirehome hardening shall not exceed the maximum of one-third (1/3) of the tax paid per pProperty.

L 2. The term "wildfire home harden" within the meaning of this chapter means improving, moving, removing, or taking other evidence-based actions to existing structures that reduce the risk of ignition from wildfire and emberswork which is the process of increasing resistance to wildfire by replacing combustible materials with ignition resistant and/or non-combustible materials and other scientifically proven actions. Parcels eligible for this program must be located within the High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones designated by the City of Berkeley and have a property sales value less than $3,000,000. The property sales value shall be adjusted annually by the City of Berkeley on January 1 of each subsequent year to a number equal to the value of consideration for the transaction at the 95th percentile of transactions that occur in the City of Berkeley during the 12 months preceding September 1 of the preceding year, as recorded by the Alameda County Assessor, rounded to the nearest $100,000 increment; provided, that in no case shall any adjustment lower the threshold below $3,000,000.:

Structures with a wood shake roof must be fully replaced with a Class A fire rated roof before any other mitigations can qualify for this transfer tax rebate. Replacement costs for the new Class A roof are eligible costs. All improvements must be permanent and comply with design, material and construction methods as described in the current version of the California Building Code, Chapter 5. and BMC 19.28.030. The work must be permanent and not vVegetation management or

gardening adaptations that require continued maintenance are not eligible with the one exception noted below in (2)(j). To be eligible for a
rebate, Mitigations performed the parcel level mitigations set forth in the California Department of
Insurance “Safer from Wildfires” Framework REG-2020-00015 adopting California Code of Regulations Title 10, Chapter 5, Subchapter 4.8, Article 4, Section 2644.9 must be satisfactorily completed as determined by the Building Official (when a permit is required) andor a Berkeley Fire Department Defensible Space Inspection when a permit is not required.

These include”Home harden” within the meaning of this chapter means any of the following:
(a) All improvements must be permanent and comply with design, material and construction methods as described in the 2025 California Building Code, Chapter 7A5. and BMC 19.28.030.
(ba) Full replacement of Structures with a wood shake roof must be replaced with a Class A fire rated roof is an eligible cost before qualifying for the transfer tax rebate. Partial replacements of a wood shake roof with a Class A roof, or repairs to wood shake roofs are not eligible.
(cb) Clearing Removal of combustible materials including fences and gates from the area within five (5) feet of the building being evaluated (Replace with only noncombustible materials.). , and/or replacement with non-combustible alternatives.
(dc) Creation of Aat least six (6) inches of noncombustible vertical clearance at the bottom of the exterior surface of the building, measured from the ground up. (ed) Purchase and installation of fire-resistant vents and gutter covers of 1/16 to 1/8 inch noncombustible, corrosion-resistant metal mesh or OSFM Category 8165 approved ember resistant vents.
(fe) Purchase and installation of mMulti-paned windows, including dual pane windows, that have at least one layer of tempbered glass.or functional shutters, which when closed, cover the entire window and do not have openings. (gf) Modifications so eaves are eEnclosed eaves.
(hg) Remove combustible materials and debris from under decks and Purchase and installation of non-combustible siding or ember resistant mesh of 1/8” or finer around deck perimeter.

(ih) Relocating or rRemovingal or absence of combustible structures, including sheds and other outbuildings, from the area within thirty (30) feet of the building being evaluated or, in the event that the applicant does not control the entirety of the area extending thirty feet from the building being evaluated, removal of combustible structures from as much of such area as is under the control of the applicant.
(ji) Installation of Bblock spaces between roof covering and sheathing with noncombustible
materials (bird stops).
(j) City-ordered tree removals within Zone 0 (within 0–5 ft of structures) when a tree has a Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) of less than 12". (k) The property upon which the building being evaluated is situated complies with Section 4291 of the Public Resources Code, when applicable, and any applicable local ordinances, governing defensible space. (lk) Any other work found by the Building Official or Fire Marshal Code Official (or their designee) to substantially increase the capability of those structures, specified in subsection L.1, to withstand destruction or damage in the event of a wildfire.

L 3. The work to wildfire harden structures as provided herein shall be completed either up to five (5) years up to
one-year prior to the recordation of the transfer document transfer of property and/or up to one (1) year after transfer, plus any extensions granted, as provided in subsection L.paragraph 565.

L 4. If hardening work, as provided for in this Ordinance, is completed up to five (5) years prior to the recordation of the transfer document, of any property subject to the tax imposed herein, the applicant may be eligible for a rebate of expenses incurred in connection with such work, subject to the following conditions:
(a) Upon completion of the hardening work and certification by the Building Official and/or Fire Code Official of the actual costs incurred for such work, and (b) Upon the subsequent sale or transfer of the property, the applicant may apply to the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, for a rebate of such certified expenses, and
(c) The City Manager or their designee may require that a rebate applicant self- certification that the hardening measures remain in service and functional, and (d) Applicants may be required to produce photographic documentation of current conditions, subject to the verification by the City at the time of transfer, and

(e) To be eligible to receive the rebate, the applicant shall, at the time of application, have a current calendar year’s defensible space inspection from the Berkeley Fire Department showing no violations present, and
(f) Upon verification, the City Manager or their designee shall authorize a rebate in an amount not to exceed one-third (1/3) of the total tax imposed pursuant to this Ordinance.
(g) The rebate shall be issued to the parties to the property transfer, in accordance with the terms of the sale agreement. Any remaining portion of the tax shall be retained by the City.

L 4.5. If hardening work, as provided for in this Ordinance, is completed up to one (1) year following recordation of the transfer document for any property subject to the tax imposed herein, the applicant may be eligible for a rebate of expenses incurred in connection with such work, subject to the following conditions:
(a) Upon completion of the hardening work and certification by the Building Official and/or Fire Code Official of the actual costs incurred for such work, and (b) The applicant may apply to the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, for a rebate of such certified expenses. This application shall include eligible hardening work performed in the five years prior to the property transfer, and (c) The City Manager or their designee may require the applicant to produce photographic documentation of current conditions, and
(d) To be eligible to receive the rebate, the applicant shall, at the time of application, have a current calendar year’s defensible space inspection from the Berkeley Fire Department showing no violations present, and
(e) Upon verification, the City Manager or their designee shall authorize a rebate in an amount not to exceed one-third (1/3) of the total tax imposed pursuant to this Ordinance, and
(f) The rebate shall be issued to the parties to the property transfer, in accordance with the terms of the sale agreement. Any remaining portion of the tax shall be retained by the City, and
(g) If the work is not completed within one year of the recordation of the transfer document, that portion which has been completed shall be credited as a rebate to the applicant upon submission of an application and substantiating documentation, as required by the City, showing the dollar amount of work completed up to that date.

If the work to wildfire harden structures and property provided for herein is to be performed after the transfer of property which is subject to the tax imposed by this chapter, upon completion of such work and certification by the building official as to the amount of the expenses of such work the City Manager or their designee may refund such expenses not to exceed one-third of the tax imposed to the parties to the sale in accordance with the terms of such sale. Any remaining tax shall be

retained by the City.

5. From the date of the recordation of the transfer document, the applicant shall have one year to complete all wildfire hardening work and submit a wildfire hardening verification application to the Codes and Inspection Division of the City of Berkeley. If the work is not completed at the end of one year, that portion which has been completed may be credited as a rebate to the applicant upon submission of a Home Hardening verification application and substantiating documentation, as required by the codes and inspections division of the City of Berkeley, showing the dollar amount of work completed up to that date.

To be eligible to receive the rebate, the applicant shall, at the time of application to the Codes and Inspection Division, have a current calendar year’s defensible space inspection from the Fire Department showing no violations present.

L 66. Within the one-year period established by paragraph 55, an applicant may request, and the City Manager may approve, an extension of up to one year. The City Manager, or their designee, may grant such an extension only for good cause.

The decision of the City Manager or their designee shall be entirely within their discretion and shall be final.
(a) "Good cause" includes (i) the inability of the applicant, after a prompt and diligent search to find and retain the services of an architect, engineer, contractor or other service provider whose services are necessary for to complete the Hhome
Hardening hardening work; (ii) unforeseen and unforeseeable circumstances such as a
significant change in the scope of the Wildfire home Hardening hardening work due to
circumstances in the field which could not reasonably have been known earlier; and (iii) serious illness or other extraordinary and unforeseeable circumstances that prevented the timely commencement or completion of the Wildfirehome Hardening hardening work.
(b) "Good cause" does not include (i) ignorance of the applicable City ordinances or regulations concerning the Wildfire home Hardening hardening rebate provided in
this chapter or state or local laws relating to the standards with which wildfirehome
hardening work must comply; or (ii) any delays which were within the control or responsibility of the applicant.

Section 2. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of 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.

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

AMENDING SECTION 7.52.060 OF THE BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE; REAL

PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX EXCEPTIONS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code 7.52.060, Real Property Transfer Tax Exceptions, Sub-section L, is amended to read as follows:

BMC 7.52.60 Sub-section L
L 1. Up to one-third of the tax imposed by this chapter shall be rebated, on a dollar for dollar basis, for all expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2025, to "home harden" either any structure which is used exclusively for residential purposes, or any mixed-use structure which contains two or more dwelling units.

Multiple rebate applications may be submitted for a partial rebate of the tax paid.

However, the total rebate for any combination of seismic retrofit and/or home hardening shall not exceed the maximum of one-third (1/3) of the tax paid per Property.

L 2. The term "home harden" within the meaning of this chapter means improving, moving, removing, or taking other evidence-based actions to existing structures that reduce the risk of ignition from wildfire and embers. Parcels eligible for this program must be located within the High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones designated by the City of Berkeley and have a property sales value less than $3,000,000. The property sales value shall be adjusted annually by the City of Berkeley on January 1 of each subsequent year to a number equal to the value of consideration for the transaction at the 95th percentile of transactions that occur in the City of Berkeley during the 12 months preceding September 1 of the preceding year, as recorded by the Alameda County Assessor, rounded to the nearest $100,000 increment; provided, that in no case shall any adjustment lower the threshold below $3,000,000.

Structures with a wood shake roof must be fully replaced with a Class A fire rated roof before any other mitigations can qualify for this transfer tax rebate. Replacement costs for the new Class A roof are eligible costs. All improvements must be permanent and comply with design, material and construction methods as described in the current version of the California Building Code, Chapter 5. and BMC 19.28.030. Vegetation management or gardening adaptations that require continued maintenance are not eligible with the one exception noted below in (2)(j). Mitigations performed must be satisfactorily completed as determined by the Building Official (when a permit is required) or a Berkeley Fire Department Defensible Space Inspection when a permit is not required. ”Home harden” within the meaning of this chapter means any of the following:

(a) Full replacement of a wood shake roof with a Class A fire rated roof is an eligible cost. Partial replacements of a wood shake roof with a Class A roof, or repairs to wood shake roofs are not eligible.
(b) Removal of combustible fences and gates from the area within five (5) feet of the building being evaluated, and/or replacement with non-combustible alternatives.
(c) Creation of at least six (6) inches of noncombustible vertical clearance at the bottom of the exterior surface of the building, measured from the ground up. (d) Purchase and installation of fire-resistant vents and gutter covers of 1/16 to 1/8 inch noncombustible, corrosion-resistant metal mesh or OSFM Category 8165 approved ember resistant vents.
(e) Purchase and installation of multi-paned windows, including dual pane windows, that have at least one layer of tempered glass. (f) Modifications so eaves are enclosed.
(g) Purchase and installation of non-combustible siding or ember resistant mesh of 1/8” or finer around deck perimeter.
(h) Relocating or removing combustible structures, including sheds and other outbuildings, from the area within thirty (30) feet of the building being evaluated or, in the event that the applicant does not control the entirety of the area extending thirty feet from the building being evaluated, removal of combustible structures from as much of such area as is under the control of the applicant. (i) Installation of block spaces between roof covering and sheathing with noncombustible materials (bird stops).
(j) City-ordered tree removals within Zone 0 (within 0–5 ft of structures) when a tree has a Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) of less than 12". (k) Any other work found by the Building Official or Fire Code Official (or their designee) to substantially increase the capability of those structures, specified in subsection 1, to withstand destruction or damage in the event of a wildfire.

L 3. The work to harden structures as provided herein shall be completed up to five (5) years prior to the recordation of the transfer document and up to one (1) year after, plus any extensions granted, as provided in paragraph 5.

L 4. If hardening work, as provided for in this Ordinance, is completed up to five (5) years prior to the recordation of the transfer document, of any property subject to the tax imposed herein, the applicant may be eligible for a rebate of expenses incurred in connection with such work, subject to the following conditions:
(a) Upon completion of the hardening work and certification by the Building Official and/or Fire Code Official of the actual costs incurred for such work, and (b) Upon the subsequent sale or transfer of the property, the applicant may apply to the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, for a rebate of such certified expenses, and
(c) The City Manager or their designee may require that a rebate applicant self- certification that the hardening measures remain in service and functional, and (d) Applicants may be required to produce photographic documentation of current conditions, subject to the verification by the City at the time of transfer, and (e) To be eligible to receive the rebate, the applicant shall, at the time of application, have a current calendar year’s defensible space inspection from the Berkeley Fire Department showing no violations present, and
(f) Upon verification, the City Manager or their designee shall authorize a rebate in an amount not to exceed one-third (1/3) of the total tax imposed pursuant to this Ordinance.
(g) The rebate shall be issued to the parties to the property transfer, in accordance with the terms of the sale agreement. Any remaining portion of the tax shall be retained by the City.

L 5. If hardening work, as provided for in this Ordinance, is completed up to one (1) year following recordation of the transfer document for any property subject to the tax imposed herein, the applicant may be eligible for a rebate of expenses incurred in connection with such work, subject to the following conditions:
(a) Upon completion of the hardening work and certification by the Building Official and/or Fire Code Official of the actual costs incurred for such work, and (b) The applicant may apply to the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, for a rebate of such certified expenses. This application shall include eligible hardening work performed in the five years prior to the property transfer, and (c) The City Manager or their designee may require the applicant to produce photographic documentation of current conditions, and
(d) To be eligible to receive the rebate, the applicant shall, at the time of application, have a current calendar year’s defensible space inspection from the Berkeley Fire Department showing no violations present, and

(e) Upon verification, the City Manager or their designee shall authorize a rebate in an amount not to exceed one-third (1/3) of the total tax imposed pursuant to this Ordinance, and
(f) The rebate shall be issued to the parties to the property transfer, in accordance with the terms of the sale agreement. Any remaining portion of the tax shall be retained by the City, and
(g) If the work is not completed within one year of the recordation of the transfer document, that portion which has been completed shall be credited as a rebate to the applicant upon submission of an application and substantiating documentation, as required by the City, showing the dollar amount of work completed up to that date.

L 6. Within the one-year period established by paragraph 5, an applicant may request, and the City Manager may approve, an extension of up to one year. The City Manager, or their designee, may grant such an extension only for good cause.

The decision of the City Manager or their designee shall be entirely within their discretion and shall be final.
(a) "Good cause" includes (i) the inability of the applicant, after a prompt and diligent search to find and retain the services of an architect, engineer, contractor or other service provider whose services are necessary to complete the home hardening work; (ii) unforeseen and unforeseeable circumstances such as a significant change in the scope of the home hardening work due to circumstances in the field which could not reasonably have been known earlier; and (iii) serious illness or other extraordinary and unforeseeable circumstances that prevented the timely commencement or completion of the home hardening work.
(b) "Good cause" does not include (i) ignorance of the applicable City ordinances or regulations concerning the home hardening rebate provided in this chapter or state or local laws relating to the standards with which home hardening work must comply; or (ii) any delays which were within the control or responsibility of the applicant.

Section 2. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of 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.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Disaster and Fire Safety Commission
Submitted by: Greg Murphy, Chairperson
Subject: Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt first reading of an ordinance removing the 1-year pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening from BMC 7.52.060, to encourage early mitigation efforts.

POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
On September 11, 2025, the Budget & Finance Committee adopted the following action:

M/S/C (Kesarwani/Blackaby) to send the item to Council with a Qualified Positive Recommendation to request that staff submit an amended ordinance with the item that includes the following:
 5-year/1-year eligibility timeline
 Limit eligibility to High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones  Clarify eligible vegetation as proposed by staff
 Include other minor language clean up proposed by staff Also, include analysis and options for an eligibility cap based on home value.

Vote: All Ayes.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Increased utilization of the transfer tax exemption will result in less revenue to the City.

Reduced risk of significant costs due to wildfire disaster.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City of Berkeley has responded to wildfire risk with a variety of mitigation measures to improve prevention. One type of mitigation measure to reduce risk is through home “hardening” which is the process of increasing resistance to wildfire by replacing combustible materials with ignition resistant and/or non-combustible materials and other scientifically proven actions including:
• Reducing the home’s vulnerability to heat.
• Creating fire-resistant surfaces
• Blocking any potential points of ingress for embers and other flammable material.

Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the CONSENT CALENDAR transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening May 20, 2025

Retrofitting our homes against seismic damage and destruction has proven to be good policy; hardening against wildfire will be as well.

On September 10, 2024, the council approved the first reading of the Ordinance amending BMC 7.52.060 to include “Wildfire Hardening” in the Real Property Transfer Tax Exceptions. While this encourages homeowners to implement wildfire hardening at the time of sale, the limitation of eligibility to projects undertaken within a year prior to the time of transfer discourages early action, and, to the extent that such measures could be required within Fire Zone 4 as part of EMBER or a future program, dampens the ability to require the recommended measures without imposing hardship. It appears that this was an unintended consequence of the original action.

Therefore, the Commission recommends that the City Council amend Berkeley Municipal Code 7.50.060.L.3 to strike the words “up to one-year” from the current ordinance. The Commission notes that the existing rebate program for seismic upgrades does not have a one-year restriction prior to sale. While the point of sale is often an important opportunity for home renovations, the recent adoption of this ordinance with a one year prior to sale restriction could have the unintended consequence of discouraging homeowners from making wildfire hardening improvements early. Project delivery and property transfer dates are also subject to delay, which contributes to uncertainty, thereby discouraging action without this correction. Possible concerns to address permanence and verification should be studied over the next few years to integrate appropriate documentation filing requirements and/or re-inspection.

The inherent wildfire risk Berkeley faces because of the natural topography and weather conditions is increasing due to climate change which is bringing more frequent and substantial draughts, and higher temperatures. The City of Berkeley has and will continue to implement strategies that reduce the wildfire risk to our community, and should a wildfire occur, improve the emergency response. However, the City is able to address only part of the wildfire risk that the community faces as much of the risk within the City proper lies on private property in the form of structures that pre-date modern fire resistive building codes. While some of the retrofit work that must occur is inexpensive, much of it is expensive and requires professionals. Thus, there is a significant challenge to getting this work completed, even for motivated residents. There is a need to be nimble and adapt our legislation to incentivize the work we know has to get done, work that will help slow an advancing fire so firefighters can protect the community. This amendment will provide an opportunity and mechanism for the City to incentivize homeowners in making these improvements.

Action: Motion to approve the Commission recommendation Katz. Second: Kinosian.

Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the CONSENT CALENDAR transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening May 20, 2025

Votes: Ayes: 7 Katz, Wilson, Bradstreet, Herzer-Baptiste, Gordon, Murphy, Kinosian;
Noe’s: 0
Abstain: 0

Absent: 2 Dean, Darling

BACKGROUND
Maintaining our housing stock is essential to the health and welfare of our city. The impacts from a wildfire are not just seen in the structures; it has devastating consequences on mental health, individual sense of security, and our financial stability as a community. The Loma Prieta Earthquake took the Bay Area by surprise on October 17,1989. According to the California Department of Conservation, that 6.9 magnitude earthquake killed 63 people, injured close to 4,000 and displaced over 12,000 people.

Less than two years later, June 25, 1991, Berkeley City Council voted for an exception on transfer property taxes to help homeowners pay for seismically upgrading their homes, and BMC 7.52.060, Sub-section K was established. In the last 10 years, the Finance Department processed approximately 1,200 seismic upgrade rebates for a total of $7.2M. Since the seismic retrofit exception was included in BMC 7.52.060 in 1991 no expanded safety exceptions have been added. The City of Berkeley is in one of the highest wildfire risk areas in the state. We have a long history of catastrophic wildfire here in Berkeley.

Most notably, in 1923, when a wildfire destroyed more than 600 homes, leaving more than 1,000 residents homeless. In 1991, the Berkeley/Oakland Tunnel Fire was responsible for 25 deaths and destroyed more than 3,000 homes. In 2024 valuation, that conflagration cost 4 billion dollars. Now is the time to improve and adapt policies, and help residents harden their homes against wildfire. Fire science studies are decisive. Wildfire hardening reduces the chances of a home catching fire.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
● The Commission previously evaluated requiring that some investment to harden against wildfire while making major renovations and / or additions to the property will comply owners to undertake these important upgrades and reduce our vulnerability to destruction and damage as a result of a wildfire. This approach was found to be difficult for the Building Department to implement in a broader area, indicating that incentive approaches are important until staff can develop more experience after implementation of these aspects of the EMBER program within Fire Zone 4.

Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the CONSENT CALENDAR transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening May 20, 2025

● The Commission considered recommending that pre-transfer rebate value be indexed to inflation, so homeowners not planning to transfer property ownership in the near term retain the real value of the incentive. The Commission did not recommend this feature at this time based on the Council declining to adopt a similar, although higher inflation adjustment for the rebate of home energy efficiency deposits. This feature could be considered in the future after further review.

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager concurs with the content and recommendations of the Commission’s report to the extent that it can motivate Berkeley residents to perform work on the homes to reduce fire ignition and spread. Following direction from the Budget and Finance Committee, the Ordinance has been revised to extend the pre-transfer eligibility period, limit eligibility to the highest risk areas of the City, define what types of vegetation mitigation are permissible, introduce a sale price cap, and perform other minor language cleanup.

CONTACT PERSON
Keith May, Commission Secretary, Deputy Fire Chief, (510) 510-981-5508.

Attachments:
1: Ordinance Amending Sections of 7.52.060 of the BMC

Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the CONSENT CALENDAR transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening May 20, 2025

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

AMENDING SECTIONS 7.52.060 OF THE BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code 7.52.060, Real Property Transfer Tax Exceptions, Sub-section L, is amended to read as follows:

BMC 7.52.60 Sub-section L
L. 1. Up to one-third of the tax imposed by this chapter shall be rebated, on a dollar for dollar basis, for all expenses incurred on or after January 1, 2025 to "wildfire harden" either any structure which is used exclusively for residential purposes, or any mixed-use structure which contains two or more dwelling units.

Multiple rebate applications may be submitted for a partial rebate of the tax paid.

However, the total rebate for any combination of seismic retrofit and/or wildfire hardening shall not exceed the maximum of one-third (1/3) of the tax paid per property.

2. The term "wildfire harden" within the meaning of this chapter means work which is the process of increasing resistance to wildfire by replacing combustible materials with ignition resistant and/or non-combustible materials and other scientifically proven actions. The work must be permanent and not vegetation management or gardening adaptations that require continued maintenance. To be eligible for a rebate, the parcel level mitigations set forth in the California Department of Insurance “Safer from Wildfires” Framework REG-2020-00015 adopting California Code of Regulations Title 10, Chapter 5, Subchapter 4.8, Article 4, Section 2644.9 must be satisfactorily completed as determined by the Building Official (when a permit is required) and a Berkeley Fire Department Defensible Space Inspection.

These include:
(a) All improvements must be permanent and comply with design, material and construction methods as described in the California Building Code, Chapter 7A. and BMC 19.28.030.
(b) Structures with a wood shake roof must be replaced with a Class A fire rated roof before qualifying for the transfer tax rebate.
(c) Clearing combustible materials including fences and gates, and all movable combustible objects, from the area within five (5) feet of the building being evaluated (Replace with only noncombustible materials.).

Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the CONSENT CALENDAR transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening May 20, 2025

(d) At least six (6) inches of noncombustible vertical clearance at the bottom of the exterior surface of the building, measured from the ground up. (e) Fire-Resistant Vents and Gutter Covers of 1/16 to 1/8 inch noncombustible, corrosion-resistant metal mesh or OSFM Category 8165 approved ember resistant vents.
(f) Multi-paned windows, including dual pane windows, or functional shutters, which when closed, cover the entire window and do not have openings. (g) Enclosed eaves.
(h) Remove combustible materials and debris from under decks and installation of non-combustible siding or ember resistant mesh of 1/8” or finer around deck perimeter.
(i) Removal or absence of combustible structures, including sheds and other outbuildings, from the area within thirty (30) feet of the building being evaluated or, in the event that the applicant does not control the entirety of the area extending thirty feet from the building being evaluated, removal of combustible structures from as much of such area as is under the control of the applicant. (j) Block spaces between roof covering and sheathing with noncombustible materials (bird stops).
(k) The property upon which the building being evaluated is situated complies with Section 4291 of the Public Resources Code, when applicable, and any applicable local ordinances, governing defensible space. (l) Any other work found by the Building Official or Fire Marshal (or their designee) to substantially increase the capability of those structures, specified in subsection L.1, to withstand destruction or damage in the event of a wildfire.

3. The work to wildfire harden as provided herein shall be completed either up to one year prior to the transfer of property or as provided in subsection L.5.

4. If the work to wildfire harden structures and property provided for herein is to be performed after the transfer of property which is subject to the tax imposed by this chapter, upon completion of such work and certification by the building official as to the amount of the expenses of such work the City Manager or their designee may refund such expenses not to exceed one-third of the tax imposed to the parties to the sale in accordance with the terms of such sale. Any remaining tax shall be retained by the City.

5. From the date of the recordation of the transfer document, the applicant shall have one year to complete all wildfire hardening work and submit a wildfire

Remove pre-transfer eligibility restriction of the CONSENT CALENDAR transfer tax rebate for wildfire hardening May 20, 2025

hardening verification application to the Codes and Inspection Division of the City of Berkeley. If the work is not completed at the end of one year, that portion which has been completed may be credited as a rebate to the applicant upon submission of a Home Hardening verification application and substantiating documentation, as required by the codes and inspections division of the City of Berkeley, showing the dollar amount of work completed up to that date.

6. Within the one-year period established by paragraph 5, an applicant may request, and the City Manager may approve, an extension of up to one year. The City Manager or their designee may grant such an extension only for good cause.

The decision of the City Manager or their designee shall be entirely within their discretion and shall be final.
(a) "Good cause" includes (i) the inability of the applicant, after a prompt and diligent search to find and retain the services of an architect, engineer, contractor or other service provider whose services are necessary for the Home Hardening work; (ii) unforeseen and unforeseeable circumstances such as a significant change in the scope of the Wildfire Hardening work due to circumstances in the field which could not reasonably have been known earlier; and (iii) serious illness or other extraordinary and unforeseeable circumstances that prevented the timely commencement or completion of the Wildfire Hardening work.
(b) "Good cause" does not include (i) ignorance of the applicable City ordinances or regulations concerning the Wildfire Hardening rebate provided in this chapter or state or local laws relating to the standards with which wildfire hardening work must comply; or (ii) any delays which were within the control or responsibility of the applicant.

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

Elmwood BID Advisory Board
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.cityofberkeley.info/manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Elmwood Business Improvement District (BID) Advisory Board Submitted by: Andrew Han, Chair, Elmwood BID Advisory Board Subject: Renewal of the Elmwood BID for Calendar Year 2026

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the Elmwood Business Improvement District Advisory Board’s (hereafter “Elmwood BID Advisory Board” or “the Advisory Board”) recommendation that Council 1) approve the 2025 Annual Report and preliminary budget for proposed improvements in the District for calendar year 2026; 2) declare its intent to levy an assessment to finance improvements in the District for calendar year 2026 and 3) direct the City Clerk to schedule a public hearing on the renewal of the Elmwood BID for December 2, 2025.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Projected BID revenue of approximately $30,000 will be deposited into the Elmwood BID Fund and expensed from budget code 782-21-208-251-0000-000-446-636110. The BID constitutes an independent funding source that must be targeted to commercial revitalization efforts that are recommended by the Advisory Board. The City of Berkeley operates a parking lot within the district and will thus be assessed $2,000 for 2026, paid through the Off-Street Parking Fund. To the extent that the work of the Elmwood BID enhances the development of the Elmwood commercial district and its business climate over the long term, the BID contributes towards improving City revenues through increased sales and property taxes.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Under the State of California Parking and Business Improvement Area law of 1989 (California Streets and Highways Code section 36500 et. seq.) the City Council must approve an Annual Report prepared by the BID Advisory Board with a proposed budget for the next year as a requirement to levy new assessments. Accordingly, at its meeting of September 9, 2025, the Elmwood BID Advisory Board voted to recommend that the City Council approve the Annual Report of 2025 and budget for 2026 and adopt a Resolution of Intention to renew the Elmwood BID (M/S-Han/Stepak; Ayes: (4) Han, Stepak, Berne, Hammond, Nays: 0, Absent: 0). The Resolution of Intention also sets a public hearing date for December 2, 2025 where affected Elmwood businesses can express support or opposition to renewal of the BID for 2026. If written and/or oral

29

Renewal of the Elmwood BID for Calendar Year 2026 CONSENT CALENDAR October 28, 2025
protests are received from businesses proposed to pay a majority of the assessment prior to or at the public hearing, Council cannot vote to levy assessments for 2026. If no majority protest is received, the Council may renew the assessment.

BACKGROUND
The Elmwood BID was established in November 2013 to provide the Elmwood Business Association with a sustainable, predictable source of funding for its activities to promote, maintain, and beautify the Elmwood commercial district. The Elmwood Business Association has used the funds raised through the BID to implement a variety of activities such as place-based marketing, events, and capital improvements.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
By maintaining and enhancing the district, the Elmwood BID creates shopping opportunities for residents and visitors alike while encouraging alternative forms of transportation. Because the District is well served by public transportation, these services indirectly support environmental sustainability goals of encouraging alternative transportation modes and decreasing carbon emissions.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
State law requires that the City Council annually renew the Elmwood BID by first passing a resolution stating Council's intention to levy an annual assessment and scheduling a public hearing on the proposed renewed assessment for the coming year.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Vincent McCoy, Secretary to the Elmwood BID Advisory Board, (510) 981-7403 Attachments:
1: Resolution
Exhibit A: Elmwood BID Annual Report 2025 and Proposed Budget for 2026 Exhibit A1: Map of the Elmwood BID 2026
Exhibit A2: Assessment Rates 2026

RESOLUTION NO. -N.S.

APPROVING THE 2025 ANNUAL REPORT AND PROPOSED BUDGET OF THE ELMWOOD BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR 2026; DECLARING COUNCIL'S INTENTION TO LEVY AN ASSESSMENT IN THE DISTRICT FOR 2026; AND

DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2, 2025 REGARDING LEVYING OF A RENEWED ASSESSMENT FOR 2026 WHEREAS, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (California Streets and Highway Code section 36500 et seq.) authorizes cities to establish parking and business improvement areas for the purpose of imposing assessments on businesses for certain purposes; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2013 the Berkeley City Council established such an area known as the Elmwood Business Improvement District (the "District"); and WHEREAS, the City Council established the Elmwood Business Improvement District Advisory Board (Advisory Board) to act in compliance with State law to oversee the activities of the District; and
WHEREAS, the Advisory Board has submitted an Annual Report to the Berkeley City Council that outlines the activities of the District proposed for 2026 as required by the California Streets and Highways Code Section 36533; and WHEREAS, the Annual Report is clear and complete and found to comply with the interests of Elmwood BID assessees; and
WHEREAS, the annual process for levying assessments in Business Improvement Districts requires that cities adopt a Resolution of Intent that declares their intent to levy such an assessment and then set a date for a public hearing where interested parties may be heard on the issue.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the Elmwood Business Improvement District Annual Report (Exhibit A) as submitted to the City Clerk by the Elmwood Business Improvement District Advisory Board.

Section 2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 36500 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act"), the City Council declares its intent to levy an annual assessment for the parking and business improvement area known as the Elmwood Business Improvement District.

Section 3. The boundaries of the District are set forth in Exhibit A1 to the Elmwood BID Annual Report and Budget which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 4. The improvements and activities proposed for the District are as described in the Report and Budget (Exhibit A) and appended hereto. Council intends that these funds be used for designated activities and improvements in the Elmwood commercial

area. Council explicitly intends that funds generated through this BID shall not be used to pay for activities routinely paid for by the City.

Section 5. The City Council intends to levy assessments on businesses located within the boundaries of the District shown Exhibit A1 and according to the business classifications and rates set forth in Exhibit A2 which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 6. A public hearing shall be held before the City Council on December 2, 2025.

Following the hearing the Council will consider adoption of a resolution levying an assessment as recommended by the Elmwood Business Improvement Advisory Board.

At this hearing the Council will hear all interested persons for or against the levying of such an assessment.

All formal written and oral protests against the levying of the District assessment should contain the following certification: "I certify that I am the owner of the business listed below, and that the business is located or operates within the boundaries of the Elmwood Business Improvement District." Protests should also contain the following information:
business name (printed), business address (printed), City Business License Tax Registration number, name of protester (printed), signature of protester, date of protest and the reason(s) the protester is against the levying of the District assessment. Protests will not be considered valid unless signed and submitted by the owner of a business located within the boundaries of the proposed District. Written protests shall be filed with the City Clerk, First Floor, City Hall, at 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, California, 94704, at or before 3 pm on December 2, 2025 and shall contain a description of the business sufficient to identify the business, and if the person so protesting is not listed on City records as the owner of the business, the protest shall be accompanied by written evidence that the person subscripting the protest is the owner of the business. Any protest pertaining to the regularity or sufficiency of the proceedings shall be in writing and shall clearly set forth the irregularity or defect to which the objection is made. If written protests are received from the owners of businesses in the District which will pay fifty percent (50%) or more of the assessment proposed to be levied, no further proceedings to levy the assessment shall be taken for a period of one year from the date of the finding of a majority protest by the City Council. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of improvements or activities within the District, those types of improvements or activities shall be eliminated.

Section 7. The City Clerk is directed to give notice of said public hearing by publishing the Resolution of Intention in a newspaper of general circulation.

Exhibit
A: Annual Report for the Elmwood Business Improvement District for ‘25 & Budget ‘26 A1: Map of the Elmwood BID 2026
A2: Assessment Rates 2026

EXHIBIT A
Annual Report for the Elmwood Business Improvement District for 2025 September 8, 2025
To: Members of the Berkeley City Council
From: The Elmwood Business Improvement District Advisory Board Re: 2026 Elmwood BID Renewal
We respectfully request that the Elmwood Business Improvement District be renewed for the 2026 fiscal year, with the same boundary as the prior year (Exhibit A1). The assessment method and basis remain the same.

The Elmwood BID was established in November 2013 to promote, maintain and beautify the Elmwood commercial district. Revenues of roughly $30,000 per year provide a regular, predictable source of funding for the Elmwood Business Association (EBA) activities, and an additional $5,000 of grant funding and fundraising is also anticipated. The Elmwood BID has allowed the EBA to expand its activities into areas such as maintenance and capital improvements.

The Elmwood Business Association is continuing to be the catalyst for Elmwood Business District’s ongoing vitality. Here are some highlights:
• Engaging the merchants in the expanded BID to envision how EBA can assist in supporting their businesses
• Successfully put on the Second Elmwood Music Festival on three stages, partnering with the Berkeley Public Library – Claremont Branch, local food truck vendors, and local craft artists, bringing together the community
• Bringing back the popular Wine Walk on September 13, 2025 • Officially installed the SmartSpace Program (employee parking program) after a successful pilot in collaboration with CoB Transportation Dept. • Participation in the AC Transit EasyPass program by the Elmwood merchants • Maintenance of year-round lighting installation on district buildings • Website: www.shoptheelmwood.com serves as one of the district’s main marketing tools – District Events, Introducing New Businesses, and ongoing marketing updates • Continued maintenance of Welcome to Elmwood banners as well as seasonal banners on light posts and ongoing maintenance
• Quarterly weeding and cleaning of Russell St. parking lot partnering with UC Berkeley • Maintenance of security camera at Russell St. parking lot • Maintaining a part-time Administrative Assistant to:
o Engage the public on social media
o Manage merchant communications

o Promote monthly specials among Elmwood Merchants
o Updating the website to keep it current
o Project manage events around Elmwood BID
 Sponsored the following events:
o Spring and Fall Outdoor Movie Nights
o Spring Elmwood Music Festival
o Where’s Waldo Events
o Summer Merchant Social to integrate merchants from the expanded BID o Fall Live Music Stroll
o Stop for Berkeley Bicycle Day participants for snacks and water o Craft Fair featuring local artists
o Fall Wine Walk
o Holiday Season Events
o Shop Local Promotions
 Members of the board are active in other Berkeley commercial and residential neighborhoods to promote harmony and cooperation
Below is a summary of our current financial position and our proposed budget for 2026 for your review.

2025-2026 Actual and Projected Expenditures
Elmwood Business Association
INCOME 2025 Budget 2026 Budget
Operating Income
BID Membership dues $ 30,000 $ 33,000 Other Revenue $ 4,495 $ 5,500 Total Operating Income $ 34,495 $ 38,500 Non-Operating Income
Fees Collected from Vendors $ 500 $ 1,000 Total Non-Operating Income $ 500 $ 1,000 Total INCOME $ 34,995 $ 39,500

EXPENSES
Advertising & Marketing
Banner Maintenance $ 1,000 $ 1,800 Building Light Maintenance $ 250 $ 250 Spring event production $ 500 $ 500 Merchant Social - Summer $ 1,000 $ 1,300 Artisan Craft Event $ 300 $ 300 Web Hosting and marketing $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Halloween event production $ 600 $ 600 Holiday season event production (incl. tree
lights) $ 2,500 $ 2,500
Music in the Elmwood
Music Festival Expenses $ 5,000 $ 7,000 Consulting & Accounting
Square Payment System $ 120 $ 120 Accounting S/W (Xero)/Tax Filing $ 200 $ 200 Dues and
Subscriptions
Chamber of Commerce $ 350 $ 350 Insurance
Liability for EBA $ 500 $ 650 Liability for Board members $ 800 $ 900 License & Permits
Taxes & Licenses $ 175 $ 200 Other: Office Supplies/Annual Mtg.

Printing/copy $ 1,000 $ 1,200 Postage & Delivery (PO Box) $ 250 $ 250 Annual Mtg. Food/Beverage $ 1,000 $ 1,300

Repairs and Maintenance
Gardening (Tree wells) $ 400 $ 400 Professional Fees
Legal and Professional Fees $ 100 $ 100 Bank Fees
Wells Fargo Bank $ 150 $ 150 Security
Holiday Private Security $ 9,000 $ 10,000 Admin Support
Wages $ 12,500 $ 12,500
Total Operating Expenses $ 38,695 $ 43,570 Retained
Earnings $ (3,700) $ (4,070)

Exhibit A1: Elmwood Business Improvement District (BID), Map Elmwood BID Boundaries
City of Berkeley
Elmwood BID

Exhibit A2: Elmwood Business Improvement District, Assessment Rates Any business that is classified as a nonprofit (Tax Code N) for business licenses purposes, shall nevertheless pay the assessment at the rate that corresponds to its North American Standard Industrial Classification if it is engaged in the sale of products or services. Any new business established within the District shall not be required to pay an assessment on application for its business license but only on renewal at the end of the year it was initiated. (Ord. 7317-NS § 3 (part), 2013) Business Classifications and Assessment Rates
Classifications Annual
Rates
Retail including jewelers & groceries but not restaurants (Tax Codes R, M and G but without NAICS 722, Food Services & Drinking Places) • Gross receipts under $350,000 $250
• Gross receipts $350,000--$999,000 $350
• Gross receipts $1,000,000 $500
Restaurants, including all businesses that prepare and
serve food at the request of customers (NAICS 722)
$500
Professionals including offices of real estate brokers (Tax Code P) • Gross receipts under $100,000 $300
• Gross receipts over $100,000 $400
Entertainment and Recreation (Tax Code E) $450
Business, Personal and Repair Services (Tax Code B)
except Hair, Nail and Skin Care Services (NAICS 81211)
$200
Hair, Nail and Skin Care Services (NAICS 81211) $200
Parking lot operators $2,000
Financial Institutions $2,500

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Solano Business Improvement District (BID) Advisory Board Submitted by: Fern Solomon, Chair, Solano Avenue BID Advisory Board Subject: Renewal of the Solano Avenue BID for Calendar Year 2026

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District Advisory Board’s (hereafter “Solano BID Advisory Board” or “the Advisory Board”) recommendation that Council: 1) approve the 2025 Annual Report and preliminary budget on proposed improvements in the District for calendar year 2026; 2) declare its intent to levy an assessment to finance improvements in the District for calendar year 2026; and 3) direct the City Clerk to schedule a public hearing on the renewal of the assessment for December 2, 2025.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Projected BID revenue of approximately $30,000 will be deposited into the Solano Avenue BID Fund, revenue budget code 783-21-208-251-0000-000-000-412110- and expensed from budget code 783-21-208-251-0000-000-446-636110. The BID constitutes an independent funding source that must be targeted to commercial revitalization efforts that are recommended by the Solano BID Advisory Board. To the extent that the work of the Solano BID enhances the economic development of Solano Avenue and its business climate over the long term, the BID contributes towards improving City revenues through increased sales and property taxes.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Renewal of the Solano BID is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to foster a dynamic, sustainable, and locally-based economy. Under the State of California Parking and Business Improvement Area law of 1989 (California Streets and Highways Code section 36500 et.seq.) the City Council must approve an Annual Report prepared by the Solano BID Advisory Board with a proposed budget for the next year as a requirement to levy new assessments. Accordingly, at its meeting of September 23, 2025, the Solano BID Advisory Board voted to recommend that the City Council approve the Report for the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District for 2025-26 and adopt a Resolution of Intention to renew the assessment 2026. The Resolution of Intention also sets a public hearing date for December 2, 2025 where affected Solano businesses can express support or opposition to renewal of the BID for calendar year 2026. If written and/or oral protests are received from businesses proposed to pay a

30

Renewal of the Solano Avenue BID for Calendar Year 2026 CONSENT CALENDAR October 28, 2025
majority of the assessment, Council cannot vote to levy assessments for 2026. If no majority protest is received the Council may renew the assessment.

BACKGROUND
Since its revival in May 2012, the Solano BID Advisory Board has used Solano BID revenues to finance three programs: 1) a tree watering contract to ensure the health of 48 young street trees on Solano; 2) installing a program of 40 hanging planter baskets on light poles; and 3) sponsorship of events that attract customers to the district and

improvements that enhance the pedestrian experience. In recent years, the BID program has focused on sponsoring activities and improvements intended to market

and promote the Solano Avenue business district. In the wintertime, the BID in conjunction with the Solano Avenue Association (which represents both Albany and Berkeley businesses along Solano Avenue) pays a contractor to erect holiday lights and

decorations on City street light poles. This will continue for the upcoming winter season.

Due to expenditures in prior years, the Solano BID will use less of its funds on the holiday décor program, and, instead, explore expanded landscaping services to better maintain existing tree wells and water existing hanging flower baskets. BID expenditures are to be made through an established fiscal agency contract with Telegraph Property and Business Management Corporation (or the “TPBMC”).

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
By maintaining and enhancing the district, the Solano BID creates shopping opportunities for residents and visitors alike while encouraging alternative forms of transportation. The environmental enhancements such as the added street trees,

hanging planters, parklet, and holiday decorations contribute to making Solano a more pleasant walking destination. Because the District is well served by public transportation and biking infrastructure, these services indirectly support environmental sustainability

goals of encouraging alternative transportation modes to decrease carbon emissions.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
State law requires that the City Council annually renew the Solano BID by first passing a resolution stating Council's intention to levy an annual assessment and scheduling a public hearing on the proposed renewed assessment for the coming year.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Vincent McCoy, Secretary to the Solano BID Advisory Board, (510) 981-7043.

Attachments:
1: Resolution
Exhibit A: Report for the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District 2025 Exhibit A1: Map of the Solano BID
Exhibit A2: Assessment Rates

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

APPROVING THE ANNUAL REPORT AND PROPOSED BUDGET OF THE SOLANO AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR 2025-26; DECLARING COUNCIL'S INTENTION TO LEVY AN ASSESSMENT IN THE DISTRICT FOR 2026; AND

DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2, 2025 TO CONSIDER LEVYING A RENEWED ASSESSMENT FOR 2026.

WHEREAS, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (California Streets and Highway C ode
section 36500 et seq.) authorizes cities to establish parking and business improvement areas for the purpose of imposing assessments on businesses for certain purposes; and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2003 the Berkeley City Council established such an area

known as the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District (the "District"); and WHEREAS, the City Council established a Solano Avenue Business Improvement District Advisory Board (Advisory Board) to act in compliance with State law to oversee

the activities of the District; and
WHEREAS, the Advisory Board has submitted an Annual Report to the Berkeley City Council that outlines the activities of the District proposed for 2026 as required by the California Streets and Highways Code Section 36533; and WHEREAS, the Annual Report is clear and complete and found to comply with the interests of Solano Avenue assessees; and
WHEREAS, the annual process for levying assessments in Business Improvement Districts requires that cities adopt a Resolution of Intent that declares their intent to levy such an assessment and then set a date for a public hearing where interested parties may be heard on the issue.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District Annual Report 2025 and Budget for the year 2026 (Exhibit A) as submitted to the City Clerk by the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District Advisory Board.

Section 2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 36500 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act"), the City Council declares its intent to levy an annual assessment for the parking and business improvement area known as the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District.

Section 3. The boundaries of the District are set forth in Exhibit A1 to the 2025-26 Annual Report which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 4. The improvements and activities proposed for the District are as described in the Report and budget (Exhibit A) and appended hereto.

Council intends that these funds be used for designated activities and improvements in the Solano Avenue commercial area. Council explicitly intends that funds generated through this BID shall not be used to pay for activities routinely paid for by the City.

Section 5. The City Council intends to levy assessments on businesses located within the boundaries of the District shown Exhibit A1 and according to the business classifications and rates set forth in Exhibit A2 which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 6. A public hearing shall be held before the City Council on December 2, 2025.

Following the hearing the Council will consider adoption of a resolution levying an assessment as recommended by the Solano Avenue Business Improvement Advisory Board. At this hearing the Council will hear all interested persons for or against the levying of such an assessment.

Formal protests against the levying of the District assessment must be made in writing.

All written and oral protests should contain the following certification: "I certify that I am the owner of the business listed below, and that the business is located or operates within the boundaries of the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District." Protests should also contain the following information: business name (printed), business address (printed), City Business License Tax Registration number, name of protester (printed), signature of protester, date of protest and the reason(s) the protester is against the levying of the District assessment. Protests will not be considered valid unless signed and submitted by the owner of a business located within the boundaries of the proposed District. Written protests shall be filed with the City Clerk, First Floor, City Hall, at 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, California, 94704, at or before 3 pm on December 2, 2025 and shall contain a description of the business sufficient to identify the business, and if the person so protesting is not listed on City records as the owner of the business, the protest shall be accompanied by written evidence that the person subscripting the protest is the owner of the business. Any protest pertaining to the regularity or sufficiency of the proceedings shall be in writing and shall clearly set forth the irregularity or defect to which the objection is made. If written protests are received from the owners of businesses in the District which will pay fifty percent (50%) or more of the assessment proposed to be levied, no further proceedings to levy the assessment shall be taken for a period of one year from the date of the finding of a majority protest by the City Council. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of improvements or activities within the District, those types of improvements or activities shall be eliminated.

Section 7. The City Clerk is directed to give notice of said public hearing by publishing the Resolution of Intention in a newspaper of general circulation seven days prior to the public hearing.

Exhibits
A: Report for the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District 2025-26 A1: Map of the Solano BID
A2: Assessment Rates

Exhibit A
Report for the Solano Avenue Business Improvement District for 2025 and Budget for 2026
Background
The first version of the Solano Business Improvement District (BID) operated from 2002-2007, with administration of the BID headed by the Solano Avenue Association (SAA). In 2012, the Council appointed the Solano BID Advisory Board to administer the Solano Avenue BID, to fund physical improvements to the street and dedicate marketing and promotion efforts towards the businesses on the portion of Solano Avenue that lies in Berkeley. This Annual report and budget updates the most recent year of operational programs of the Solano BID.

Landscape Program
In 2013, the Solano BID financed a tree watering program for young street trees along upper Solano Avenue. In 2016, per the City of Berkeley arborist, the trees were mature enough to not require additional water services. In early 2016, the board voted to enhance Solano’s landscape by installing 41 hanging planter baskets on light poles distributed throughout the district, utilizing the Downtown Berkeley Association’s (DBA) services. The DBA watered and maintained the baskets though the end of calendar year 2018. From 2019 to 2021, rainwater alone supported the baskets, and in 2022 the Solano BID entered into a contract with The Peralta Services Corporation to supplement other efforts to clean, weed, and level the tree wells through the district, and to develop an ongoing watering and maintenance system for the hanging flower baskets. Peralta's services began in July of 2022 and, per Peralta, the latest contract is renewed on a quarterly basis with regularly scheduled landscaping in tree wells, including cleaning of porous pavement on a weekly basis. Additional services have been considered and further options and changes will be discussed in the context of the 2026 Work Plan.

Marketing and Promotion of Solano
Marketing and promotion of Solano Avenue constitutes a second priority of the Solano BID. The commission has engaged with Solano Avenue Association for the purpose of increased marketing to member businesses, improved online presence, and higher visibility during events, minor and major, along Solano Avenue. Since 2018, the board approved funding for a new vendor for Christmas decorations under the direction of the SAA, with BID reimbursement to the SAA, which covered more poles and provided greater decoration coordination opportunities with neighboring Albany, all at a lower cost than previous seasons. The BID used the same vendor and process last season and plans to study and perhaps change the decorations for the 2026 season. This partnership underscores the leverage the BID obtains in working with the SAA to provide support for BID priorities for the Berkeley portion of Solano Avenue. In the remainder of 2025, the Advisory Board may again decide to participate in the development of holiday campaigns and activities (e.g., supporting the SAA in producing the Stroll and additional holiday events.) This year the BID developed a website directory for the district (www.uppersolano.com) and an advertising budget. The ads run

in the Berkeley Times, Berkeleyside and Edible East Bay and direct the public to the Upper Solano directory. The details of the 2026 Work Plan, are to be developed over the remainder of the year and include engaging with the City regarding traffic safety improvements, increased marketing of the Berkeley portion of Solano Avenue, and improvement programs to deploy merchant fees effectively and equitably.

Commissioner Recruitment
In the spirit of vibrant and effective service to the merchants of the Solano BID, the Advisory Board continues to recruit new board members. Ongoing recruitment is a focus for the remainder of 2025 and 2026. Merchant owners are often busy operating, and sometimes expanding, their businesses. The Advisory Board reminds merchants that they can assign a proxy, from inside or outside their organization, to represent them on the Board. City of Berkeley residence is not required for Board membership.

Solano BID Administration
The Solano BID has contracted with a fiscal agent, the Telegraph Property and Business Management Corporation (Telegraph PBMC), which charges a 5% fiscal agent fee on new BID revenue annually. For example, the anticipated new Solano BID revenue for 2026 is $30,000 so the fiscal agent fee is estimated to be $1,500.

FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE SOLANO BID, AUGUST 2025
Solano BID Balance, as of 8/31/2024 $45,815
Accounts Receivable - Remaining 2024 Carryover from City of Berkeley $0 Less fall and winter payments remaining for Solano Ave Assn Contract, for 2024-25 holiday-related events -$10,000
Less payments for holiday decor installation, removal and storage, Nov ‘24 to Jan ‘25 -$5,471
Less fall and winter payments for Peralta Svcs Corp sidewalk/tree maintenance -$4,782 Allocated Expenditures -$9,248
Unallocated as of 8/31/2025 $16,314
BUDGET FOR THE SOLANO BID FOR 2026 (Calendar Year)
Estimated new revenue 2026 $30,000
Carryover from 2025 (estimated) $16,314
Estimated SAA Events Payments -$20,000
Estimated Holiday Decorations Payments -$5,471
Estimated Peralta Svcs Corp sidewalk Cleaning/tree well maintenance -$6,182 Less fiscal agent fee to Telegraph PBMC (5%) - of estimated new revenue -$1,500 Total additional available for expenditure in 2026 $13,161

RECOMMENDATIONS
The Advisory Board recommends that Council:
 Approve the 2025 Annual Report and 2026 Budget.
 Make no changes in the boundaries of the Solano Business Improvement District or in the two Benefit Zones, A & B, as shown in Exhibit A1.  Make no changes in the method and basis for merchant assessments, as shown in Exhibit A2.
 Carry over to 2026 the estimated surplus revenues from 2025, as stated in the 2026 Budget.

Exhibit A1
SOLANO
Business
Improvement
District

Exhibit A2
Berkeley Solano Avenue Business Improvement District Annual Assessment Formula Annual
Assessments
Type of Business Zone A Zone B
a. Retailers and
Restaurants
1-5 employees $200 $125
6-9 employees $300 $175
10+ employees $400 $225
b. Service
Businesses
$175 $100
c. Professional
Services
$100 $65
d. Financial
Institutions
$500 $500
SOLANO
Business
Improvement
District

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7180 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Humbert (Author)
Subject: Russell Street Halloween Festivities: 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 $1,000 per Councilmember including $1,000 from Councilmember Humbert to the Claremont Elmwood Neighborhood Association for Russell Street Halloween festivities 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
Russell Street Halloween in the Elmwood neighborhood is a long-standing tradition that draws large crowds of trick-or-treaters and other ooky-spooky Halloween characters.1 This community-led event features lovingly decorated homes, costumes, and seasonal activities. Residents on Russell Street transform their houses into creepy and fun displays, making it one of the best spots for trick-or-treating in Berkeley. The event has become a cherished celebration, especially for families seeking a lively and safe Halloween experience. These funds will help the event cover expenses and ensure that Russell Street Halloween remains a Boo-erkeley tradition for years to come.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
No General Fund impact. $1,000 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 1 https://www.berkeleyside.org/2022/11/01/halloween-elmwood-berkeley-trick-treat Berkeley City Councilmember
Mark Humbert, District 8
2180 Milvia Street, 5th Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704
[email protected]

31

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

RUSSELL STREET HALLOWEEN FESTIVITIES
WHEREAS, the Russell Street Halloween festivities, sponsored by the Claremont Elmwood Neighborhood Association, will take place on October 31, 2025; and WHEREAS, the annual event is a fang-tastic Elmwood community tradition; and WHEREAS, Russell Street Halloween is a skele-ton of fun for the whole family; and WHEREAS, Councilmember has surplus funds in his office expenditure account, witch he would like to contribute to the event; and
WHEREAS, the Claremont Elmwood Neighborhood Association is trick-or-treating for funds in the amount of $1,000 to help cover the costs of the festivities; and WHEREAS, coffin up funds for this event would serve the civic interests of community- building, creating safe spaces for holiday celebrations, and preventing this event from ghosting;
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 $1,000 per office shall be granted to the Claremont Elmwood Neighborhood Association for helping cover the costs of Russell Street Halloween festivities.

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
October 28, 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: Amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions) to Allow Separate Sale of ADUs

RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing, and upon conclusion, adopt the first reading of an Ordinance to amend Berkeley Municipal Code Title 21 (Subdivisions Ordinance) and Chapter

23.306 Accessory Dwelling Units to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1033 by establishing local regulations for the separate sale of ADUs as condominiums.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
None.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
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, allows 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. 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 (Attachment 1) would provide for such separate sales.

Currently, condominium conversions are regulated in BMC Chapter 21.28 (Condominiums and Other Common Interest Subdivisions). The purposes of Berkeley’s Condominium Conversion regulations are to preserve the rental housing stock, protect existing renters, mitigate the loss of rental units through condominium conversion, and to create a transparent process for the conversion of rental units to condominiums.

Most ADUs are “naturally affordable” and exempt from rent control. In a study published in 2022, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) found that 20 percent of ADUs are offered rent-free, 16 percent are rented at discounted rates (presumably to

32

Amendments to BMC Title 21 (Subdivisions) regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING October 28, 2025

friends and family), and that most market-rate ADUs are affordable to low or moderate- income households in most markets.1
Recognizing the generally affordable nature of ADUs, the Planning Commission’s recommendation treats ADU condominiums differently than typical condominiums.

These differences include:
 Condominium Conversion Mitigation Fee: The proposed ordinance would 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. The Planning Commission’s recommendation bases tenant protections on an ADU’s rent ordinance status.

Rent Ordinance
Status
Description Tenant Protections
Covered Rental
ADU
An ADU that does not meet an
exemption under BMC

13.76.050(C)(6), including:

ADUs on parcels with
multifamily buildings, parcels
with more than one single-
family dwelling, or parcels with
one single-family dwelling
where no unit is owner-
occupied.
 Right of first
refusal (1 year);
 Right to remain
after conversion.

Exempt Rental
ADU
An ADU on a parcel with
exactly one single-family
dwelling where an owner
occupies either unit, consistent
with BMC 13.76.050(C)(6).
 None.
1 Final Affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025- 04/ADU_Affordability_Report_June_13_2022.pdf

Amendments to BMC Title 21 (Subdivisions) regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING October 28, 2025

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.

BACKGROUND
At its March 5, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission received an informational report regarding AB 1033 implementation (Attachment 3) and directed staff to prepare an ordinance to permit 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.

At its meeting of July 29, 2025, the City Council considered revisions to the Zoning Ordinance related to ADU development standards. At that meeting, the City Council adopted the Zoning Ordinance amendments, and continued consideration of the ADU condominium changes to a future meeting.

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).

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.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
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.

Amendments to BMC Title 21 (Subdivisions) regarding ADUs PUBLIC HEARING October 28, 2025

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.

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

Attachments:
1: Ordinance
2: City Council Referral to implement AB 1033, May 14, 2024. 3: Planning Commission Staff Report, March 5, 2025
4: Public Hearing Notice

ORDINANCE NO. -N.S.

AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS) TO ALLOW SEPARATE SALE OF

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADU), AND A CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 23 (ZONING) RELATED TO ADUS
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 for Covered Rental ADUs. 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 Covered Rental ADU, 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 Municipal Code Section 23.306.040(C)(2) is amended to read as follows:

2. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the main building, unless authorized under BMC 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; Section 3. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation.

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

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

ATTACHMENT 4

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS) TO ALLOW SEPARATE SALE OF

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
The public may participate in this hearing by remote video or in-person.

The Department of Planning and Development is proposing an Ordinance to adopt proposed amendments to Title 21 (Subdivisions Ordinance) to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1033 to establish local regulations for the separate sale of ADUs as condominiums.

The hearing will be held on, October 28, 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 October 16, 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: October 17, 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 October 16, 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/

ACTION CALENDAR
October 28, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Terrance Davis, Director, Department of Public Works Subject: Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the recommended conceptual design (Concept 3B) of the Telegraph Ave Multimodal Corridor Project (Project) and authorizing the City Manager to proceed with the detailed engineering design of the project.

SUMMARY
The goals of the Project include:
 Achieve Vision Zero traffic safety policy goals;
 Improve transit travel times and on-time reliability;  Provide all ages & abilities biking facilities;
 Improve Telegraph Avenue pavement to a state of good repair; and  Implement a curb management strategy to better utilize curb space.

These goals are consistent with the goals of the City’s Transit-First Policy, Pedestrian Plan, Bicycle Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, and Strategic Plan.

The recommended concept design “Concept 3B” is depicted in Exhibit A. This design replicates the Telegraph Avenue design approved by the Oakland City Council with modifications that seek to maintain transit service quality consistent with the City’s Transit-First Policy in the General Plan Transportation Element (Policy T-4). The proposed design removes one travel lane in each direction leaving one remaining vehicle travel lane in each direction, a continuous center turn lane, “floating” parking lanes, and Class IV bike lanes. Class IV bike lanes are on-street bike facilities with physical separation between the bikeway and travel lanes. Class IV bike lanes are hereafter referred to as “protected bike lanes”.

The recommended concept includes bus-only lanes in each direction near Ashby Avenue between Webster Street and Russell Street (three blocks). The project includes other transit priority elements such as queue-jump lanes, which allow the bus to get a head start at the traffic signals at Webster and Russell streets, and bus boarding islands to allow buses to stop in the traffic lane rather than divert to curbside bus stops. Staff recommends Concept 3B due to the following considerations:

33

Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design ACTION CALENDAR October 28, 2025

1. Prioritizes overall traffic safety due to slower vehicle speeds;

2. Prioritizes pedestrian safety by reducing pedestrian crossing distances;

3. Prioritizes transit where most transit delay occurs (Ashby Avenue intersection) along the Project corridor;

4. Maintains the most parking and loading, preserving flexibility for local merchants and supporting small package and food delivery trends;

5. Aligns with stakeholder feedback; and

6. The design is consistent with Oakland’s design for Telegraph Avenue from Berkeley border to 17th Street, offering continuity and a predictable user experience across jurisdictions.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The recommendation has no fiscal impacts because it seeks approval of the Project’s conceptual design only and does not authorize the City Manager to accept or spend any funding related to advancing the project beyond the conceptual phase. The current conceptual design phase budget is $460,000, which is funded by a $290,000 grant of Measure B from the Alameda County Transportation Commission. $170,000 of required local match using funds will be provided from the Measure BB transportation sales taxes (Resolution No. 69,709-N.S., “Approving the Berkeley Strategic Transportation Plan Addendum and authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements related to accepting grant funds for the Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project” [adopted January 26, 2021]).

Detailed engineering is anticipated to be funded by a $1,011,000 grant of Measure BB and Vehicle Registration Fee funds from the Alameda County Transportation Commission (approved by the Council on October 15, 2024 [Resolution No. 71,538- N.S.], and the Alameda County Transportation Commission on May 8, 2025). Funding for construction will be pursued during the subsequent detailed engineering phase.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Project corridor is a 0.85-mile section of Telegraph Avenue from Dwight Way to Woolsey Street (Oakland border). The Project is adjacent to a variety of land uses, including Willard Middle School, medical offices, commercial uses, and mixed- use/residential uses. This corridor provides a critical connection between Berkeley and Oakland. Further, this corridor is a primary access route from Highway 24 to the UC Berkeley Campus, and intersects State Highway 13 at Ashby Avenue, which is Caltrans jurisdiction.

The City of Oakland completed projects on Telegraph Avenue within the last 10 years that reduced the number of vehicle lanes and included protected bikeways and bus boarding islands. In early 2025, the Oakland City Council approved a similar road-diet design for the section of Telegraph Avenue between 52nd Street and Woolsey Street at the Berkeley border. The proposed City concept design builds on this momentum by

Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design ACTION CALENDAR October 28, 2025

delivering a consistent and predictable user experience along this multi-jurisdictional corridor to support local and regional goals for safety and economic vitality.

The Project is in alignment with Strategic Plan Priorities, advancing our goals to  provide state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities;  create a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared city; and  be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment.

Stakeholder and Public Engagement
Public outreach for this project was comprehensive to capture diverse perspectives and inform the design process. Engagement began in 2022; however, this effort was paused for two years due to staffing vacancies. Engagement activities were resumed in 2024.

The engagement effort for this project consisted of technical committees, commissions, public meetings, and targeted stakeholder discussions, as outlined in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Stakeholder Meetings
Year Stakeholder Meeting
2022  Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 (8/25/2022)  Public Meeting #1 (10/26/2022)
 Telegraph Business Improvement District (TBID) Meeting #1 (9/29/202) 2023  Willard Neighborhood Association Meeting (3/30/2023)  Telegraph for People Meeting (4/24/2023)
2024  Public Works Zero Waste Site Walk (4/16/2024)
 Fire Department Focused Meeting #1 (9/9/2024)
 Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment, and Sustainability Committee (FITES) Meeting #1 (10/9/2024)
 Door to Door Business Outreach (10/2024)
2025  FITES Meeting #2 (3/5/2025)
 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 (5/1/2025)
 Fire Department Focused Meeting #2 (6/2/2025)
 Commission on Disability Meeting (6/11/2025)
 Transportation and Infrastructure Commission (TIC) Meeting #1 (6/12/2025)
 Public Meeting #2 (6/25/2025)
 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #3 (8/12/2025)
 TBID Meeting #2 (8/12/2025)
 FITES Meeting #3 (9/17/2025)
 TIC Meeting #2 (9/18/2025)

Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design ACTION CALENDAR October 28, 2025

Synthesis of Feedback
Common themes were expressed throughout the outreach process, including strong community support for bike and pedestrian safety; concerns about neighborhood access resulting from left turn prohibitions; the possibility for private vehicles to illegally speed in the bus-only lane based on the City of Oakland’s experience with the AC Transit Tempo bus rapid transit project on International Boulevard. In addition, themes also included questions about the need for bike lanes on Telegraph Avenue when there are nearby bike boulevards, and concerns from the disability community regarding visually impaired people unexpectedly encountering bus boarding islands in the street and potential conflicts with bicyclists when exiting a vehicle into the painted buffer between the parking lane and the protected bike lane.

The Fire Department recommended Concept 3 due to the potential for the center turn lane to be used by Fire trucks and other emergency response vehicles in the event of an emergency. The Fire Department expressed a preference for using a center turn lane as opposed to a bus-only lane on the right side of a general-purpose lane in the event of an emergency because drivers intuitively yield to the right when an emergency vehicle with sirens and lights is approaching. The Fire Department’s preference for Concept 3 was a significant reason Concept 3 was selected as the basis for further design refinements that led to Concept 3B as Staff’s recommended concept design.

During the June 11, 2025 Commission on Disability meeting, commissioners stated that blue zones are safer and more accessible when located immediately adjacent to the sidewalk so the wheelchair ramp can be deployed directly onto the sidewalk rather than in a bike lane or bike lane buffer. In response to these comments, the Project team anticipates siting blue zones on side streets where they can be located directly adjacent to the curb during the detailed engineering phase. With respect to floating bus boarding islands, while it is understood that visually impaired people may not be expecting vertical elements such as bus boarding island curbs after departing the sidewalk, the Project would implement best practices regarding floating bus boarding island and pedestrian safety islands consistent with AC Transit’s Transit Supportive Design Guidelines (2025), such as including an edge that can be detected with a guide cane on either side of the bicycle zone to provide the necessary cues that help people with a visual disability locate designated crossings of the bicycle zone and avoid accidentally traveling into the bikeway.

Comments were received requesting that the City improve parallel bike boulevards instead of adding protected bike facilities on Telegraph Avenue. Protected bike lanes on Telegraph Avenue are a component of all concept designs considered by the City for the following reasons:
 bike lanes on arterial streets such as Telegraph Avenue provide direct access to these high-activity areas, which parallel bike boulevards often bypass;  bicyclists currently use Telegraph Avenue, which is a “high-injury corridor” per the Vision Zero Action Plan (2020),

Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design ACTION CALENDAR October 28, 2025

 protected bike lanes provide physical separation making Telegraph Avenue safer for bicyclists attracting new riders who may not feel comfortable on less direct bike boulevards; and lastly, and
 bike boulevards offer low-stress routes for local trips, while arterial bike lanes cater to commuters and destination-driven trips.

Protected bike lanes on Telegraph Avenue make a seamless interjurisdictional connection between Berkeley and Oakland, offering a consistent and predictable experience for all users of the street.

Public Survey
A public survey was available between June 11, 2025 – July 3, 2025 (22 days). A link to the survey was published in a community message, sent to the Project distribution list, and posted on the City’s website. In addition, a QR code linking to the Project website was printed on decals affixed to the sidewalk at every intersection and every bus stop in the Project corridor.

A total of 505 responses to the survey were received (see Attachment 2 for the full survey results). In general, respondents valued pedestrian and bicyclist safety the most and ranked on-street parking and loading as the least important priorities. In addition, 54% of respondents preferred Concept 3 compared to 20% for Concept 2 and 26% for Concept 1. It should be noted that Concept 3B was developed in response to feedback received during the public outreach period and thus was not included in the survey.

Transportation and Infrastructure Commission Meeting Summary The Project was first introduced to the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission on June 12, 2025. The existing conditions analysis and three initial concept designs were presented to commissioners. Commissioners asked questions and commented on specific design details that would be identified and designed during the subsequent detailed engineering phase.

The recommended concept design was later presented to the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission on September 18, 2025. The Commission passed a motion supporting the staff-recommended design, as follows:

Item B2 – Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Study
It was Moved/Seconded (Lutzker/Scheider) that the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission: Support Concept 3B provided City Staff works with AC Transit Staff to reduce transit travel times to the maximum extent feasible; and return to the Commission later with several options for closing the slip lane at the Dwight Triangle; and return to the Commission later with specific intersection designs for Commissioners to review.

Ayes: Gattu, Hothi, Leung, Lutzker, Moss, Scheider, Walton, Zaro Motion carried 8-0-0-0

Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design ACTION CALENDAR October 28, 2025

Concept Design Selection
Initial Design Concepts
The Project team, which includes City Staff and consultants from Nelson Nygaard Engineering, initially identified and analyzed three design options: Concept 1, Concept 2, and Concept 3. Later, the team identified a fourth option: Concept 3B that Staff eventually selected as the recommended concept design. All four options include continuous protected bike lanes, but vary in their approaches to transit, parking and loading, and pedestrian safety and accessibility. As described in Table 2 and Exhibit A, Concepts 1 and 2 include bus-only lanes, removal of approximately half of the existing on-street parking and loading, restrictions on left-turn vehicle movements, and longer pedestrian crossing distances. Options 3 and 3B preserve most of the parking and loading and left-turn opportunities, while shortening pedestrian crossing distances.

Concept 3 is generally consistent with the design approved by the Oakland City Council for Telegraph Avenue. Concept 3 design removes two travel lanes in each direction and replaces them with a center turn lane, “floating” parking lanes, and protected bike lanes.

Concept 3 does not include bus-only lanes. Concept 3B matches the Oakland design but strategically adds bus-only lanes and queue-jump lanes to support transit service.

Table 2: Concept Design Comparison
Concept
Design
Option
Bus-
Only
Lanes
Bike Lanes
Intersections
Allowing Left
Turns
(15 existing)
Net Parking
Change
(193 existing
spaces)
Change
in Public
Transit
Travel
Time1
Change
in
Vehicle
Travel
Time
Concept
1 Yes Yes
(Class IV) 2 -100 (-52%) -17% 42%
Concept
2 Yes Yes
(Class IV) 4 -83 (-43%) -9% 70%
Concept
3 No Yes
(Class IV) 12 -32 (-17%) 59% 100%
Concept
3B
Partial Yes
(Class IV)
12 -33 (-17%) 10% 65%
Note:
1 As of August 2025, AC Transit is completing construction of the Telegraph Rapid Corridors Project, which seeks to reduce overall transit travel time on Line 6 by about 10% using techniques such as bus stop consolidation, relocation, and transit signal priority. Stop consolidation and relocation is included in the existing conditions scenario for this analysis, but transit travel time savings from transit signal priority is not included in the analysis.

Telegraph Multimodal Corridor Project Conceptual Design ACTION CALENDAR October 28, 2025

Recommended Concept Design
Using Synchro traffic modeling software, it was determined that, under Concept 3, the intersection of Ashby and Telegraph Avenue caused 84% of the increased transit travel time for a bus traversing the entire 0.85-mile project corridor. Since Concept 3 was preferred by the Fire Department and the public as expressed in the public survey; as well as the Telegraph Business Improvement District, but degraded transit performance, the Project team examined refinements to mitigate effects on transit speed and reliability resulting from the reduction from two travel lanes to one in each direction.

The traffic analysis determined that refinements to Concept 3 could substantially reduce transit delay caused by congestion at the intersection of Ashby and Telegraph Avenue, so a revised concept was developed. Concept 3B (shown on p. 2 of Exhibit A) substantially reduces the increase in transit travel time compared to existing conditions from +59% to +10% by including transit priority infrastructure elements such as bus-only lanes and queue-jump lanes between Webster and Russell streets. City Staff plan to continue working closely with AC Transit to identify further mitigation, including changes to signal timing, intersection geometry, or additional transit priority elements, to completely eliminate the +10% increase in transit travel time under Concept 3B.

Concept 3B balances bicyclist safety; transit speed and reliability; pedestrian safety, and parking and loading to serve this commercial corridor because it preserves most parking and loading on the corridor, includes continuous protected bike lanes, and preserves nearly all left turns reducing inconvenience for motorists accessing residential neighborhoods to the east and west of Telegraph Avenue. Additionally, the change from four lanes to three lanes (two travel lanes and a continuous center turn lane) reduces pedestrian crossing distances. As indicated in design guidelines such as the National Association of City Transportation Officials Urban Street Design Guide, this lane reduction and street narrowing is likely to reduce overall vehicles speeds, improving traffic safety for all users. Concept 3B, which is a continuation of the Oakland design but with targeted transit priority elements such as bus-only lanes and queue-jump lanes between Webster and Russell streets, fulfills many of the project goals and aligns with stakeholder feedback while minimizing some of the drawbacks of Oakland’s design, namely the lack of dedicated roadway capacity for transit.

Dwight Triangle
The intersection of Dwight Way and Telegraph Avenue contains a vehicle “free right turn lane”, or “slip lane”, for eastbound vehicles turning right from Dwight Way onto southbound Telegraph Avenue to bypass the traffic signal. Slip lanes prioritize vehicle flow because they allow vehicles to change roads without actually entering an intersection, often neglecting pedestrian and cyclist safety. Closure of the slip lane and installation of a public plaza in its place was included in the 2016 Telegraph Public Realm Plan. On October 26, 2021, a Council referral was submitted regarding closure of the vehicle right-turn slip turn lane at the Dwight Triangle to create a public plaza. In addition, on October 14, 2024, the Telegraph Business Improvement District (TBID)