Berkeley City Council
December 2, 2025

Tuesday, December 2, 2025 AGENDA Page 1

P R O C L AM AT I O N

C AL L I N G A S P E C I AL M E E T I N G O F T H E

B E R K E L E Y C I T Y C O U N C I L
In accordance with the authority in me vested, I do hereby call the Berkeley City Council in special session as follows:

Tuesday, December 2, 2025
4:00 PM
SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD ROOM - 1231 ADDISON STREET, BERKELEY, CA 94702

ADENA ISHII, MAYOR
Councilmembers:

DISTRICT 1 – RASHI KESARWANI
DISTRICT 2 – TERRY TAPLIN
DISTRICT 3 – BEN BARTLETT
DISTRICT 4 – IGOR TREGUB
DISTRICT 5 – SHOSHANA O’KEEFE
DISTRICT 6 – BRENT BLACKABY
DISTRICT 7 – CECILIA LUNAPARRA
DISTRICT 8 – MARK HUMBERT
This meeting will be conducted in a hybrid model with both in -person and virtual attendance. Attend this meeting remotely using Zoom. To request to speak, use the “raise hand” function in Zoom. To join by phone: Dial 1-669- 254-5252 or 1-833-568-8864 (Toll Free) and enter Meeting ID: 160 966 0575. To provide public comment, Press *9 and wait to be recognized by the Chair. To submit a written communication for the public record, email [email protected].

Live captioned broadcasts of Council meetings are available on B -TV (Channel 33) and via internet video stream.

All Council meetings are recorded.

This meeting will be conducted in accordance with the Brown Act, Government Code Section 54953. Any member of the public may attend this meeting, however, if you are feeling sick, please do not attend the meeting in person.

The City Council may take action related to any subject listed on the Agenda.

Pursuant to the City Council Rules of Procedure and State Law, the presiding officer may remove, or cause the removal of, an individual for disrupting the meeting. Prior to removing an individual, the presiding officer shall warn the individual that their behavior is disrupting the meeting and that their failure to cease their behavior may result in their removal. The presiding officer may then remove the individual if they do not promptly cease their disruptive behavior. “Disrupting” means engaging in behavior during a meeting of a legislative body that actually disrupts, disturbs, impedes, or renders infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting and includes, but is not limited to, a failure to comply with reasonable and lawful regulations adopted by a legislative body, or engaging in behavior that constitutes use of force or a true threat of force.

Government Code Section 84308 (Levine Act) - Parties to a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use are required to disclose if they made contributions over $5 00 within the prior 12 months to any City employee or officer. Parties and participants with a financial interest are prohibited from making more than $500 in contributions to a decisionmaker for the 12 months after the final decision is rendered on the proceeding.

The above contribution disclosures and restrictions do not apply when the proceeding is competitively bid, or involves a personnel or labor contract. For more information, see Government Code Section 84308.

Tuesday, December 2, 2025 AGENDA Page 2
Preliminary Matters
Roll Call:

Action Calendar
The public may comment on each item listed on the agenda for action. For items moved to the Action Calendar from the Consent Calendar or Information Calendar, persons who spoke on the item during the Consent Calendar public comment period may speak again during the Action Calendar public comment period on the item
The Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak line up at the podium, or use the "raise hand" function in Zoom, to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time. If ten or fewer persons are interested in speaking on an individual agenda item, each speaker may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers to one minute per speaker. Speakers are permitted to yield the ir time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes. The Presiding Officer may, with the consent of persons representing both sides of an issue, allocate a block of time to each side to present their issue.

Action items may be reordered at the discretion of the Chair with the consent of Council.

The Presiding Officer may open and close an additional comment period for Action items on this agenda (excluding any public hearings, appeals, and/or quasi-judicial matters), at the start of the Action Calendar.

Those who speak on an item during this comment period may not speak a second time when the item is taken up by Council.

Action Calendar – New Business

1. Sharing the Final Report of the Mayor’s Vision 2050 Task Force, Realize Vision 2050: Update to the Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure
From: Mayor Ishii (Author)
Recommendation: Invite City Council to review Realize Vision 2050: An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure, a report completed by the Mayor’s Vision 2050 Task Force in October 2025.

Financial Implications: None
Contact: Adena Ishii, Mayor, (510) 981-7100

2. Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Review staff recommendations, provide input and direction on project priorities, and discuss which infrastructure projects should be reflected in a community survey for potential inclusion in a bond measure.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: David White, City Manager's Office, (510) 981-7000, Terrance Davis, Public Works, (510) 981-6300, Scott Ferris, Parks, Recreation and Waterfront, (510) 981- 6700, Henry Oyekanmi, Finance, (510) 981-7300, David Sprague, Fire, (510) 981- 3473

Adjournment

Tuesday, December 2, 2025 AGENDA Page 3
I hereby request that the City Clerk of the City of Berkeley cause personal notice to be given to each member of the Berkeley City Council on the time and place of said meeting, forthwith.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the official seal of the City of Berkeley to be affixed on this 25th day of November, 2025.

/s/ Adena Ishii, Mayor
Public Notice – this Proclamation serves as the official agenda for this meeting.

ATTEST:

Mark Numainville, City Clerk

NOTICE CONCERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS : If you object to a decision by the City Council to approve or deny a use permit or variance for a project the following requirements and restrictions apply:
1) No lawsuit challenging a City decision to deny (Code Civ. Proc. §1094.6(b)) or approve (Gov. Code 65009(c)(5)) a use permit or variance may be filed more than 90 days after the date the Notice of Decision of the action of the City Council is mailed. Any lawsuit not filed within that 90 -day period will be barred. 2) In any lawsuit that may be filed against a City Council decision to approve or deny a use permit or variance, the issues and evidence will be limited to those raised by you or someone else, orally or in writing, at a public hearing or prior to the close of the last public hearing on the project.

Archived indexed video streams are available at: berkeleyca.gov/council-agendas.

Channel 33 rebroadcasts the following Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. and Sunday at 9:00 a.m.

Communications to the 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 to the City Clerk Department at 2180 Milvia Street. 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 Department for further information.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the public counter at the City Clerk Department located on the first floor of City Hall located at 2180 Milvia Street, and through the City's online records portal:
https://records.cityofberkeley.info/.

Agendas, agenda reports, and revised/supplemental material may be accessed via the online agenda for this meeting at: berkeleyca.gov/council-agendas
and may be accessed at reference desks at the following locations:

City Clerk Department - 2180 Milvia Street, First Floor Tel: 510-981-6900, TDD: 510-981-6903, Fax: 510-981-6901 Email: [email protected]

Libraries: Main – 2090 Kittredge Street,
Claremont Branch – 2940 Benvenue, West Branch – 1125 University, North Branch – 1170 The Alameda, Tarea Hall Pittman South Branch – 1901 Russell

Tuesday, December 2, 2025 AGENDA Page 4
COMMUNICATION ACCESS INFORMATION:

This meeting is being held in a wheelchair accessible location.

To request a disability-related accommodation(s) to participate in the meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Disability Services specialist at [email protected], (510) 981-6418 (V), or (510) 981-6347 (TDD) at least three business days before the meeting date.

Please refrain from wearing scented products to this meeting.

Captioning services are provided at the meeting, on B -TV, and on the Internet. In addition, assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available from the City Clerk prior to the meeting, and are to be returned before the end of the meeting.

ACTION CALENDAR
December 2, 2025
To: Honorable Members of the Berkeley City Council
From: Mayor Adena Ishii
Subject: Sharing the Final Report of the Mayor’s Vision 2050 Task Force, Realize Vision 2050: Update to the Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure

RECOMMMENDATION
Invite City Council to review Realize Vision 2050: An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure, a report completed by the Mayor’s Vision 2050 Task Force in October 2025.

BACKGROUND
This Report includes important updates to Vision 2050, a 30-year plan that was adopted by Berkeley’s City Council on September 29, 2020. Vision 2050 was developed by a multi-disciplinary citizen task force and calls for greater financial and institutional support for the infrastructure that is needed to support a safe, vibrant and resilient Berkeley, both now and into a future challenged by extreme weather and other changes.

In February 2025, the Mayor reconvened the Vision 2050 Task Force (Mayor’s Task Force) and was joined by two Council colleagues, Councilmembers Tregub and Taplin.

Mayor Ishii requested a brief update to consider the significant changes since 2020, both the good (e.g. passage of Measure FF, progress in repair and delivery of infrastructure) and bad (e.g the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires.) She also asked the Task Force to provide concrete recommendations for key actions Berkeley should take in the near term to support infrastructure that meets the challenges laid out in Vision 2050.

The Task Force took up the challenge and met throughout 2025 and worked to distill a large amount of information into this concise and clear report with detailed appendices.

On October 23, 2025, the Mayor’s Task Force submitted their final report, An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure, which we are pleased to share with members of the City Council.

The report makes persuasive arguments for the City of Berkeley to comprehensively address the infrastructure we all rely on. Key recommendations include ensuring cost- effective maintenance, multi-disciplinary project planning and design, support for

integration of innovative technologies, discipline in addressing the City’s structural financial deficits, and more transparent information and a greater focus on public engagement.

Join me in appreciating the invaluable work of this Task Force. Appendix B of the report lists both the 2020 and 2025 Task Force members.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications to sharing this report. However, the report does offer information and recommendations that members of the City Council may consider in our deliberations regarding future infrastructure financing.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no environmental impacts associated with sharing this report. However, the report does call for major actions and expenditures that could have significant impacts on the City’s environmental sustainability.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Adena Ishii
510-981-7100
Attachment A: Realize Vision 2050: An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure

1 MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Adena Ishii
City of Berkeley
FROM: Ray Yep, Co-chair
Margo Schueler, Co-chair
Mayor Ishii’s Realize Vision 2050 Task Force
SUBJECT: Realize Vision 2050:

An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure DATE: October 23, 2025
Dear Mayor Ishii:

We are writing to thank you for convening the Mayor’s Realize Vision 2050 Task Force. On behalf of the entire Task Force, we appreciate the opportunity to provide our expertise and knowledge of Berkeley to support your leadership to address the City of Berkeley’s infrastructure needs.

The Task Force met several times during this year and produced a concise report with details in appendices.

We are proud to provide you with the Task Force’s report: An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure. We believe that our recommendations are comprehensive and include considerations on integrated planning, using new technologies, improving maintenance, providing new funding to address needs, and better engagement with the public. Our updated vision for Berkeley’s infrastructure in the future is:

Our City is an eco-city. Our streets are significant contributors to our resilience, which should incorporate technologies such as sustainable, permeable surfaces that work with nature. All City departments and partner agencies coordinate seamlessly to manage infrastructure as one interconnected system. Greenery, native flora, and urban wildlife are fully and rightfully integrated into the city’s design, making Berkeley a living ecosystem where infrastructure and nature thrive together. The City maintains systems that enable continuous adaptation of infrastructure to evolving fire safety, traffic safety and climate resilience needs, ensuring a safe and sustainable future for all.

The Task Force recommends these top 5 actions:

A. Have a Unified Approach Across City Departments and Other Agencies – All parts of the City must work together effectively to plan for and to implement improvements to our infrastructure, as well as collaborate with other infrastructure agencies.

B. Prepare an Infrastructure Program Plan – We recommend preparing an Infrastructure Program Plan by Spring 2026, in conjunction with an updated Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and the next budget, to help the City Council discuss the timing and what should be included in a future funding measure. This should be sensitive of the City’s current budget constraints. Therefore, a

2 prioritization process is critical, using Envision criteria, should be included to address the $2+ billion of infrastructure needs.

C. Implement an Asset Management Program (AMP) – Support the ongoing implementation of a life cycle maintenance management program, commonly called an Asset Management Program, that will keep our infrastructure working properly from their inception to the end of its useful life. We recognize that condition assessment work has started and the City’s NexGen asset management software is fully implemented. This start to an AMP is being embraced in the Public Works Department.

D. Gain Support for New Funding – New funding measures will be needed in the future. City Council should discuss public polling and funding options for a potential funding measure in 2026 or 2028.

E. Promote Urgency in Addressing Infrastructure – Improving our infrastructure needs to be treated with urgency as environmental stressors increase and our infrastructure ages. We need to use new technologies and engage the public.

Our task force members are available to continue to support you in implementing the recommended actions.

Appendices
A. Infrastructure needs in Berkeley
B. Realize Vision 2050 task force members
C. Realize Vision 2050 implementation plan
D. Future trends and drivers
E. Asset categories used for prioritization in the 2022 infrastructure program plan F. Glossary of terms

3 Realize Vision 2050:

An Update to Vision 2050 and Recommendations to
Address Berkeley’s Infrastructure
Introduction
The City of Berkeley’s (City) streets, storm drains, and sewers, date to the early decades of the 20th century.

Numerous civic facilities were built during the Great Depression to serve this fast-growing population, including Aquatic Park, the Rose Garden, Civic Center, and the Community Theater on the Berkeley High campus. A description of Berkeley’s complex infrastructure systems and how it is important to the quality of our lives is in Appendix A. In the five years since the City Council (Council) accepted the Vision 2050 report, our infrastructure has benefited from significant investments. However, climate change continues at an accelerating pace, construction costs have risen, national political changes threaten funding, and income disparity undermines our quest for equity. Locally, the threat of wildfire, sea level rise, storm intensity, rising temperatures increase stresses on our aging infrastructure.

To build upon previous efforts to focus on the City's infrastructure needs, Mayor Ishii organized the Realize Vision 2050 Task Force to review and update the previously completed Vision 2050 recommendations. The Task Force was comprised of subject matter experts who worked on the previous initiative along with new members to provide both continuity and new input to the process. For more information on the Task Force members, please refer to Appendix B.

What is Vision 2050?
Former Mayor Jesse Arreguin chose the year 2050, and
organized the Vision 2050 initiative, to reorient the
City’s infrastructure planning beyond a five-year
horizon. The initiative asked what steps must we take
now to address Berkeley’s aging infrastructure and
create a vibrant city for the next generation of Berkeley residents.

The initiative grew out of Measure R, approved by
voters in November 2018, advising the mayor to
engage a panel of citizen experts to identify and guide implementation of a plan to bring climate smart,
technologically advanced, integrated and efficient
infrastructure to support a safe, vibrant and resilient future for Berkeley. The City Council accepted the Vision 2050 report in 2020, which included the recommendations summarized in Table 1.

4 Table 1
Vision 2050 Recommendations
The
Realize 2050 Task Force reviewed the
Vision 2050 objectives and
developed an updated objective statement, as follows:

Our City is an eco-city. Our streets are significant contributors to our resilience, which should incorporate technologies such as sustainable, permeable surfaces that work with nature. All City departments and partner agencies coordinate seamlessly to manage infrastructure as one interconnected system. Greenery, native flora, and urban wildlife are fully and rightfully integrated into the city’s design, making Berkeley a living ecosystem where infrastructure and nature thrive together. The City maintains systems that enable continuous adaptation of infrastructure to evolving fire safety, traffic safety and climate resilience needs, ensuring a safe and sustainable future for all.

Building on Successes Underway
The City maintains an extensive portfolio of capital assets and infrastructure that contribute to the City’s vibrancy and enhance the community’s quality of life, including 215 miles of streets and 53 miles of bicycle infrastructure; 50 acres of Marina harbor, 54 parks, 63 play areas, 38 public restrooms, 4 community centers, 3 resident camps and 2 pools. The City has developed a detailed Electric Mobility Roadmap to achieve a fossil fuel-free transportation system, while simultaneously improving traffic safety towards its commitment to Vision Zero. Further, the City advances its street pavement condition through a long-term commitment to funding pavement maintenance and rehabilitation programs. In 2022, the Council adopted a Street Maintenance and Rehabilitation Policy, which supports the ongoing creation of the Five-Year

5 Paving Plan to support sustainable paving efforts. The Green Infrastructure Plan, Climate Action Plan, Electrification Strategy and upcoming Stormwater Master Plan all address elements of Berkeley’s infrastructure portfolio. The adopted 5- year (FY 2025 – FY 2029) CIP provides a sound basis for planning infrastructure improvements. The infrastructure categories in the CIP include:
 City facilities
 Equipment and fleet
 Information technology
 Parks, recreation and waterfront
 Sanitary sewers
 Storm drains
 Sidewalks
 Streets
 Transportation
 Other infrastructure
The CIP is a description of the condition of our infrastructure and their deficiencies. It is the “what” of our infrastructure. This Realize Vision 2050 Implementation Plan attempts to describe the “how”. We are proposing that an Infrastructure Program Plan be prepared to prioritize the work components; to consider funding options and to evaluate the organization and staffing needs to deliver the work. We are also proposing to implement a life cycle maintenance management program (Asset Management Program) so that our systems are kept at a proper operating condition. This type of coordinated and comprehensive approach to infrastructure management was started in 2021. The Public Works Department presented to Council: Turning Vision 2050 into Reality: Public Works Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2022, on March 16, 2021. That report stated:

This is the first CIP work session report to incorporate Vision 2050. In future iterations, the Vision 2050 elements and CIP will be intertwined so that neither is distinguishable from the other. A shorter version of the City’s CIP book will be produced and completed by May 15, 2021 titled Turning Vision 2050 into Reality:

CIP in Brief. That document will identify particular CIP projects with the Vision 2050’s values of equity, public health & safety, strong local economy, and resiliency & sustainability.

The Vision 2050 report stated that its focus is on infrastructure within the public right-of-way. It stated:

This report focuses on the infrastructure systems over, on, and beneath the public streets and right of ways.

Most of our current infrastructure systems are located here and they provide service to the largest number of people. We view this area as part of our Public Commons.

This was a good starting point and its focus led to the creation of the Sustainable and Accountable Funding for Equitable Street Transformation, Revitalization, Enhancements, and Essential Traffic Safety (SAFE STREETS) Initiative, or Measure FF. The task force continues to ponder the needs in the public right-of-way as the discussion expands to all the physical infrastructure needs in the City, including buildings, facilities, fleet and waste management. We will defer this question to the Public Works Department as they prepare the next update to the CIP.

6 Capital project funding comes from various sources including the discretionary General Fund (including the CIP Fund), as well as sources with spending and use restrictions comprising several special revenue funds, enterprise funds, grants and bonds. Important recent contributions to funding infrastructure improvements include:
 Measure T1 Infrastructure GO Bond: Measure T1 was approved by Berkeley voters in November 2016. It consists of General Obligation Bonds not- to-exceed $100 million, for use to repair, renovate, replace, or reconstruct the City’s aging infrastructure and facilities.  General Fund annual contribution of approximately $9.9 million to street paving.  Measure FF sidewalk and street repair parcel tax: Measure FF will provide an estimated $15 million annually for 14 years (estimated $267 million over the 14-year duration, including inflation) to improve streets, sidewalks, safety, and the environment. Berkeley voters passed Measure FF in November 2024.

During the first phase of the Measure T1 projects, between 2017-2022, the City invested $42.7 million on 40 priority projects. Combined with funding from grants and special funds, the City was able to invest $65.7 million in infrastructure improvements. During the second phase of Measure T1 projects, between 2021- 2026, the City plans to spend $60 million on 30 different projects. Examples of innovative projects completed by the City are shown in Appendix A

Prioritization Process for Infrastructure Improvements
The Public Works Department prepared an Infrastructure Program Plan in 2022 that was submitted to Council. The Plan provided information on outcome objectives, program elements, community input, the funding plan, prioritization criteria, program implementation, and program oversight and reporting. The Plan was prepared to provide the public with an understanding of the “big picture” for Vision 2050 in advance of voting for new funding. This approach was an improvement from prior approaches. The Plan described the work at the asset category level (see descriptions in Appendix E). It was not a project-by- project prioritization. That will happen after voters approve funding.

The work to improve all of Berkeley’s infrastructure systems is complex. An objective and understandable prioritization process is needed to sequence the work. A proposed scoring system is as follows:
 Envision criteria, 60% weighting
 Community input criteria, 40% weighting
The Vision 2050 report recommended the use of multi-criteria decision-making and suggested using the Envision criteria as a prioritization tool. The Envision framework includes 64 sustainability and resilience indicators organized around five categories: quality of life, leadership, resource allocation, natural world, and climate and resilience. Envision is now widely applied to civil infrastructure projects much in the way that LEED certification is applied to buildings. For more information, see www.sustainableinfrastructure.org. Other relevant criteria are in Berkeley’s Street Maintenance and Rehabilitation Policy. The City may add other criteria or consider other prioritization tools. This criterion is given a weighting of 60%.

7 The other criteria comprise community input from public polling, online feedback and community meetings. What the community wants for Berkeley is important and this criterion is given a weighting of 40%. The resulting criteria and score sheet is shown on Table 2.

Each asset category was rated using the score sheet and an initial scoring was completed by managers in the Public Works and Parks, Recreation and Waterfront departments in 2022. We recommend that City department leaders and subject matter experts conduct another scoring, as well as modifications they find necessary, to determine infrastructure prioritization.

The Realize Vision 2050 Implementation Plan
The current Task Force used a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis to review the Vision 2050 recommendations and to determine what is still relevant and what needs to be updated. We compared the conclusions of the SWOT analysis to the Vision 2050 recommendations and developed an updated set of goals and strategies. The following Realize Vision 2050 Implementation Plan describes 5 infrastructure goals, the strategies to implement them and the performance metrics. These are summarized below and are described in more detail in Appendix C.

Goal No. 1 – Improve our planning to realize Vision 2050 Table 2 – Prioritization Score Sheet
S

8 Improve infrastructure planning to be sure that our systems have a regular assessment of their condition and that deficiencies are identified and improvements needed are described. This should be done through scheduling updates to infrastructure master plans, integrating planning across City departments and using new AI tracking tools.

Strategies for achieving goal:

A. Implement the comprehensive planning policy in City departments.

B. Integrate project planning across City departments for all infrastructure capital project.

C. Involve the Planning Department to consider new policies that will help the City meet its climate action goals.

Performance metrics:
 Prepare a master schedule for preparing and updating planning studies by July 2026.  Department heads to coordinate planning during annual budget reviews.  Prepare a new policy by July 2026 for post disaster reconstruction to comply with the City’s climate action goals. An example is requiring the use of electrification instead of allowing for reconstruction using natural gas.

Goal No. 2 – Create a technology hub in the City
Create an organizational structure (i.e. a technology hub) where new infrastructure technologies can be identified, evaluated and utilized in the City’s projects. This will be shared among City departments and will link us closer with the academic resources nearby.

Strategies for achieving goal:

A. Collaborate with universities, research organizations, professional organizations and other cities for new technologies and approaches.

B. Apply new technologies and Envision processes on pilot projects to assess their usefulness in Berkeley.

C. Maximize the use of nature-based solutions and green infrastructure.

D. Establish parameters for the use of AI to provide efficiency in project preparation and implementation.

Performance metrics:
 Establish collaboration with U.C. Berkeley and U.C. Davis by April 2026.  Prepare a plan to incorporate new technologies, with an emphasis on green infrastructure, in the implementation of Measure FF by April 2026.

Goal No. 3 – Implement a life cycle maintenance management program Implement a program that will maintain our infrastructure systems from its inception to the end of its useful life (i.e. an Asset Management Program). This is a pro-active approach that will maintain operating efficiency and avoids unplanned failures.

Strategies for achieving goal:

A. Continue implementation of an AMP that will maintain infrastructure over its life cycle. This program shall include condition assessment, risk assessment and planned repairs and replacement.

We recognize that condition assessment work has started and the City’s NexGen asset

9 management software is fully implemented. This start to an AMP is being embraced in the Public Works Department.

Performance metrics:
 Establish an AMP steering committee by July 2026. The steering committee should include a representative from the Mayor’s office, City Manager’s office, Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment and Sustainability (FITES) Policy Committee and subject matter experts.
 Begin condition assessment of infrastructure systems by July 2026.  Implement an AMP for facilities, street paving, sidewalks and sewers by July 2027.  Prepare an annual maintenance plan by Q1 of each fiscal year and a report of the maintenance work completed by the following Q1 of the next fiscal year.

Goal No. 4 – Invest in our future
Invest in our future by providing funding to make the necessary infrastructure improvements and to create the organizational structure to deliver the infrastructure projects. The unfunded infrastructure need is approximately $2 billion.

Strategies for achieving goal:

A. Prioritize infrastructure needs using a multi-criteria scoring system that involves staff and public input. We recommend using the Envision criteria.

B. Conduct polling and evaluate funding options for a funding measure in 2026 or 2028.

C. Develop an organization structure and staffing needed to deliver the projects.

Performance metrics:
 City Council to conduct polling in early 2026 to evaluate public support for funding infrastructure improvements.
 City staff to develop a long-term strategy by Spring 2026 for the City’s bonding capacity and the scheduling of issuing bonds.
 Complete an Infrastructure Program Plan by Spring 2026. This will help with prioritizing the funding needs, will consider organizational requirements and other considerations.  City Council to discuss a funding measure in 2026 or 2028.

Goal No. 5 – Engage the Public
Improve public support by communicating effectively with the public and gain their trust and support for funding infrastructure improvements.

Strategies for achieving goal:

A. Provide more opportunities for the public to learn about infrastructure and to participate with decision making.

B. Communicate the City’s infrastructure work and project successes.

C. Hold workshops with U.C. Berkeley and other community organizations on engagement for Vision 2050.

D. Successfully implement Measure FF.

Performance metrics:
 Initiate public tours of infrastructure projects in April 2026 and hold a tour once a quarter.

10  Initiate an annual report to the public of public works success stories.  Hold a public kickoff meeting for Measure FF in 2026 Q1.  Develop a strategy to utilize social media more effectively by Spring 2026.

Recommended Next Actions
This report was prepared by a task force of dedicated subject matter experts. We hope that it will serve as a catalyst to implement an action plan to restore Berkeley’s infrastructure to a proper working condition and ensure core infrastructure is able to meet future challenges. We recommend the following actions by the Mayor and City leaders.

1. Inform Council of the Realize Vision 2050 Implementation Plan -- Lead: Mayor Ishii This report is submitted to Mayor Ishii. We recommend that this report be shared with City Council.

2. Communicate with applicable commissions and Council Policy Committees-- Lead: Mayor’s office We recommend that this report be presented to the FITES Policy Committee and the Health, Life Enrichment, and Equity & Community Policy Committee (HLEECS) and the following commissions:
 Transportation and Infrastructure commission
 Parks, Recreation and Waterfront commission
 Energy and Climate commission
 Zero Waste commission
 Commission on Disability
 Disaster and Fire Safety commission
 Commission on Aging

3. Consider a ballot funding measure in 2026 or 2028 -- Lead: Mayor Ishii, with City Council and City Manager
We recommend that City Council discuss a future ballot funding measure in 2026 or 2028. The discussion shall be coordinated with the Council’s budget and finance committee and the Finance Department. There are many considerations on the timing of the funding measure, including readiness and prioritization of the work, gauging public support with polling, the economy, other funding measures that will be on the ballot, and other factors.

4. Work on implementing the recommendations and report on its progress -- Lead: Public Works Department
We recommend that a core team be formed to implement the recommended actions. The team should be led by the Public Works Director. Progress reports shall be submitted to Council and commissions annually or as needed. The work shall include developing infrastructure prioritization, preparing an Infrastructure Program Plan, implementing an Asset Management Program and other activities.

5. Successfully implement Measure FF -- Lead: Public Works Department It is imperative that Measure FF get off to a good start and will achieve the goals stated in the ballot measure.

11 Appendix A
Infrastructure Needs in Berkeley
The Complexity of Berkeley’s Infrastructure Systems
Infrastructure keeps our city functioning. It is beneath our feet, over our heads and all around us. Some parts of this critical infrastructure are controlled by the City of Berkeley while other important components are controlled by our partners such as EBMUD, PG&E, AVA Community Energy, AC Transit, and BART.

Surface infrastructure is most familiar to everyone – and includes our streets, sidewalks and bikeways. The quality of these systems is very important for public safety, mobility for all people and the conduct of our daily lives.

Above the street are power and streetlight poles that support electric and communications hardware, while trees and plants invite us to slow down and enjoy life, providing habitat for our wildlife, sequestering carbon and water, cooling our streets, protecting pedestrians and improving the air we breathe. The future may see drones overhead delivering packages.

Beneath our feet is an extensive world of cables, pipes, tunnels and vaults providing essential services we rarely think about. This infrastructure delivers water and natural gas to our homes and businesses, and takes away storm water and sewage. It also hosts part of the electric and communications grids and Berkeley’s underground BART system.

Table A-1 summarizes the major infrastructure systems in Berkeley.

Major Infrastructure Systems in Berkeley
Infrastructure System Controlled by City Controlled by Others Streets, sidewalks, paths,
bikeways, and tunnels
216 miles of streets
300 miles of sidewalks
50 miles of paths and
bikeways
AC Transit buses
BART system
AMTRAK and trains
Taxis, Lyft, Uber and rideshare
ZipCar, Bicycles and Micro-Mobility
Power and communication
systems 7,000 street lights
PG&E, Ava electricity and natural
gas delivery systems
Private and Public
telecommunications and Internet
services
Parks, street trees and public
plantings
38,000 street trees
52 parks and play grounds
East Bay Regional Parks
Water supply system 11 creek watersheds EBMUD potable and recycled water
Sanitary sewers 380 miles of sewers EBMUD sewage treatment Table A-1
Major Infrastructure Systems in Berkeley

12 Major Infrastructure Systems in Berkeley
Infrastructure System Controlled by City Controlled by Others Stormwater system
93 miles of storm sewers, 4
miles of creek culverts and

0.5 miles of open creeks
6,000 storm drain facilities
Small privately developed culverts
and drains on private property
throughout the City
Solid waste management
7-acre transfer/recycling
station
Curbside collection services
Commercial food waste
collection
Alameda County landfill
Alameda County household
hazardous waste services
Alameda County construction &
demolition debris services
Public buildings 95 public buildings
BUSD Buildings, UC Berkeley
Buildings, Transportation Hubs e.g.

Bart Plazas, Berkeley City College
Berkeley marina Berkeley marina
Municipal pier
State of California
By building upon Berkeley’s resources and historic leadership on tough issues, we can meet the significant environmental and social challenges of the next decades. We have done it before: from the Key trolley line that linked San Francisco to Berkeley bringing growth and prosperity, undergrounding BART throughout our city to ensure that segregation did not impact our south Berkeley neighborhoods, bussing to provide equity in education, sustainable city recognition by the Rockefeller Foundation to our innovative and the award- winning Center Street Garage. Through thoughtful planning, new technologies, modernized management practices and innovative financing approaches, we can do it again.

The following are examples of innovative projects being carried out by the City.

Allston Way Permeable Paver Demonstration Project
Installed in 2014, the City implemented a full width one block long permeable pavement demonstration project on
Allston Way in downtown Berkeley. The project was
promoted by the Public Works Commission and was seen as a test of a long-lasting durable technology as compared to traditional asphalt paving. Using life cycle cost analysis, the total cost for the two alternatives is comparable over a 40- year life. Permeable pavement also has multiple benefits, including the infiltration of surface waters to replenish the groundwater, pre-filtering of contaminants in the
stormwater and attenuation of high stormwater flows. The project has been in use for over 10 years and is an example of applying innovative and green technologies to Berkeley’s infrastructure needs.

13 University Avenue Reconstruction at the Marina
With funding from Measure T1, the
Marina Roadway Project was completed
in 2023. Major improvements were made
to University Avenue (between the West
frontage road and Marina Blvd), Marina
Boulevard and Spinnaker Way. The
project included many innovations:
 Realigning University Avenue to
avoid the old railroad trestle
 Use of a roundabout to facilitate
traffic flow
 Permeable surface in the parking
area along Spinnaker Way
 Use of native vegetation
The project is an excellent example of innovation to provide long lasting use, mitigating environmental effects and providing better benefits to the public
Aquatic Park Roadway Improvements
It is the practice of the Parks, Recreation and
Waterfront Department to involve the public in
park maintenance, where feasible, and to hold a
Ribbon Cutting Special Event when a project is
completed. A good example was the Bolivar
Drive Landscape & Streetscape Improvements
Project.

The department also involves the community in
shoreline cleanups, tree planting, pollinator
gardens and dog park maintenance.

Multiple tree planting events were held at Aquatic Park. At one event 300 volunteers participated.

A suggested best practice by the City would be:
 To involve the public in projects where feasible
 To hold a ribbon cutting event to celebrate the completion of every infrastructure project What other innovations await us, in the not-too-distant future: delivery by drone, driverless cars, surface subways, air travel?
A key component of Vision 2050 must be to assure that the infrastructure serves the entire City, correcting many inequities in the distribution of resources from our past and provide a source of good, local jobs that can be equitably filled and provide excellent training for long-term employment opportunities.

14 Working together, we can design and build the new, resilient Berkeley that will serve our children and grandchildren for years to come and cost us less in the long run.

Improving the Quality of Our Lives
All decisions made in infrastructure planning must include how they will impact the community’s quality of life, today and in a sustainable future. There are many things to consider such as adding trees to both cool and beautify our streets and sidewalks; managing stormwater differently in areas with a higher water table; using alternate paving materials to reduce the heat-island effect; creating dry utility tunnels in lower lying areas; ensuring safety of elders and seniors during a heat wave; and much more.

In addition, with the projected increase in population, we need transportation systems that can move people more effectively throughout our community while also reducing our Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. While electric vehicles can help lower carbon emissions, they are not a panacea, partly because of the limited space available and also the issues of battery and vehicle production and disposal. It is also unknown what other alternative forms of transportation might emerge and how personal transportation behaviors might change, including artificial intelligence and autonomous vehicles.

It is important to provide more prioritized spaces for transit systems and safe, generous and lovely spaces for people walking or riding in wheelchairs, on bikes, on electric scooters and more. Many of these modes of transportation, such as walking, are proven to increase both physical and emotional health, while also fostering stronger community relations by increasing interactions in our Public Commons. This will also reduce automotive traffic for those who may need to use private vehicles. Regardless, infrastructure planning should be adaptive and nimble, to the greatest extent possible. Just look at how transportation and its related behavior have changed over the past 30 years.

Welcoming public spaces are important also as a destination for people to gather and connect for civic, commercial, cultural, educational and recreational purposes, building community with planned and spontaneous activities. This is increasingly important with growing loneliness and digital isolation.

If we want to increase the likelihood that our future infrastructure decisions will protect and enhance our quality of life, then we must ensure that quality of life considerations have equal, formalized footing with all the other factors that comprise our infrastructure decisions, and that they are part of an iterative, coordinated planning process that is adaptive and regularly updated as our demographics and behaviors change over time.

Our infrastructure is critical to our quality of life, including our health and social relationships. Strong, effective, and resilient infrastructure supports a higher quality of life, such as:
 Safe and efficient travel
 Healthy and joyful spaces to live, work, play, and connect with one another  Utilities, such as electricity, water and fast internet  GHG reductions and stormwater filtration through street trees and native plantings Core Values Guide our Planning
As we plan for an uncertain and changing future, our infrastructure decisions should be thoughtful and guided by a set of core community values.

● Equity – The equity core value is to ensure that the benefits of improved infrastructure are

15 distributed equitably throughout the entire community. Equity may mean that disadvantaged citizens with more pressing needs experience benefits sooner than others and receive benefits particularly tailored to their unique needs. For example, equity for street paving might move from equal allocation among council districts to paving streets of highest needs (i.e. areas of historic disinvestment, bicycle routes, areas of safety concerns, areas of heavy load conditions, etc.). ● Public health and safety – “Safety” means different things to different people. This core value considers safe and convenient access to greenspaces, public services, clean air, and our social support network, all of which can have a big impact on our emotional and physical health. Well planned infrastructure that is thoughtfully designed to address the needs of every user plays a critical role in strengthening the health and safety of the community. A good example of this is the Vision Zero program, which will move us from congested and dangerous street travel to safer street designs for all road users, including those trying to walk or bike. ● A strong local economy – A strong local economy provides resources to our citizens and creates an opportunity to build local skills and employment opportunities that support a diversity of people within Berkeley. Businesses are attracted to areas where there is easy, high-speed internet and other strong, modern infrastructure. Ensuring that Berkeley has the right amount of resources, distributed equally throughout the city, will support its population and can also reduce the amount of carbon-producing travel.

● Resiliency and sustainability – “Resilience” refers to systems and structures that are able to recover quickly from temporary and, sometimes, catastrophic events. For example, we need to consider what changes we need to make so that Berkeley can recover quickly from a major earthquake, wildland fire and the inevitable sea-level rise. “Sustainability” refers to the ability to minimize our impacts on the environment while still supporting biodiversity and the survival of other ecosystems. Both resiliency and sustainability are important to maintain our quality of life and our planet over the long-term.
● Joyful community – this includes the creation and support of public spaces where the community can come together, both formally and informally, to share and enjoy civic life, culture, arts, commerce and recreation. Joyful communities also support arts, cultural and community non- profits, and commercial businesses, that serve our diverse community, attracting local residents, workers and visitors. They also provide infrastructure in parks, streets and plazas, that enable the community to celebrate nature, beauty, culture and art that surprise and delight us in multiple ways.

Vision 2050 is asking all infrastructure projects to respect these core values and anticipate environmental and socio-economic impacts. Together, we can prepare for inevitable disasters before they occur, help reduce their impacts and protect our quality of life. Through this process and using the Vision 2050 framework, we can strengthen equity and inclusion in Berkeley, and enhance important determinants of our emotional and physical health while strengthening Berkeley as a place for joy and thriving.

A Street Corner View of Berkeley in 2050
Investing in infrastructure is not always an exciting prospect. The systems are not highly visible and the payoff often takes years. Stories can help us overcome our tendency to focus on what is short term and in front of us. The Vision 2050 Task Force used our core values and attempted to transport ourselves into the

16 future and tell a story about Berkeley in 2050. This story could have many other versions, and the future we create will depend on the plans and investments we make together in the years to come.

Picture yourself standing on a street corner in Berkeley in 2050. What will our city look like? Will our infrastructure adapt to make our lives safer, more productive and enjoyable? Hi, I’m Maria. It’s already a warm morning as I ride my bike down the bike path, calling out to neighbors who are walking their kids to school or getting ready for work. I continue down the street, thankful for the protected and pothole-free bike lanes. What a difference the safe streets initiative (Vision Zero) has made to bike and pedestrian safety! I’m glad that these new protected pathways are wide enough for first responder access in an emergency. I’m on my way to the South Berkeley co-op where my great aunt Lizzie lives. She is 85 and asked me if I would like to join her at a habitat restoration workshop at the updated Berkeley Marina. She wants to learn how to improve the shared open area in her community.

My watch pings to let us know that the accessible shuttle, now celebrating its 20th year of electrified operation, will pick us up in five minutes. After we board, I take a moment to check my phone and see that my home’s smart energy system has turned on my dishwasher and washing machine to take advantage of the strong output from our solar panels. It also notifies me that the window shades have been drawn on the sunny south side of the house.

As we stroll down the waterfront, we see people coming and going from the bustling ferry terminal. Aunt Lizzie stops for a moment to remember what this area was like before Berkeley restored the wetlands to help protect the waterfront from sea-level rise and storm surges. It is thrilling to see the snowy egrets hunting in the restored, climate-buffering wetlands.

On the way to lunch, we spot solar panels and wind turbines producing a significant portion of the city's power needs, and I particularly enjoy easy access to the strong secure Wi-Fi now available throughout the city. I am still trying to convince Aunt Lizzie to get an Easy Access watch, but she prefers the old method of text messaging on her phone.

After lunch, I return home and see the Berkeley Fire Department hard at work. They are inspecting homes in the neighborhood to be sure that debris is cleared away from our houses and that we are doing everything we can to prevent an urban wildland fire. It’s the time of year that the Diablo winds kick up. We are thankful for the City staff that has undergrounded the overhead wires on Ashby and other evacuation routes.

At around 4 pm, my friend Devin knocks on the door – time for our outdoor concert downtown. Fortunately, the plaza has lots of benches and tables in the shade or we certainly wouldn’t be here! Summer and fall temperatures have been steadily rising in Berkeley over the last few decades. We pick our favorite spot under a leafy oak tree, close to the Mist Maker and watch children playing in the interactive fountain. It’s all recycled water, so we don’t worry about wasting water in this long-lasting drought. We have a fun time shopping at local craft vendor booths, delight in getting ice cream from a local merchant. And we have a great time catching up with neighbors that we have not seen in a couple years.

After the concert, Devin and I head over to the nearby park for our Tai Chi class. At the corner, we notice a neighbor with his young children pressing the “Extra Time to Walk” button. It’s so much safer having a little extra time to cross between the high-visibility crosswalk demarcation. After class, we walk to the shuttle stop in the soft down-glow of LED lights, mounted hip-level on the pathway’s stanchions. New rain gardens now prevent those flooded intersections and provide a little green oasis at every other corner. Devin and I

17 look forward to the cool evening breezes. As we watch the moon rise over the East Bay hills, we feel fortunate to live in Berkeley where, over the past 30 years, the city started implementing long-term changes that make such a positive impact to our quality of life. Berkeley is still an amazing and charming city that we are proud to call home.

18 Appendix B
Realize Vision 2050 Task Force Members
Background Areas Task Force Member Affiliation
Project sponsors Adena Ishii
Terry Taplin
Matt Nichols
Terrance Davis
Mayor of Berkeley
Councilmember, District 2
Mayor’s advisor on infrastructure
Public Works Director
Task force leads Ray Yep
Margo Schueler
Co-chair
Co-chair
Creating a safe and
vibrant Berkeley
Former Vision 2050 task force:
 Karen Parolek
New members:
 John Caner
 Weldon Bradstreet
Former Transportation & Infrastructure
commissioner
Downtown Business Association
Disaster & fire safety commissioner
Environmental
challenges
Former Vision 2050 task force:
 Kristina Hill
 Margo Schueler
New members:
 Alison LaBonte
 Igor Tregub
 Olga Bolotina
U.C Berkeley professor of environmental planning
Vision 2050 Co-chair
Energy & climate commissioner
Councilmember, District 4
Chief of Staff to Councilmember Tregub
Technology trends Former Vision 2050 task force:
 Sachu Constantine
 John Elliott
New members:
 Kenichi Soga
 Chrise de Tournay Birkhahn
Vote Solar
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
UC Berkeley professor of civil engineering
Zero Waste commissioner
Financing and
management topics
Former Vision 2050 task force:
 Gordon Wozniak
 Sophia Skoda
 Ray Yep
New members:
 Dan Lindheim
Former Councilmember, District 8
EBMUD
Vision 2050 Co-chair
U. C. Berkeley Goldman School professor

19 Appendix C
Realize Vision 2050 Implementation Plan
Realize Vision 2050 Implementation Plan
The following Implementation Plan describes 5 infrastructure goals (i.e. desired outcomes), the strategies to implement them, challenges to overcome, specific action items and the performance metrics. These are crafted to be near term, actionable and to produce tangible results.

Infrastructure Goal No. 1 – Improve Our Planning to Realize Vision 2050 Improve infrastructure planning to be sure that our systems have a regular assessment of their condition and that deficiencies are identified and improvements needed are described. This should be done through scheduling updates to infrastructure master plans, integrating planning across City departments and using new AI tracking tools.

Strategies for Achieving Goal

1. Implement the comprehensive planning policy in City Departments.

2. Integrate project planning across City departments for all infrastructure capital project.

3. Involve the Planning Department to consider new policies that will help the City meet its climate action goals.

Challenges to Overcome
Adopted plans are not systematically reviewed and
updated on a regular basis to determine opportunities
for integration or innovation.

Environmental stressors are changing fast and need to
be incorporated in planning.

Planning should be integrated across City departments.

Also, there are many plans that compete for resources
and staff capacity for implementation.

Action Items

1. Prepare a list of the planning documents used by the Public Works and Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Departments. Create a master schedule for when these should be prepared or updated. Provide rationale on the issues that would trigger an update.

2. City department heads shall meet regularly to discuss coordination on planning studies. The discussion shall include environmental stressors, priority issues, integration issues and other topics.

Performance Metrics
 Prepare a master schedule for preparing and updating planning studies by July 2026.  Department heads to coordinate planning during annual budget reviews.  Prepare a new policy by July 2026 for post disaster reconstruction to comply with the City’s climate action goals. An example is requiring the use of electrification instead of allowing for reconstruction using natural gas.

20 Infrastructure Goal No. 2 – Create a Technology Hub in the City Create an organizational structure (i.e. a technology hub) where new infrastructure technologies can be identified, evaluated and utilized in the City’s projects. This will be shared among City departments and will link us closer with the academic resources nearby.

Strategies for Achieving Goal

1. Collaborate with universities, research organizations, professional organizations and other cities for new technologies and approaches.

2. Apply new technologies and Envision processes on pilot projects to assess their usefulness in Berkeley

3. Maximize the use of nature-based solutions and green infrastructure.

4. Establish parameters for the use of AI to provide efficiency in project preparation and implementation.

Challenges to Overcome
Post Covid trends, the emergence of AI, and other issues are changing the workplace.

Staff vacancies and heavy workload limit the time to
conduct research on new technologies.

Action Items

1. Establish collaboration with universities to create a learning environment and to access new technologies.

The collaboration shall include:
 U.C. Berkeley Center for Smart Infrastructure -- The center develops and tests emerging technologies such as intelligent systems and networks, remote sensing and monitoring, and data analytics for decision-making. The center has a computer simulation and data analytics facility to examine the resiliency of infrastructure systems.
 U.C. Davis Pavement Research Center -- Dedicated to providing knowledge, the Pavement Research Center uses innovative research and sound engineering principles to improve pavement structures, materials, and technologies. There is also expertise on the use of life cycle cost analysis.

The collaboration may include advice on infrastructure projects, the involvement of student interns and other topics.

2. Utilize the Envision sustainable infrastructure framework, use pilot projects and use life cycle cost analysis to apply new technologies. An example is the applicability of permeable pavement to improve street surface durability and to meet stormwater permit requirements.

Performance Metrics
 Establish collaboration with U.C. Berkeley and U.C. Davis by April 2026.  Prepare a plan to incorporate new technologies, with an emphasis on green infrastructure, in the implementation of Measure FF by April 2026.

21 Infrastructure Goal No. 3 – Implement a Life Cycle Maintenance Management Program
Implement a program that will maintain our infrastructure systems from its inception to the end of its useful life (i.e. an Asset Management Program). This is a pro-active approach that will maintain operating efficiency and avoids unplanned failures. We recognize that condition assessment work has started and the City’s NexGen asset management software is fully implemented. This start to an AMP is being embraced in the Public Works Department.

Strategies for Achieving Goal

1. Implement an Asset Management Program (AMP) that will modernize the way that we evaluate, maintain, and replace infrastructure over its life cycle. Components of an AMP include:
 Asset inventory
 Condition assessment of assets
 Setting level of service
 Risk assessment
 Scheduling repairs and replacement
 Cost projections
Challenges to Overcome
The City has limited resources to complete
comprehensive maintenance.

There is limited forecasting of needed maintenance,
repairs, and rehabilitation.

The organization and community require education and
buy-in to shift its paradigm on capital investments to
make AMP part of the regular funding allocation
decision making process
Action Items

1. Organize an AMP steering committee that includes a representative from the Mayor’s office, City Manager’s office, FITES committee and subject matter experts.

2. Initially implement an AMP for facilities, street paving, sidewalks and sewers.

3. Prepare annual maintenance reports and share with the community to monitor progress and support ongoing education.

4. Analyze cost details on innovative projects and compare costs/benefits to standard operations and infrastructure costs, such as:
 Permeable pavers vs. asphalt paving
 Stormwater basins and bioswales vs conventional storm drain piping Performance Metrics
 Establish an AMP steering committee by July 2026.
 Begin condition assessment of infrastructure systems by July 2026.  Implement an AMP for facilities, street paving, sidewalks and sewers by July 2027.  Prepare an annual maintenance plan by Q1 of each fiscal year and a report of the maintenance work completed by the following Q1 of the next fiscal year.

22 Infrastructure Goal No. 4 – Invest in Our Future
Invest in our future by providing funding to make the necessary infrastructure improvements and to create the organizational structure to deliver the infrastructure projects. The unfunded infrastructure need is approximately $2 billion.

Strategies for Achieving Goal

1. Prioritize infrastructure needs using a multi-criteria scoring system that involves staff and public input. We recommend using the Envision criteria.

2. Conduct polling and evaluate funding options for a funding measure in 2026 or 2028.

3. Develop an organization structure and staffing needed to deliver the projects.

Challenges to Overcome
Measure T1 funding is almost exhausted. Measure FF
and dedicated enterprise funding is insufficient to fulfill the $2+ billion of unfunded infrastructure needs.

There is a current high staff workload and broad
community priorities that make prioritization
challenging with limited resources.

A review of organizational structure, funding priorities, and investments in technology is needed to address the
large capital needs.

Limited Envision knowledge and certification of City
staff or consultants.

Action Items

1. Complete the Infrastructure Program Plan that was prepared in 2022 for prioritizing infrastructure improvement needs. This shall incorporate recent infrastructure planning studies, such as for the transfer station and recycling center and the civic center improvements.

2. Prepare a recommendation for an infrastructure ballot funding measure in 2026 or 2028.

3. Evaluate the organization of other cities implementing major capital programs and adapt the learning to Berkeley’s needs. Include training of staff on the use oof Envision.

Performance Metrics
 City Council to conduct polling in early 2026 to evaluate public support for funding infrastructure improvements.
 City staff to develop a long-term strategy by Spring 2026 for the City’s bonding capacity and the scheduling of issuing bonds.
 Complete an Infrastructure Program Plan by Spring 2026. This will help with prioritizing the funding needs, will consider organizational requirements and other considerations.  City Council to discuss a funding measure in 2026 or 2028.

23 Infrastructure Goal No. 5 – Engage the Public
Improve public support by communicating effectively with the public and gain their trust and support for funding infrastructure improvements.

Strategies for Achieving Goal

1. Provide more opportunities for the public to learn about infrastructure and to participate with decision making.

2. Communicate the City’s infrastructure work and project successes.

3. Successfully implement Measure FF.

Challenges to Overcome
The public lacks trust in the City’s ability to complete projects and provide transparency on the status.

The public lacks knowledge of current work being
accomplished and completed projects.

The public did not approve Measure L. There is a sense of the public feeling tax fatigue.

Action Items

1. Provide more opportunities for the public to learn about infrastructure and to participate with decision making.

2. Communicate the City’s infrastructure work and project successes.

3. Hold workshops with U.C. Berkeley on community engagement for Vision 2050

4. Successfully implement Measure FF.

Performance Metrics
 Initiate public tours of infrastructure projects in April 2026 and hold a tour once a quarter.  Initiate an annual report to the public of public works success stories.  Hold a public kickoff meeting for Measure FF in 2026 Q1.  Develop a strategy to utilize social media more effectively by Spring 2026.

24 Appendix D
Future Trends and Drivers
Environmental Challenges
In the past we have planned for sustainability by trying to match land uses to the building capacity of a site.

We have planned for resilience by seeking to increase our capacity to recover quickly from events like earthquakes, fires, and temporary flooding. We have begun to plan for sustainability by trying to minimize our impacts on the environment, while supporting biodiversity and other ecosystem services. In our new era of infrastructure planning, planning will have to contend with changes in the environment that we had not previously foreseen.

Our City has declared a Climate Emergency. According to the 4th California Climate Assessment, new climate conditions will lead to: more frequent more severe heatwaves and intense precipitation events; major fires; reduce our air quality and regional biodiversity; and gradually flood the coastal highways, parks, landfills/toxic sites and neighborhoods of cities around the Bay Area. Road systems, sewer systems, new construction, and land use decisions will need to adapt to this changing environment. The 5th California Climate Assessment will be completed in 2026 with data indicating that climate change, impacts and hazards increasing in intensity.

Increasing heat, rainfall extremes, wildfires and rising sea levels, as well as increasing population density will affect where people live, public health and will increase maintenance costs. The City needs a vision that reflects how these trends are connected. Our shared public investments, policies and actions must work to mitigate climate impact and adapt to long-term environmental changes, as well as build our resilience to short-term events, such as a heat waves, wildfires and extreme precipitation.

Increasing Heat
Since Vision 2050 was adopted in 2020, the past five years have been increasingly the hottest years on record. Hotter air leads to more intense rainfall, drier vegetation and air quality problems that impact people’s health. More heat means higher maintenance costs and lower performance of our infrastructure.

Berkeley can expect continuing increase in air temperature, along with boom-and-bust rainfall years.

Observations since 1950 show a decrease in the number of foggy days. In dry years, Berkeley has, and will, experience less fog and lower humidity and more days with reduced air quality. This ongoing change will cause an increase in the mortality of trees that cool our homes and remove carbon dioxide from our air throughout the city. It is resulting in more frequent days of higher air temperatures and energy demand in buildings. Dead and dry vegetation is more dangerous as a fuel for fire in the hills of Berkeley. Increased air temperatures can also lead to increased health problems, will impact outdoor recreation and can lead to death for those who are medically fragile. Additionally, there is evidence that hotter streets need more frequent maintenance, and that they are associated with breaks in underground water pipes.

25 Significant Changes in Precipitation
“Boom and bust” years — both very wet and very dry conditions — are a certainty in the coming decades.

Our largest winter storms, called “atmospheric rivers,” have become more intense. High intensity storms challenge Berkeley’s stormwater system and lead to more and deeper potholes as well as increased flooding. Longer droughts — like the 2012-16 drought which led to the most severe moisture deficits in the last 1,200 years — will parch our precious parks and open spaces. As rainfall totals decrease, higher temperatures and longer heatwaves will dry out vegetation significantly, increasing fire danger and degrading streetscapes and green areas.

Warmer temperatures are predicted to make a substantial change in the Sierra snowpack, which is the source of the vast proportion of EBMUD’s water supply. Under a high emissions scenario in California’s 4th Climate Assessment, the average overall Sierra snowpack will decline by 20% in the next few decades, 30%- 60% in mid-century, and over 80% in the late 21st century. Consecutive years of low or no snowpack are especially worrisome. In addition, warmer temperatures are producing a shift to earlier snowmelt in the Sierra, posing storage and supply problems for high water demand periods that occur in hot summers and falls.

Wildland Fire Risk
2024 saw very hot months in California. The drought of 2011-2017 killed over 100 million trees in California.

Seventeen of the twenty most destructive wildfires in the state’s history have occurred since 2015. destroying over 1 million acres, thousands of homes, and taking dozens of lives. The IBHS white paper "Return of Conflagration to the Built Environment" examines how modern suburban communities, especially those in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), are increasingly vulnerable to wildfire-driven conflagrations due to factors such as drought, high winds Development adapts to our higher fire risk climate by improving vegetation management to create defensible space, creating viable escape routes in high hazard areas, requesting that residents voluntarily evacuate at risk neighborhoods – before a fire starts - when Berkeley experiences extreme fire weather, expanding pre-fire education and outreach programs, improving emergency warning systems, undergrounding overhead utility wires, creating “smoke-free” community centers during major smoke events, and taking other significant steps to protect our residents.

Additionally, the City of Berkeley adopted the EMBER (Effective Mitigation for Berkeley’s Ember Resistance) Program in 2025 to focus on specific neighborhoods where more enhanced fire prevention methods should be implemented. Among those methods is Zone Zero, where nearly all hazardous vegetation is removed from a zone extending out to a five-foot perimeter around structures. Considering the January 2024 Palisades Fire and Eaton Fire, local fire officials learned that concentrating fire readiness in Berkeley’s most vulnerable hillside neighborhoods can enhance wildfire safety for the entire city. This is the focus of EMBER.

For the sake of life safety, it is of critical importance that vegetation must be addressed in the Berkeley Hills- in Tilden Regional Park as well as in the city itself. Parking regulations for fire season should be developed that keep evacuation routes clear for residents and for emergency vehicles. Alert systems must be expanded and tested regularly. Evacuations must be practiced so that people know what will be in their “go bag,” as well as where they are going and how they are going to get there. Residents need to practice plans that are realistic for unexpectedly blocked streets, low light, and other extreme conditions.

Evacuation plans must work with different mobility needs, including children and people with walking disabilities.

26 A critically important action will be to work with PG&E, the California Public Utilities Commission and other agencies to ensure that any Public Safety Power Shutoff activity (PSPS) does not block Berkeley’s emergency services, keep basic infrastructure from functioning or adversely affect residents who require electric power in their homes for medical support. This work will be essential as Berkeley makes a major transition from natural gas to electricity for buildings and from gasoline-powered cars to electric vehicles.

Sea Level Rise
Both California’s 4th Climate Assessment and the State of California’s recent guidance to public agencies on sea level rise tell us that Berkeley can expect to see significant sea level changes over the next 20-80 years, and beyond. Although no one knows exactly how much and how rapidly the Bay will rise, the State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance (2024) has provided a range of estimates to show the low, intermediate- low, intermediate, intermediate-high, and high risk scenarios.

By 2050, the State has identified a range of likely sea level rises between 0.5 to 1.2 feet. By 2100, many scientists believe that the amount of carbon and methane in the atmosphere today has committed us to an eventual rise in sea level up to 6.6 feet. As scientists have learned more about the dynamics of ice sheet melting, they have developed scenarios for even greater levels of sea rise until some equilibrium is reached between the elevated levels of CO2 present and the amount of heat trapped in the ocean.

California’s Sea Level Rise Policy guidance recommends that local jurisdictions consider multiple Sea Level Scenarios, “intermediate”, “intermediate-high”, and “high” scenarios when planning facilities.

Governments should then consider the risks associated with various Sea Level Scenarios and determine their tolerance for, or aversion to, those risks (i.e., over or underestimating the amount of sea level rise) to inform which of the scenarios to use in project infrastructure planning. For investments meant to last beyond 50 years, the State suggests a medium-high risk aversion category, for which planning to be resilient to the intermediate-high scenario is recommended. Many scientists think that we will know a lot more about which sea level trend is occurring in the next decade or two.

We need to consider the expected lifetime of our infrastructure, as well as the rate and timing of sea level change. It is imperative that new investments in longer lived assets are designed to withstand potential high sea level rise.

Rising coastal groundwater, and any pumping that happens on public or private property, will create impacts before tidal flooding. As groundwater rises, sewers can be infiltrated and lose capacity to function.

Earthquake liquefaction zones will likely expand in extent. And contaminated soils may be mobilized in ways that put people at risk of indoor air contamination, as well as increase the risk of Bay pollution. Low- lying streets are vulnerable to groundwater flooding, like the combination of rain and groundwater that floods Ashby Avenue where it passes under the railroad near I-880. “Compound flooding” - in which rain, groundwater and high tides combine to cause more serious flooding- needs to be studied, rather than each individual source of floodwater alone. Flood maps are all underestimating future risk if they do not consider the potential for compound flooding to occur. The City’s transfer station at Gilman Street will be vulnerable to sea level rise.

Coastal parks and bike trails will be affected – both by sea level rise directly, storm surges increasing in frequency and intensity, and by increased erosion from wave action that reaches higher areas of the land.

This potential impact will push us to decide where we locate public access (and private facilities that pay fees to the City), and where improvements will be lost or need to be reconfigured. Intertidal wetlands will

27 be lost unless investments are made to raise the surface elevation of the wetlands or they are allowed to migrate inland onto lands that are now roads, parking, or other uses.

Earthquakes and Landslides
Berkeley’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies earthquake and rainfall triggered landslides as likely hazards with catastrophic severity of impact.

Most of our thinking about acute land changes centers on the destruction of hundreds of building structures. However, the impacts to our infrastructure range from rupture and blockage of water, sewer and gas pipelines to toppling of power and communication poles and overhead structures and could result in the loss of power for weeks and destruction of 5,000 water lines, most of which will not be repaired for months. Streets and sidewalk buckling and failure has the potential to impede emergency responders and evacuation routes. Although the earthquake fault runs through the eastern portion of Berkeley and there may be extensive damage from shaking and landslides, most of the seismic vulnerable buildings are in central, south and west Berkeley. In addition, the gas pipelines and transportation network are centered in central, south & west Berkeley.

The reality of such a cataclysmic event will result in hundreds of people that will be forced to move out of town or need to live in shelters. School will close. Businesses will fail. Plans must be developed and action taken soon to make the city as resilient as possible in the face of these threats.

Combined Effects
Sea level rise is very likely to produce unexpected impacts through networks of cause-and-effect. The US Geological Survey has shown that rising sea levels will cause groundwater to rise within a few miles of the shoreline. Loss of marshes will devastate biodiversity historically hosted in vegetated bay shores. This change could flood sewer and stormwater lines and basements. It could also move soil and cause the spread of groundwater pollution, creating serious health threats. Other concerns are possible corrosion of the pipes that hold underground electrical and communication utilities. Street pavement is more prone to cracking in a high-groundwater environment. High groundwater can also increase the risk of extreme shaking in an earthquake, resulting in greater damage to property and loss of life.

We can adapt to this challenge, but we need to understand the cause-and-effect network connections to determine the best investment and design strategies.

While other lower lying communities around the Bay will experience serious impacts from sea level rise before Berkeley, we will all be affected within the life span of many of our infrastructure investments. As Berkeley seeks to redevelop our Marina and Bay Parks opportunities abound for increased adaptation and resilience against sea level rise. regional wastewater, transportation, refineries and pipelines, will require significant adaptive investment. Many regional facilities will need to be relocated. Our bay shoreline, roadways and western neighborhoods already suffer flooding impacts of rising sea and groundwater levels when combined with severe storms and king tides. Long term infrastructure investments should be evaluated frequently against evolving sea level rise data and projections.

There is not one answer for Berkeley
Our infrastructure corridors connect us, providing transportation, water, waste, power and communication networks. Berkeley grew in the 19th century along the shipping corridors on the bay with the pier and the railroads moving goods and people north and south from farms and factories. With the establishment of

28 the University, the center of town shifted east from Oceanview, at the shore, and Berkeley developed the 20th century grid of water, sewer, gas, telephone and power along the streets from the bay to the hills.

From an infrastructure and climate point of view, Berkeley has three different “zones” each with its own unique challenges. These different zones of Berkeley have unique needs. Infrastructure planning and implementation must recognize historic and present inequalities, and avoid using “equality” (i.e., giving everyone the same thing) as a substitute for “equity” (which is making sure people have access to what they need).

● The hills have the highest risk of fires and landslides. Earthquakes on faults (e.g. Hayward fault) in the hills will result in land displacement across fault lines and seismic shaking. Steep slopes and narrow, winding roads make evacuation difficult. Adaptation will require careful management of vegetation, and finding opportunities to shelter in place when evacuation is impractical. Water pressure needs to be high for fire-fighting, and electric utilities should be placed underground.

● The flatlands have the highest flooding risks as climate change and development increase runoff from higher elevations. Rising sea levels and groundwater will keep water from seeping into the soil and flowing into the Bay. Poorer air quality impacts neighborhoods along Interstate 880, University, Ashby and San Pablo Avenues due to heavy and increasing traffic. Below surface infrastructure will need to be waterproofed and sensored to locate breaks and leaks with seismic events, and the already greatest risk of seismic shaking in the flats may increase to extremes as groundwater rises.

These neighborhoods have the least amount of tree canopy yet they have the highest traffic impacts. Efforts should be made to increase green infrastructure to reduce and disperse the airborne particulate matter of carbon emissions in heavily impacted traffic corridors.

● Downtown and South Berkeley are particularly vulnerable to heat and has high traffic demand due to population density. Pedestrians and bicycles must have safer streets and sidewalks. Additionally, these neighborhoods need greener infrastructure (trees and rain gardens) to help manage both storm water and air quality. Since they sit at the base of the hills, storm water and groundwater can emerge as springs and flood basements. Infrastructure and sidewalks need to be enlarged and re- designed to handle growth and development, support street-tree canopies, and become more people-friendly.

Technology Trends
Technology affects the way we use Berkeley’s infrastructure and is challenging the ability of existing infrastructure to meet future needs. While technology offers many opportunities to improve infrastructure, the City will need to work proactively to:
 Explore, understand and incorporate new beneficial technologies  Take steps to prevent potential negative impacts
 Ensure that benefits of improved technology are shared widely and equitably We consider seven areas of technology that will affect the services provided by the City: buildings, energy, transportation, information technology, water, waste reduction and management, and emergency services.

Technology in each of these areas has changed dramatically, and will continue changing over the next 25 years. While it is impossible to predict exactly what technologies will be available in five years, let alone 25 years from now, we can identify general trends and the challenges they pose to current infrastructure approaches. Our local partners, including UC Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, will be

29 important collaborators in this process to help the City stay abreast of current research, projections, and innovations.

Buildings
Berkeley has approximately 50,000 residences, over 3.4 million square feet of commercial building space, and approximately 100 public buildings within the direct control of the City. Taken together, these buildings account for just under 40% of the GHG emissions in Berkeley.

To meet state climate action targets through 2050 (and for the City to meet its Climate Action Plan goals), these buildings will need to become more energy and water efficient. They will also need to move off natural gas and rely on the increasingly clean electricity grid, which the state has committed to make zero carbon by 2045. This electrification effort involves replacing equipment like water heaters and furnaces with heat pump technologies, using electric induction cooktops, and relying on some limited electric resistance heating (e.g. in kitchen ovens). It will also involve taking steps to improve efficiency by adding insulation, sealing up cracks, and upgrading windows. Homeowners, designers, and contractors will need to learn about new products on the market and be part of this transformation in our buildings. In many cases, electrical panels will need to be upgraded to support electrification. The City can help develop a local market of installers for electrified technologies and help streamline permitting processes.

Buildings will increasingly include energy generation and energy storage that have been traditionally taken care of by central utilities. We will be seeing more solar panels batteries, and if current state and federal policies change, microgrids., and batteries. Our buildings may also be the site of more distributed water- related services such as storm water and domestic water capture, water treatment, and reuse.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, we have noticed significant shifts in work and shopping patterns. There are more vacant office and retail spaces in the City, creating a need to explore socio-technological solutions for effectively converting these office and retail spaces into residential areas or other purposes.

Transportation
Berkeley’s transportation networks - including roadways, sidewalks, bicycle and pedestrian bike paths, public transit systems, fleets, as well as shared and private automobiles - move people, goods and services around the City. These transportation activities account for about 60% of Berkeley’s GHG emissions. To meet climate mitigation targets, transportation will need to become electrified (or in some cases moved to alternative, zero-GHG emission fuels). Electrification will require new electric vehicle charging infrastructure distributed among private homes, commercial properties, and within the public rights-of-way.

Rapid changes in transportation technology, usage patterns and services are also likely to reduce the rate of private vehicle ownership and create changing demands for public infrastructure. For example, the proportion of physical space allocated to parking is likely to shift.

Transportation networks will have to support everyone - not just cars. “Complete streets” will enable a greater number of pedestrians and a variety of vehicle types, sizes and speeds to pass safely on the public roads and pathways. Private companies providing ride hailing services and micro-mobility solutions (such as pay-and-go bicycles, scooters, and cars) are more prevalent. There will be increasing demands for flexible public transportation solutions provided by our regional partners such as AC transit and BART to meet the diverse needs of the community and manage congestion.

A primary challenge for the City is that transportation technologies are significantly changing, altering the basic design and allocation of space within the public right-of-way. These changes in transportation modes

30 and demands impact congestion and pollution and will require that the City balance the needs of people’s quality of life with changes to their mobility.

Energy
Energy demands in the City of Berkeley include the production, distribution, storage and consumption of energy used to meet residential, and commercial, and industrial needs. This energy consumption accounts for about 40% of our community GHG emissions. As identified in the City’s Resilience Strategy and Climate Action Plan, Berkeley seeks an energy system that, by 2050, delivers carbon-free electricity across a highly distributed system. Multiple and multifaceted changes to existing infrastructure and its uses will be required to achieve carbon reduction goals. In general, these changes can be summarized as:  1) maximize energy efficiency, 2) electrify everything possible, 3) decarbonize and clean up the grid, 4) develop additional renewable (e.g., wind and solar) power sources on public land and 5) phase out use of fossil fuels.

While California has established a policy
framework that will achieve a carbon-free grid by
2045, Berkeley has the ability to achieve a local
carbon-free grid more quickly. The City has
significant control and influence over local energy
infrastructure and technology choices, particularly
for public and city assets. From developing solar
canopies over parking spaces in the public right-of-
way in the Berkeley Marina to providing incentives
for home electrification, including heat pump
technology and induction cooking, there are many
opportunities for the City to contribute to a
carbon-free future. In addition, there is great
potential for harnessing the wind power that pours
through the Golden Gate directly towards the Berkeley Marina. Wind power is complementary to solar as the wind often blows, when the Sun doesn’t shine. Embracing bird safe wind energy technologies will allow for development without further damage to our wild neighbors.

As impacts from wildfires become more commonplace, building more self-sufficiency and flexibility is an essential feature of Berkeley’s resilient clean energy future. Critical facilities and services are vulnerable to power shut-offs caused by fires or other disasters. The transition from natural gas to electricity for space heating, along with the increased demand for space cooling (including more data center demands), necessitates greater reliance on electricity alone. This shift requires more resilient solutions for electricity supply. Clean energy microgrids, capable of providing electricity even when the larger grid is down, must be prioritized on public health and safety facilities, and encouraged elsewhere in the city. They can work in parallel with the grid, contributing to our state and national GHG reduction goals, but also harness local clean energy resources to provide power during extended outages. There may also be opportunities to underground more of the infrastructure, improving local safety and upgrading switches, relays, transformers and other essential elements of the grid. Berkeley must continue to engage in statewide and federal advocacy where policy barriers exist to the implementation of distributed energy resources such as microgrids.

Information

31 By 2050, information flows in Berkeley will increase dramatically and information technologies such as artificial intelligence will affect our daily lives. Automobiles, trucks, appliances, communication devices, entertainment devices, information infrastructure components, lighting devices will be able to communicate with each other. Major infrastructure components -- road surfaces, structural elements of buildings, load-bearing components of bridges and towers, all piping and pumping infrastructure for water, wastewater, airflow and air conditioning, all cabling and energy transport infrastructure -- will gradually incorporate sensing and communication for real-time information. The City must incorporate plans to manage this explosion of information, ensure equal access, address security risks, and manage the potential impacts from increased energy and water consumption from computing. Some information technologies can quickly become obsolete, so any technology implementation must be planned and executed with potential adaptations in mind. Public concerns about harms from electro-magnetic spectrums must be addressed with the best evidence available and weighed against public benefits. Related to the undergrounding of electricity infrastructure and a “dig-once” policy, the City must find a way to facilitate more widespread deployment and use of the public right of way for fiber-optic conduit or whatever future permutations of the hard-wired information grid require. The City cannot rely on the private sector alone to provide bandwidth in a way that ensures broad and equal access.

Water
Water services encompass the complete hydrological cycle: rain and storm water, surface flows and containment, subsurface groundwater flows, clean water use, and wastewater distribution and treatment.

The primary technical challenge will be in renewing aging water infrastructure. The East Bay Municipal Utility District has a Pipeline Rehabilitation Program that will repair or replace water pipelines that are nearly a century old. Berkeley’s sewer pipelines are currently being repaired or replaced to reduce the amount of stormwater leaking into the system. New underground infrastructure assessment and replacement technologies are currently being developed for better economy and improved long-term reliability. This includes using new trenchless technologies, earthquake resilient pipelines, and data-driven assessment of pipeline longevity.

New opportunities for stormwater management lie with the use of green infrastructure (such as bio-swales and rain gardens) and the use of permeable surfaces. For example, permeable pavement offers multiple benefits, such as stormwater flow attenuation, trash capture that will improve water quality to the bay, and a longer lasting street surface.

In order to develop a sustainable water management strategy, increased efforts in wastewater treatment and reuse are anticipated. As we study the potential to provide supplemental water to our parks and median strips during drought conditions, there are opportunities to recharge with our groundwater by utilizing large residential and commercial buildings to install on-site wastewater capture and treatment systems.

Waste Prevention and Management
To be effective, waste management must address both upstream and downstream flows. In 2005, the City renamed its waste management division as the Zero Waste Division and established a goal of 90% diversion from landfill – a goal it has yet to meet. Diversion from landfill can be achieved through expanded practices of re-use, repair of existing goods, and effective recycling and composting services. While Berkeley continues to reduce the use of single-use products through ordinances and education, it will need to develop new policies, programs and infrastructure to meet its own goals, as well as those of state legislation mandates (SB 1383 that reduces greenhouse gas emissions by diverting organic waste from landfills and SB54 that prevents plastic pollution by requiring producers to ensure that plastic packaging

32 and food ware are recyclable or compostable). Increasing production of plastic and packaging from delivered goods will likely increase while unstable markets and lack of domestic recycling infrastructure will impede effective recycling of discards. Former off-shore markets that long recycled our materials (primarily China) no longer accept plastics, challenging local efforts due to weak domestic infrastructure. As technology for transportation and building continue to evolve, an influx of aging solar panels, batteries, and heat pumps/refrigerants are projected to enter the waste stream.

Waste permeates daily life - in homes, streets and public spaces. Improvement in waste management requires people to change their behaviors, and businesses to make upstream changes in the way products are designed and shipped, in order to facilitate a closed-loop system. Neither behavior nor product design are in the direct control of the City, though in its purview are bans of “bad actor” materials (food-service expanded polystyrene/styrofoam use was banned 1986). The challenge for the City will be to allocate and secure funding to rebuild the aging Transfer Station as an interactive, community-accessible center that includes reuse, repair, and education portals. New and evolving technology, including phone apps, AI and robotic sorting, will need to be incorporated. Berkeley must also continue to evolve its services to encourage development of more local opportunities to impact the amount of waste the City generates and collects (routes and public self-haul), and prioritize reuse, repair, improved recycling, and composting, all while supporting its workforce and local jobs.

Emergency Services
Fire, police, medical and mental health assets must be deployed to resolve inevitable conflicts, disasters and disruptions to city life. Particular care must be taken to ensure that Emergency Services have full access to the flow of information. The City may consider adopting advanced digital technology tools to create a Common Operational Picture (COP) that enhances communication among different organizations. These tools can be utilized not only during disaster events but also for the operation, maintenance, and renewal of the City’s infrastructure systems. The City can help connect the dots – just as the City’s Resilience Strategy recognizes the value of having solar generation technologies that can still be used when the power grid has gone down. However, new technologies can introduce risks and challenges when they are damaged during disasters, such as the disposal of burned electric vehicles and batteries after a wildfire. The city must prepare not only short-term emergency plans after major natural disasters but also effective functional recovery strategies to minimize long-term financial and social impacts. A primary challenge is continuing to engage Berkeley’s diverse population so that they are prepared and empowered in the event of everyday emergencies as well as those life-changing ones such as large earthquakes and wildfires.

Finance for the future
The City’s unfunded infrastructure need is over $2 billion. The infrastructure categories and the funding needs estimate will be updated in 2026 with the next edition of the City’s CIP. Capital project funding comes from various sources including the discretionary General Fund (including the CIP Fund), as well as sources with spending and use restrictions comprising a number of special revenue funds, enterprise funds, grants and bonds. Funding Sources Include:

 General Fund, CIP Fund
 Special Revenue Funds such as Measure BB Sales Tax (approved by Alameda County voters November 2014), Vehicle Registration Fee, State Transportation Tax (Gas Tax), Measure F (approved in November 2014 for parks facilities), Parks Tax, Playground Camp, Streetlight Assessment, UC Settlement
 Measure T1 Infrastructure GO Bond

33  Enterprise Funds such as Zero Waste, Marina, Sanitary Sewer, Clean Storm Water  Internal Service Funds such as Equipment Replacement Fund  Federal, State, and Local funds and grants
Methods to fund the improvements have been discussed in the Vision 2050 report, the Infrastructure Program Plan and with various City funding measures. We will defer a detailed evaluation of the options to the City’s Finance Department, Council’s Budget and Finance Policy Committee and subject matter experts.

Based on peer practices and Berkeley’s current assessed valuation growth, it is fiscally viable to issue a series of general obligation bonds totaling $250 – $300 million over the next 25 – 30 years, without breaching responsible debt thresholds. Doing so would allow the City to systematically address its backlog of infrastructure liabilities, minimizing cost escalation due to delays and creating a financially resilient public capital framework. In addition, Measure FF is demonstrating how financing infrastructure through parcel taxes is another viable option. This modifies the burden of who pays (i.e., removing funding from the perceived inequities from Prop 13-based assessed values) based on Prop 13) and lessens the interest costs of long-term bond issues.

Strategically leveraging investment earnings via a matching grant fund is a forward-looking mechanism that turns financial efficiency into external revenue, magnifying the City's capital resources. This model aligns with both fiduciary best practices and intergovernmental funding paradigms that increasingly prioritize local match capacity.

Geopolitical Landscape
Geopolitical and political forces directly shape Berkeley’s infrastructure needs and funding. Global shifts in trade, energy, and migration patterns influence material availability, population growth, and regional service demand, requiring infrastructure that can scale and adapt. At the same time, changes in federal and state leadership affect funding priorities, grant eligibility, and local revenue streams, while ballot measures and political cycles determine the timing and scope of investments. Mandates often arrive without full funding, creating compliance pressures and diverting maintenance resources. To remain resilient and competitive, Berkeley must maintain shovel-ready projects, align with evolving state and federal priorities, and demonstrate measurable equity and climate benefits. By diversifying revenue through bonds, impact fees, public-private partnerships, and regional collaborations—and maintaining transparency in reporting— the city can build public trust and sustain the long-term infrastructure investments needed to serve a growing population in an unpredictable global environment.

34 Appendix E
Asset Categories Used for Prioritization in the 2022
Infrastructure Program Plan
Outcome 1 – Have Safe and Good Quality Streets
Streets are Safer, More Sustainable, Improved to a Good Condition, and Maintained Having streets that are safer, use sustainable technologies, and are in “good” or better condition is a top priority from the community input, has been a subject of City audits, and is a priority of the Council. The asset categories to achieve this outcome are described below.

Asset Category 1.1 – Street Surface
The poor condition of Berkeley’s streets has been documented by the City Auditor’s report Rocky Road:

Berkeley Streets at Risk and Significantly Underfunded, by residents’ complaints, and by an overall low Pavement Condition Index (PCI). On a scale of 0 to 100, streets in a “good” condition have a PCI between 70 – 79. Berkeley’s streets are “at risk” with an overall average PCI of 57. From a community survey conducted in the fall of 2021, improving the condition of Berkeley’s streets is one of the community’s highest infrastructure priorities. The target is to improve Berkeley’s streets to a PCI of more than 70.

Asset Category 1.2 - Sidewalks
Most Berkeley residents use a sidewalk daily, and many of us much more. Sidewalks in 2050 will be an even more important part of the transportation network. They will accommodate and promote the City’s trees and healthy urban forest, serve users of all levels of ability and accessibility, and use materials that help filter stormwater and reduce surface temperatures. At present, the City faces a backlog of thousands of sidewalk repairs that have been requested by residents.

Asset Category 1.3 – Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans
Eighty percent of the collisions that result in deaths or severe injuries on our streets involve someone riding a bike or walking. Making our streets safer means prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian safety. This is especially important to help more residents and workers choose these fossil fuel-free active transportation modes, and is why Berkeley’s vision for the future of its transportation network is to be multi-modal, fossil- fuel free, and equitably accessed. The City has adopted the 2017 Bicycle Plan and the 2020 Pedestrian Plan, and has identified projects to help to bring the City closer to these safe and accessible multi-modal goals.

The City is transforming the City’s bicycle network into a low-stress experience with a goal of reducing motor vehicle conflicts and connecting cyclists with the most utilized portions of the City. At the end of the program, over 50 miles of city streets will comprise bikeways, with 15.8 miles of these streets being full bicycle boulevards that crisscross the City.

Asset Category 1.4 - Traffic Signals and Parking Meters In support of creating safe and accessible intersections, the City of Berkeley is planning upgrades to existing traffic signals, including detection at 67 locations, ADA accessibility, pedestrian push buttons at 103 locations, and battery back-ups at 124 locations. Replacements and upgrades of 2,100 parking meters and 240 pay stations require attention as well.

35 Outcome 2 – Protect the Environment
Infrastructure is Resilient, Protects the Environment, and is Adapted to Climate Change Impacts Global warming is a significant threat to communities globally and to the City of Berkeley. Berkeley’s 2009 Climate Action Plan, 2016 Resilience Strategy, and 2019 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan establish city-wide actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change impacts. The message is clear that the City’s infrastructure must be resilient to prepare the City for these risks. Key goals of the City’s climate action plans are to use energy more efficiently, transition to renewable energy as a power source for both buildings and transportation, improve access to sustainable transportation modes, recycle our waste, and build local food systems. The asset categories to achieve this outcome are described below.

Asset Category 2.1 - Stormwater and Watershed Management The 2012 Watershed Management Plan (WMP) identified projects to improve storm drains, restore creeks, attenuate peak flows and to reduce pollutants entering San Francisco Bay. That project modelled the Potter and Codornices watersheds. The City is in the process of updating the WMP. The updated plan will consider flooding and drought caused by extreme storm events, sea level, and groundwater rise, implementation of the Green Infrastructure Plan, and modelling of all the watersheds. Infrastructure improvements will include storm drains, flow attenuation basins, permeable surfaces, bio-swales, and improvements at Aquatic Park.

The expected outcome is to have a stormwater system that addresses future climate impacts, reduces impervious surfaces, minimizes flooding, meets the City’s stormwater discharge permit into San Francisco Bay, prevents pollution from reaching the San Francisco Bay, and revitalizes the urban watershed.

Asset Category 2.2 - Sewers
The City’s wastewater collection system includes approximately 254 miles of City-owned sanitary sewers, 7,200 manholes and other sewer structures, seven pump stations, and approximately 31,600 service laterals. The City is responsible for maintenance and repair of the lower portion of the service laterals (located within the public right-of-way) from the property line cleanout to the connection to the City’s sewer main. Wastewater generated in the City’s collection system is conveyed to the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) wastewater interceptor system and is treated at EBMUD’s Main Wastewater Treatment Plant.

During the 1980s, EBMUD and the seven Satellite agencies conducted studies to address the problem of overflows and bypasses of untreated wastewater that occurred during large wet weather events due to excessive infiltration and inflow (I/I) into the collection systems. These studies resulted in a long-term program of construction of collection system relief sewers and sewer rehabilitation. The City has rehabilitated or replaced over 200 miles of its gravity sewers and associated lower laterals over the past 30 years. Since 2006, the City has also implemented a private sewer lateral (PSL) certification program requiring the inspection and/or repair or replacement of private (upper) sewer laterals at the time of property transfer or major building remodel.

The seven Satellites and EBMUD are in a Consent Decree with the U.S EPA, the State Water Resources Control Board, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, which establishes requirements for achieving the elimination of untreated wastewater overflows and bypasses over the next 20 to 25 years.

The expected outcome is to comply with the City’s requirements in the Consent Decree and seal the sewer system from storm water intrusion, thereby reducing the risk of untreated sewage reaching the Bay during wet weather. This will become even more important as storms intensify due to the climate crisis.

36 Asset Category 2.3 -- Undergrounding Overhead Utility Wires The City of Berkeley’s stated goal, as outlined in the General Plan, Disaster Preparedness and Safety Element, is to ensure the City’s disaster related efforts are directed toward preparation, mitigation, response and recovery from disaster shocks. The Berkeley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan states that our two greatest disaster challenges are a Hayward Fault rupture and Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) fire.

The climate crisis will result in periods of drought followed by very wet winters, producing heavy vegetation, dry summers, and hot easterly winds in the late summer. These conditions are known to create significant fires such as the 1991 Oakland Hills Tunnel Fire and fires in many parts of California in the past five years.

Methods to reduce the threat of overhead wires creating WUI fires include aggressive vegetation management and other fire hardening techniques. Overhead power lines, more so than undergrounded wires, can exacerbate unsafe conditions either by contributing to the disaster itself or hampering public safety efforts and evacuations. Earthquakes and landslides can knock over utility poles creating a special hazard. In an earthquake, poles tend to sway in opposite directions causing wires to snap and throw sparks.

Some of California’s biggest fires have started because of live wires in contact with combustible fuel.

The Public Works Commission led a three-phase study to underground overhead utility wires in Berkeley.

The Phase 3 report recommended undergrounding along evacuation routes to support public safety through ingress of first responders and egress of community members in the event of a major disaster.

The expected outcome is to implement the Phase 3 study recommendations to underground overhead utility wires along Berkeley’s evacuation routes and to support neighborhoods in fire zones that choose to underground.

Asset Category 2.4 – Electrification of Buildings Neighborhoods and Transportation A major goal of Vision 2050 is to decrease the City’s overall climate impact. This effort requires both the reduction of City-wide energy use and transition away from fossil fuels to renewable energy. The Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy in 2021 transitions existing buildings in Berkeley from natural gas appliances to all-electric alternatives in a way that benefits all residents, especially members of historically marginalized communities. As identified in the City’s Resilience Strategy and Climate Action Plan, Berkeley seeks an energy system that, by 2045, is carbon neutral and delivers carbon-free electricity across a highly distributed system. Multifaceted changes to existing infrastructure and its uses are required to achieve carbon neutrality. Improvements to the existing energy grid may include, among other items:
 Increasing electricity distribution capacity to accommodate neighborhood electrification and mobility charging, in coordination with streets and other infrastructure improvements  Improving or expanding access to transformers, vaults, and switchgears  Seeking opportunities to decommission gas pipes in areas where buildings or neighborhoods are transitioning to all-electric
 Supporting solar energy and storage for critical facilities that prioritizes renewable backup power over diesel generators, including mobile batteries and electric vehicle-to-building connections  Increasing electric vehicle infrastructure for municipal fleet and distributed mobility charging for residents
Asset Category 2.5 – Urban Forest
The City’s municipal forest includes approximately 42,000 street, park, and median trees. These are often referred to as "city trees" or "public trees." They are maintained by the Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront’s Urban Forestry Unit, which performs pruning, removing, and planting trees. These trees are hard at work.

37 They remove pollutants and carbon dioxide from the air, help cool the City during the summer, absorb stormwater during storms, and help the City stay green and support a high quality of life.

However, there are approximately 10,000 vacant tree locations and many of these locations are in areas with higher proportions of low-income residents of color. Trees and greenery have traffic calming impacts and should be integrated in bike and pedestrian projects. The expected outcome is to increase our City’s tree canopy by planting thousands more trees for the purpose of enhancing our urban forest, sequestering carbon, addressing equity, mitigating urban heat island impacts, reducing vehicle speeds, providing native wildlife habitat, and improving quality of life.

Asset Category 2.6 - Specific Resilience Infrastructure Assets While limiting City-wide climate impact is necessary, the effects of global warming are already testing traditional infrastructure and will continue to push our resources to their limits. Worsening drought conditions, increased risk of extreme weather events such as flooding and sea level rise create major challenges for our water supplies, watershed management, and resilience of our underground infrastructure systems. These events also have implications on the safety, health, and well-being of the community. The City has identified several new technologies and infrastructure to build while working towards climate adaptation and resilience. Some of the new infrastructure and adaptation strategies include:

 Develop rainwater catchments, expanding the use of gray water and expanding the distribution and use of EDMUD recycled water (purple pipe) for landscaping irrigation.  Use natural green infrastructure solutions including infiltration basins, wetlands, bioswales, permeable paving, etc. to mitigate flooding from the combined effects of groundwater, sea level rise, and extreme rain events.
 Increase the urban forestry canopy and use cool paving technologies to protect against extreme heat.  Upgrade Community Resilience Centers and Resilience Hubs to ensure respite and evacuation capacity.
 Identify and manage urban – wildland forest canopy to mitigate wildfire risks.  Install technologies such as air filtration to mitigate wildfire smoke impacts.  Use “cool” paving and reduce dark asphalt street surfaces to combat urban heat island effects.  Improve seismic safety systems in City facilities to reduce impacts from future earthquakes.  Identify lighting improvements that enhance safety while minimizing damaging impacts of urban light pollution and net energy use.

Outcome 3 – Promote Quality of Life
Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Improve Our Quality of Life A key outcome of the Vision 2050 initiative is to improve our overall quality of life through the promotion of open spaces, parks, and recreational opportunities. The asset categories to achieve this outcome are described below.

Asset Category 3.1 – Parks
The City has 52 parks that contain 15 athletic fields, 49 sports courts (basketball and tennis), and 63 play areas. Many parks need significant improvements to pathways, lighting, irrigation systems, play structures, and athletic fields. The expected outcome is to implement these improvements.

38 Asset Category 3.2 – Pools
The City has two swimming pools, one by King Middle School and the other at West Campus. The pools require improvements to the locker rooms and office areas, and improvements to piping, decking, tiling, and roofs. While the King pool has a 30-year lease, the West Campus site has a five-year lease with the possibility that a new pool will be built at San Pablo Park that serves south and west Berkeley residents.

Asset Category 3.3 – Park Buildings and Restrooms
The City has four community centers, 2 clubhouses, 29 restrooms, and outbuildings. Many of the required improvements have been made with funding from Measure T1. Future improvements include seismic/deferred maintenance at some park buildings, renovation of existing restrooms, and construction of new restrooms. The expected outcome is to implement the required improvements, including electrification, elimination of natural gas connections, and the addition of solar and battery storage, where feasible.

Asset Category 3.4 – Camps
The City of Berkeley’s non-resident camps include Cazadero Camp located off the Russian River, Echo Lake Camp located just above South Lake Tahoe, and Berkeley Tuolumne Camp located just east of Yosemite Park. These camps include hundreds of facilities, amphitheaters, bridges, pathways, water systems, and swimming pools.

Two significant camp projects have been completed: 1) the rebuilding of Berkeley Tuolumne Camp, and 2) at Cazadero Camp, the Jensen Dorm, which was destroyed by a landslide in 2016, has been reconstructed.

These projects are primarily funded by insurance.

Asset Category 3.5 – Waterfront
The Waterfront is the largest public marina in the Bay Area located on 125 acres of land and 50 acres of water, and includes approximately 1,040 berths, public access docks, pilings, channels, streets, pathways, parking lots, buildings, restrooms, buildings, and small boat launch ramps.

There are many funding needs at the Waterfront, where many of the facilities have reached the end of their useful life and are starting to fail. As documented in multiple reports, there is a diminishing ability to pay for the pressing capital needs in the Waterfront. The Marina Fund is the City’s mechanism for managing all Waterfront revenues and expenditures. Revenues steeply declined in the last two years because of safety and security concerns and failing infrastructure. The combination of falling revenue and increasing expenditure needs have strained the relatively small Marina Fund to a breaking point.

The City has begun a long-term planning effort – the Berkeley Marina Area Specific Plan (Figure 9)– to establish the community’s vision for the Waterfront and to plan for making the Marina Fund viable and stable. There is still a need to address urgent infrastructure repairs to finger docks, pilings, electrical systems, and restrooms. If these investments are not made, facilities and infrastructure will either require more costly emergency funding or be closed as in the case of the Berkeley Pier.

The goal is to make the urgent repairs, complete the Berkeley Marina Area Specific Plans, and to return the Marina Fund to solvency.

39 Outcome 4 – Have Safe Public Facilities
Public Facilities are Safe, Resilient, and Provide Community Placemaking The City is responsible for maintenance of 95 facilities, not including Library facilities and facilities leased to other entities. These facilities include 39 facilities in the Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront inventory and 56 facilities in the Public Works inventory. These facilities house City staff and are places where residents receive public services. These facilities need to be safe, healthy, and resilient, and provide community placemaking, where the connection between people and these places is strengthened. The asset categories to achieve this outcome are described below.

Asset Category 4.1 – Public Buildings
In 2013, staff retained a consultant to perform assessments and provide updated condition reports and cost estimates for the City’s facility inventory. The recommended improvements are extensive. All projects included in these assessments are considered either major maintenance or capital projects. Despite support from a variety of City funds, the cost for routine maintenance, major maintenance, and capital improvements far exceeds currently existing sources of funds.

The expected outcome is that condition assessments of the City’s public buildings will be conducted regularly, and necessary improvements identified and completed. These improvements include electrification, elimination of natural gas connections, and addition of solar and battery storage, where feasible.

Asset Category 4.2 – Civic Center
The Civic Center comprises portions of the area surrounding Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park including the Maudelle Shirek Building “Old City Hall” (1909) and the Veterans Memorial Building (1928).

Presently, the historic buildings have decades of accumulated deferred maintenance and are seismically unsound. As part of the city’s Measure T1 program, the Veterans Memorial Building and Old City Hall were slated for structural analysis and visioning of possible conceptual design alternatives, in concert with Civic Center Park. A consultant was retained to conduct a community outreach strategy, perform an assessment of the existing infrastructures, identify programs and functions for the two buildings, develop concepts for improvements for the Park. The consultant completed this work and presented a suite of financing and revenue generation strategies for the facility. City Council approved the following vision:

The Civic Center will be the heart of Berkeley’s community. Civic Center will be the prime space for civic life, culture, and the arts. It will reflect the city’s diverse identities, celebrate its history, and contribute to shaping its future. A place of shared resources and a platform for free expression accessible to all, Civic Center aims to manifest the city’s values, advance social justice, and demonstrate the power of true public space.

Asset Category 4.3 – Transfer Station and Recycling Center The city’s current solid waste transfer station was opened in 1983. In the late 1980s, Berkeley’s recycling operations relocated to the site to be operated by the Community Conservation Center. In the 1990s, the residential recyclable collection operator, the Ecology Center, was allocated an area at the site for its operations yard and office building. These facilities are not integrated and operations are not coordinated in a way that provides customers ease of use, access, or efficient drop-off of materials. These facilities do not meet current seismic requirements, have not been upgraded or improved since constructed, exceed their serviceable life, and cannot help meet the city’s Zero Waste Goal.

40 The city retained a consultant to conduct a feasibility study to build a new solid waste transfer and recycling facility. Through active collaboration and community participation between November 2018 to May 2019, the city has developed a consensus around two conceptual facility designs.

The expected outcome is that the CEQA analysis and design of the approved project will be completed and a replacement facility constructed that helps the city achieve its Zero Waste goal.

41 Appendix F
Glossary of Terms
Term Definition
AC Transit Alameda Contra Costa Transit District
AMP Asset Management Program
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
BUSD Berkeley Unified School District
CIP Capital Improvement Program
City City of Berkeley
City staff Employees of the City of Berkeley
Council City Council of Berkeley
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
Envision The Envision Sustainable Infrastructure Framework is a comprehensive tool developed by the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure to help infrastructure professionals plan, design, and deliver more sustainable infrastructure projects of all types and sizes. The Envision framework is a decision-making tool that allows infrastructure owners, engineers, designers, architects, planners, contractors, and other stakeholders to evaluate projects across a broad range of sustainability indicators that address environmental, social, and economic dimensions of sustainability to encourage systemic change.

Envision not only asks are we doing the project right, but also are we doing the right project, and it is sensitive to resource constraints, as well as the diversity of mandates, schedules, budget cycles, and funding sources that may exist.

Envision is intended for use during the planning, design, and construction stages of infrastructure development, while taking into account the project’s operations, maintenance, and end-of-life phases.

FITES Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment and Sustainability Policy Committee
GF General Fund
GO bond General Obligation bond
GHG Greenhouse gases
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric
Public commons The area in the public right-of-way encompassing streets, sidewalks and related facilities.

PSPS Public safety power shutoff
Vision Zero Vision Zero is a data-driven strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all.

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

ACTION CALENDAR
December 2, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: David White, Deputy City Manager
Terrance Davis, Director of Public Works
Scott Ferris, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront Henry Oyekanmi, Finance Director
David Sprague, Fire Chief

Subject: Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election

RECOMMENDATION
Review staff recommendations, provide input and direction on project priorities, and discuss which infrastructure projects should be reflected in a community survey for potential inclusion in a bond measure.

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to discuss services and/or capital infrastructure needs that the City Council may wish to consider funding through a revenue measure – or measures – on the November 2026 ballot.

On June 17, 2025, the City Council referred to the City Manager an item to assess the potential for a 2026 ballot measure to support capital improvements to fire department facilities1. Subsequent to that, on September 30, 2025, the City Council referred to the City Manager an item to assess the potential for a 2026 ballot measure to support the improvement of recreation and community facilities2. This report also builds on the work of Vision 2050, an initiative that resulted from the passage of Measure R in 2018. Measure R advised the Mayor to engage a panel of citizen experts to identify and guide implementation of a plan to bring climate smart, technologically advanced, integrated and efficient infrastructure to support a safe, vibrant and resilient future for Berkeley. The City Council accepted the Vision 2050 report3 in 2020 and in 2025, the Mayor convened a Task Force of subject matter experts to review and update recommendations in the 2020 report. The City Council’s discussion at this meeting will inform the development of a community survey to aid decision making in placing an item or items on the 2026 ballot. 1 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-06- 17%20Item%2028%20Fire%20Facility%20Revenue%20Measures.pdf. 2 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-09- 30%20Item%2011%20Recreation%20and%20Community%20Facility%20Improvement%20Measures.pdf. 3 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Vision-2050-Framework.pdf.

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

Given the City’s significant unfunded infrastructure and deferred maintenance needs that must be addressed over the coming decades and the lack of resources to invest in its infrastructure, staff recommend that the City Council provide direction to gauge voter interest for a General Obligation (GO) bond on the November 2026 ballot that could generate up to $300 million. This work session provides the City Council an opportunity to review staff recommendations, provide input and direction on project priorities, and discuss which infrastructure projects should be reflected in a community survey for potential inclusion in a bond measure. The survey would be designed to gauge voter interest in a variety of infrastructure projects and varying levels of funding support. The City Council may also wish to provide staff with feedback on additional measures planned for the 2026 ballot that should be part of a community survey.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Ballot Measure Development
In order to prepare for a possible community survey, the City Manager’s Office is in the process of soliciting proposals from firms that are interested and qualified in performing a community survey for the City of Berkeley.

Should the City Council choose to move forward, the next steps in the community survey process are as follows:
 The survey would take place in winter / early spring of 2026 and at least 500 Berkeley voters would be surveyed.
 Staff and the vendor would present the results of the survey(s) to the City Council.  Based on those results, the City Council would be able to discuss whether to narrow the focus of any measure(s) and could direct staff to develop specific measures for the community’s consideration. A second survey would then be conducted to assess the more focused approach.
 Following a second survey, the City Council would decide upon a specific ballot measure or measures, if any, and direct the City Manager and City Attorney to develop ballot measure language for City Council consideration in June and July.

Ballot Measure Considerations
As part of this discussion, staff has provided a comparison of the City’s property-based taxes and assessments with other neighboring jurisdictions, and information about other likely items on the November 2026 ballot.

Property Tax Bill Comparison: When comparing the property tax bills between Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany, the primary differences relate to taxes based on the General Obligation (GO) Bond debt and the jurisdiction’s special taxes, assessments and fees.

GO Bond debt is voter-approved and can be issued by the City or a school district. Special taxes can be used to meet a broad variety of needs and can be based on different formulas.

Berkeley’s special taxes are generally based on a tax rate multiplied by the building square footage, while Oakland and Albany’s special taxes are usually a flat amount per parcel with

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

some land-use variations. The table below illustrates tax differences between Berkeley, Oakland and Albany by comparing a single-family residence with an assessed value of $550,0004, a $7,000 homeowner’s exemption and 1,900 square feet.

Summary of FY 2026 Property-Based Taxes and Assessments Comparison* *For the full table, see Attachment 1.

Funding Mechanism
A General Obligation (GO) Bond is a form of long-term borrowing to finance capital improvements to real property such as buildings, roads and school facilities. Under a GO Bond structure, all tax requirements are shared proportionally based on taxable assessed value.

Key features of a GO Bond are:
 May be used only for capital improvements, not for ongoing operational costs;  Requires two-thirds voter approval to pass;
 The principal and interest are paid with the proceeds of tax levies made upon taxable property;
 Bonds are repaid by taxpayers based on their property’s assessed value; and  Bonds are generally repaid over 30 years.

Berkeley voters have passed several bonds, and the charts below show historical and projected tax rates from all the bonds issued by the City dating back to 1993. 4 Represents the median assessed value in the City of Berkeley.

AGENCY
Rate Amount Rate Amount Rate Amount
COUNTYWIDE AD VALOREM TAX 1.00% 5,500 $ 1.00% 5,500$ 1.00% 5,500$ Voter-Approved Ad Valorem Debt Service
Voter-Approved Ad Valorem Debt Service (Combined) 0.2323% 1,279 $ 0.2779% 1,529 $ 0.3571% 1,965 $ TOTAL ALL AD VALOREM TAXES 1.2323% 6,779 $ 1.2779% 7,029 $ 1.3571% 7,465 $ Total City Special Taxes $1.05974 2,013 $ Flat 1,397$ Flat 491$ Total City Special Assessments 128 $ Flat 16$ Flat 985$ Total County Assessments/Charges 500 $ Flat 488$ Flat 476$ Total Unified School District Special Taxes $0.79159 1,504 $ Flat 435$ Flat 591$ TOTAL CURRENT ANNUAL TAXES 10,924 $ 9,365$ 10,008$ Berkeley FY2026 Oakland FY2026 Albany FY2026

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

The City has maintained the annual tax levy at levels below the initial estimates for each GO Bond authorization (since 1993). As shown in the graphs above, the current remaining bond debt service is projected to require an average tax of $31/year (per $100,000 in assessed value) over the next 30 years.

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

As depicted in the figure below, when combined with existing authorizations, a new GO Bond authorization for $300 million, assuming $100 million is issued every five years, is estimated to require an average tax rate over 40 years of 0.0441% or $44 (per $100,000 in assessed value).

Should the City Council place a $300 million GO Bond on the 2026 ballot, the figure above indicates that the resulting projected average tax rate (assuming $100 million is issued every five years commencing in 2027) when combined with existing authorizations (2027-2067) is less than the historical average tax rate from existing authorizations until they are anticipated to be paid off (1993-2056). Also notable is that the combined average tax rate for the new $300 million GO bond plus existing authorizations is less than the tax rate in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s.

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

2026 Ballot Measure Schedule
To meet deadlines set by the Alameda County Registrar of Voters to place items on the November 3, 2026, ballot, the following timeline has been developed for the City Council’s consideration.

December 2, 2025 City Council to discuss possible revenue measures and questions to be included
January 2026  Launch community engagement
 If necessary, City Council provides additional direction on proposed ballot measure(s) and options for funding
mechanisms (January 27, 2026)
February 2026 First survey development, including meetings with staff, survey to field
March 24, 2026  Presentation and Discussion of first Community Survey Results
 City Council refines which issues deserve additional
testing with more focused language.

April 2026 Possible second survey
May 19, 2026 Presentation and Discussion of Second Community Survey Results and Direction About Next Steps
June 2026 Draft Ballot Language to City Council (from May 2026 direction)
July 2026 Revised Draft Ballot Language to City Council July 28, 2026 Last City Council meeting before recess; Adopt Final Ballot Language and Resolutions placing measures on the ballot
August 7, 2026 Last Day to Place a Measure on the 2026 Ballot Attachment 2 provides a more detailed calendar for the November 2026 election.

BACKGROUND
The City maintains an extensive portfolio of capital assets and infrastructure that contribute to the City’s vibrancy and enhance the community’s quality of life, including 215 miles of streets, 300 miles of sidewalks, 50 miles of paths and bicycle infrastructure; 50 acres of Marina harbor, 52 parks with play areas and public restrooms, four (4) community centers, three (3) resident camps and two (2) pools. Maintaining these assets is costly and requires significant resources and constant attention. Current resource allocations are inadequate to meet existing City infrastructure needs, let alone modernizing these assets. This leaves the community vulnerable to unplanned failure, a reduction in access to infrastructure and service interruptions. For community members, residents, workers, and businesses trying to go about their daily lives, this can translate to unsafe conditions, unexpected costs, and inequity between neighborhoods.

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

Over the years, voters have approved the following items to address community needs and priorities. The following is a partial list of items that have been approved:
 2008: $27 million Library Bond Measure to fund branch libraries.  2012: $30 million infrastructure bond (Measure M) funded street paving and related green infrastructure throughout the City.
 2014: Parks Tax Increase of 16.9% (Measure F) to ensure well maintained parks.  2016: $100 million infrastructure bond (Measure T1) to fund critical improvements to numerous city facilities including, but not limited to the following:
o North Berkeley Senior Center;
o Adult Mental Health Services Center;
o Berkeley Health Clinic;
o Public Safety Building;
o Live Oak Community Center;
o Martin Luther King Youth Services Center;
o Rose Garden Pergula, Tennis Courts and ADA needs;
o Waterfront docks, pilings and streets;
o Fire Stations 2 and 6;
o Willard Clubhouse; and
o Improvements to numerous parks, restrooms, playgrounds, streets, sidewalks, storm drains and green infrastructure.

The $100 million in Measure T1 funding has been fully allocated, leveraging an additional $80 million in grant and other funding resources, to produce over $183 million in 76 community benefiting infrastructure projects. With the final issuance of these bonds planned for 2026, these funds will be fully spent by 2028 as numerous projects such as the Tom Bates Sports Complex, African American Holistic Resource Center and the South Berkeley Senior Center will commence soon.

A detailed overview of Measure T1 and all the improvements that have resulted from this bond can be found on the City’s website - https://berkeleyca.gov/your- government/our-work/bond-revenue-measures/measure-t1.
 2018: $135 million affordable housing bond (Measure O) as well as an increase in property transfer tax on the top 1/3 of properties (Measure P) to increase the supply of affordable housing and services for people who are homeless.

Since the adoption of Measure O, the City has allocated approximately $238.1 million to build more than 1,421 units of affordable housing. This includes $129 million from Measure O, $7.3 million from Measure P, $28.2 million from Measure U1, and $56.7 million from the City’s Housing Trust Fund. These commitments helped to leverage infrastructure improvement funding through the state, including $11.1 million from the Infill Infrastructure Grant program, and $79.8 million (for infrastructure and housing) from the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Grant program.

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

Resources generated by Measure P have enabled the City to support a variety of programs and services to address homelessness. In addition, resources generated by Measure P have been leveraged to support a significant expansion of housing opportunities that enabled the City to achieve a 45% decrease in unsheltered homelessness. In 2024, Berkely voters adopted Measure W, which removed the sunset associated with Measure P and increased the tax rates.

Attachments 3 and 4 provide additional information on Measures O and P and how those resources have been deployed.
 2020: Measure FF, a parcel tax (current rate is $0.12990 per square foot of taxable improvements) that provides funding for fire services, emergency response, 9-1-1 communication, hazard mitigation, and wildfire prevention.  2024: Measure FF, a parcel tax ($0.17 per square foot of improvements for dwelling units and $0.25 for non-residential properties) that generates resources for the repair, repaving and reconstruction of streets, sidewalks and pedestrian paths, safety improvements to streets, sidewalks and pedestrian paths, and environmental enhancements to sidewalks and pedestrian paths.
 2024: Measure Y that increased the parcel tax for parks to $0.2652 per square foot of taxable improvements to maintain and invest in parks and include on-going funding for Waterfront Parks including Cesar Chavez Park.
 2024: Measure X, a parcel tax ($0.06 per square foot of improvements for dwelling units and $0.09 for non-residential properties) that provides resources for library services.

While marking important progress, the measures outlined above have not been enough to address the City’s unfunded infrastructure needs that are estimated to be greater than $1 billion. For this reason, staff recommend that the City Council survey registered voters on their support for a General Obligation Bond on the November 2026 ballot that could generate resources up to $300 million for infrastructure. While a GO bond of this size will not address all the City’s needs, it will enable the City to begin to address critical infrastructure projects that not only enhance quality of life but ensure an effective public safety response and accelerate the City’s path toward sustainability and resilience as envisioned in the Vision 2050 Framework.

Attachment 5 consists of a summary of proposed projects for a potential 2026 revenue measure. Projects were identified through a collaborative, cross-departmental process to ensure they represent community priorities and are consistent with Vision 2050 and other guiding plans. Projects were evaluated based on core criteria including:
 Health, life, and safety needs;
 Critical infrastructure condition and accessibility;
 Community use and equity;
 Geographic distribution; and

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

 Potential to leverage external or matching funds.

In addition to the above, projects were evaluated using criteria recommended by the Vision 2050 framework. The Vision 2050 criteria is consistent with the core criteria listed, and also includes elements such as equity, public health and safety, climate resiliency and sustainability as core values for infrastructure development. The projects that are outlined in Attachment 5 were analyzed for readiness, feasibility, and opportunities to reduce costs through grant offsets or matching contributions, refining the list to approximately $100 million for each of the categories outlined below:
 Community Facilities and Quality of Life;
 Public Safety; and
 Critical Infrastructure and Accessibility.

The cost estimates in Attachment 5 reflect 2025–2026 values, with escalation anticipated in later phases.

Community Facilities and Quality of Life Category
The range of proposed projects address aging facilities or upgrades to existing facilities that will greatly enhance the community’s quality of life. Some of the projects in this category include:
 Revitalization of the Frances Albrier Community Center;  Replacement of the King Pool and locker room;
 Installation of artificial turf at Harrison Field;
 Renovation of existing restroom facilities and construction of new restroom facilities where they are needed; and
 Increasing the number of dog parks throughout the City.

Public Safety Category
The list of proposed projects largely centers on the replacement of Fire Stations, which is detailed in a comprehensive Fire Facilities Master Plan, completed in 2023, along with much needed improvements to the City’s emergency communications center and Fire training facility. Most of Berkeley’s fire stations were built in the 1960s, with seismic upgrades completed in the 1990s. However, the City’s Fire Stations no longer meet current health, safety, or operational standards. The City has conceptual designs for all its fire stations and has determined that all but one, Fire Station 1 (2442 8th Street), can be renovated or replaced on existing City-owned land.

It is essential that the replacement of the City’s fire stations begin as soon as possible as the City only has the capacity to manage one firehouse remodel/rebuild at a time and each will take three to five years to complete. The highest operational need for the Fire Department is to remodel or replace the following:
 Fire Station 4 (1900 Marin Ave.) which has a projected cost of $48 million;  The Fire, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Community Emergency Response (CERT) Training Center (997 Cedar Street) which has a projected cost of $28 million;

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

 The City’s Emergency Communications Center (Dispatch) (2100 MLK Jr. Way) at a projected cost of $4 million; and
 Fire Station 6 (999 Cedar Street) which has a projected cost of $22 million.

Critical Infrastructure and Accessibility Category
The list of proposed projects builds on a variety of assessments performed over the years to determine deferred infrastructure investments and identify replacement costs for assets.

These assessments include an evaluation of City buildings and right of way, the growing backlog of sidewalk repairs to be addressed through the City’s 50/50 Sidewalk Repair Program5 that exceeds existing city resources, and the adopted Self Evaluation and Transition Plan that identified a total of $48 million in projects for sidewalks and facilities to meet accessibility requirements. Some of the projects in this category include:
 Fully funding the repair of all sidewalks in the City’s 50/50 Sidewalk Repair Program;  Seismic upgrades to the Veterans Building and Maudelle Shirek Building to support a safe, vibrant and thriving civic and cultural arts center;  Modernization and upgrades to facilities such as the West Berkely Family Wellness Center, Animal Services Facility, South Berkeley Senior Center, Public Safety Building, and 1947 Center Street; and
 Projects to enhance American with Disabilities Act (ADA)accessibility at various city facilities.

In addition to feedback from the City Council and the results of the community survey and community engagement, additional factors that will be deployed to refine the preliminary list of proposed projects for a potential November 2026 revenue measure includes an analysis of the City’s bonding capacity, deliverability, phasing, and staff capacity.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Many of the infrastructure needs identified for potential inclusion in a 2026 revenue measure present opportunities to advance the City’s climate and sustainability goals. Modernizing aging public facilities enables the City to incorporate energy-efficient building systems and high-performance materials consistent with Berkeley’s Climate Action Plan. In addition, several projects support stormwater management, sea-level rise adaptation, and climate- resilient design, aligning with the Vision 2050 Framework and broader sustainability efforts.

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The City Council could consider funding mechanisms to support infrastructure or service needs. While city staff are in the process of soliciting proposals and selecting a firm to implement a community survey, the feedback received from the City Council will be used to inform the development of the survey instrument. Once the survey has been implemented, city staff will return to City Council to provide the results of the survey to determine if an additional community survey is necessary and to receive feedback that is needed to develop any potential revenue measure(s) for the November 2026 ballot. 5 https://berkeleyca.gov/city-services/streets-sidewalks-sewers-and-utilities/sidewalk-repair.

Discussion Regarding Potential Ballot Measures for ACTION CALENDAR the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. December 2, 2025

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION
The cost of the two community surveys is expected to not exceed $100,000.

CONTACT PERSON
David White, Deputy City Manager, 981-7014
Attachments:
1: FY 26 Comparison of Property-Based Taxes & Assessments - Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany
2: November 2026 Election Calendar
3: Measure P Update (https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-03- 28%20Measure%20P%20and%20Impact%20on%20Homeless%20Services%20in%20Berkele y.pdf)
4: Measure O Update (https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-2- 06%20Measure%20O%20Update.pdf)
5: Proposed Infrastructure Projects for November 2026 revenue measure

Attachment 1

FY 2026 Comparison of Property-Based Taxes & Assessments Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany

Ad Valorem Taxes: Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany properties are all equally subject to the 1% countywide ad valorem tax based on assessed value, as well as the ad valorem debt service imposed by the Peralta Community College, Bay Area Rapid Transit, and East Bay Regional Park. In FY 2026 these combined taxes represent $5,874 for a home with a $550,000 assessed value in each city.

City General Obligation (GO) Bonds: Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany have each approved City GO bond debts, which is based upon the assessed value of properties. In FY 2026, Berkeley’s cumulative GO bond tax is $270 which is significantly lower than Oakland’s cumulative GO bond tax at $660 and Albany’s GO bond tax at $685.

Special Taxes: Each of these cities has its own set of voter-approved special taxes and other assessments; however, Oakland and Albany do not use the same taxation basis as the City of Berkeley. For instance, while most of Berkeley’s special taxes are based on a tax rate multiplied by the building square footage, those in Oakland and Albany are usually a standard flat rate amount per parcel with some variation in the flat rate based upon land use. In all three cities, most of the voter approved special taxes allow for an annual cost of living adjustment based either on the annual Bay Area Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the Statewide Personal Income Growth (PIG) rate. Berkeley’s Emergency Services for the Severely Disabled Tax, Library Taxes, Fire Protection/Emergency Response Taxes, Safe Street Tax, and Parks/Landscape Maintenance Tax use the higher of the two.

There are several significant differences in the special taxes imposed by Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany. For example, Berkeley’s Library Taxes are at $680 which is significantly higher than Oakland’s library tax at $3191 or Albany’s library and library supplemental tax at $285.

Another significant difference is in school taxes. Each city has approved School GO bond debt and special school taxes. Berkeley Unified School District’s combined GO bond and special school taxes total $2,139, Albany Unified School District’s GO and special school tax is significantly lower than Berkeley’s at $1,491, and Oakland Unified School District’s GO and special school tax is even lower at $930.

County and other agency assessments (such as County Service Area (CSA) Vector Control, AC Transit, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), East Bay Trail LLD and East Bay Regional Parks (EBRP)) are parcel-based, flat rate assessments based on land use. And, with some limited exceptions2, apply equally to all property in these three cities. There are a few other variations billed on property tax statements.

1 Parcels located in the Rockridge Community Facility District (CFD) 1 pay an additional tax of $25 annually. 2 Albany is not subject to the additional Mosquito Abatement fee and is not included in the CSA Lead Abatement program. Oakland properties pay higher CSA Vector Control assessments than Berkeley or Albany.

The table on the following page summarizes the comparison of total FY 2026 annual property taxes and assessments for Berkeley, Oakland, and Albany using an ‘average’ single family property that is 1,900 square feet with an assessed value of $550,000 and a homeowner’s exemption of $7,000.

AGENCY
Rate Amount Rate Amount Rate Amount
COUNTYWIDE AD VALOREM TAX 1.00% 5,500 $ 1.00% 5,500$ 1.00% 5,500$ Voter-Approved Ad Valorem Debt Service
County Wide GO Bond 0.0084% 46 $ 0.0084% 46 $ 0.0084% 46 $ City GO Bond 0.0490% 270 $ 0.1200% 660 $ 0.1245% 685 $ Unified School District GO Bonds 0.1154% 635 $ 0.0900% 495 $ 0.1647% 906 $ Peralta Community College 0.0432% 238 $ 0.0432% 238 $ 0.0432% 238 $ Bay Area Rapid Transit 0.0152% 84 $ 0.0152% 84 $ 0.0152% 84 $ East Bay Regional Park 0.0011% 6 $ 0.0011% 6$ 0.0011% 6$ Voter-Approved Ad Valorem Debt Service (Combined) 0.2323% 1,279 $ 0.2779% 1,529$ 0.3571% 1,965$ TOTAL ALL AD VALOREM TAXES 1.2323% 6,779 $ 1.2779% 7,029 $ 1.3571% 7,465 $ City Voter-Approved Special Taxes Rate X BSF 1,900 1,900 1,900 Landscape/Park
Oakland: City Landscape
Albany: City Landscape 88-1
Street / Sidewalk Repair (Safe Streets Measure FF of 2024) $0.17000 323 $ Albany Sidewalk Tax 0.017 $ 32$
Library Tax/Services
Oakland: City Library
Albany: Serv & Supplemental
Paramedic Supplemental
Oakland: Emg Medical and Paramedic Supplement
Albany: EMS/ALS (Measure K) & Paramedic Supplement
Emergency Services for the Severely Disabled $0.02229 42 $ Fire/Emergency Response (Measure GG) $0.06695 127 $
Fire, Emergency Svcs & Wildfire Prev Tax (Measure FF of 2020) $0.12990 247 $ Parks and Homelessness Tax (Measure Q of 2020) parcel/unit 258$ Police and Violence Reduction Parcel Tax Measure NN of 2024 parcel/unit 264$ Education Parcel Tax (Measure AA) parcel/unit 198$
Oakland Zoo (Measure Y of 2022) parcel/unit 147$
Total City Special Taxes $1.05974 2,013$ parcel/unit 1,397$ parcel/unit 491$ City Assessments
City Street Lighting $0.01080 21 $
2018 Street Light parcel/unit 19 $
Clean Storm Water (3,000 sqft lot area)
Oakland Flood Benefit12
Albany Street/Storm Drains & Clean Storm Water
2018 Storm Water Formula 61 $
Albany City Sewer Service parcel/unit 638$
Albany Emergency Svcs Tax (Measure K of 2022) 0.0740 $ 141$ Total City Special Assessments 128$ 16$ 985$
BUSD: Educator Recruitment Measure E of 2020 $0.14509 276$ BUSD Special Taxes (Measure H of 2024)
Oakland Measure N
BUSD: School Maintenance (Measure H of 2020)
Oakland Measures G & G1
Albany Measure J
Total Unified School District Special Taxes $0.79159 1,504 $ parcel/unit 435$ parcel/unit 591$ County/Agency Assessments & Fixed Charges
Mosquito Abatement parcel/unit 2 $ parcel/unit 3$ parcel/unit 2$ Mosquito Assess 2 parcel/unit 3 $ parcel/unit 4$ parcel/unit 3$ CSA Paramedic parcel/unit 41 $ parcel/unit 83$ parcel/unit 41$ CSA Vector Control parcel/unit 6 $ parcel/unit 14$ parcel/unit 6$ CSA Vector Control B parcel/unit 7 $ parcel/unit 10$ parcel/unit 7$ CSA Lead Abatement parcel/unit 10 $ parcel/unit 20$ AC Transit (Measure VV) parcel/unit 96 $ parcel/unit 96$ parcel/unit 96$ EBMUD Wet weather parcel/unit 250 $ parcel/unit 160 $ parcel/unit 160 $ East Bay Trail LLD parcel/unit 5 $ parcel/unit 5$ parcel/unit 5$ Hazardous Waste Program parcel/unit 8 $ parcel/unit 16$ parcel/unit 8$ EBRP Park Safety/M parcel/unit 12 $ parcel/unit 17$ parcel/unit 12$ Peralta CCD Measure B parcel/unit 48 $ parcel/unit 48$ parcel/unit 48$ Albany Open Space Tax parcel/unit 76$
Total County Assessments/Charges 500 $ 488$ 476$ TOTAL CURRENT ANNUAL TAXES parcel/unit 10,924 $ parcel/unit 9,365$ parcel/unit 10,008$ 591$
$0.54000 1,026 $ parcel/unit 120 $
parcel/unit315$
SFBRA Measure AA 12 $ 12$ parcel/unit 12$ parcel/unit parcel/unit 98$
$0.04740 90 $ parcel/unit 67$ parcel/unit 285 $
$0.35800 680 $ parcel/unit
parcel/unit202 $ $0.10650
Formula 27 $ parcel/unit 16$ parcel/unit 206 $
FY 2026 Property Based Taxes and Assessments Comparison Single Family Home $550,000 Assessed Value (AV) and 1,900 Square Feet Berkeley FY2026 Oakland FY2026 Albany FY2026
$0.26520 504 $ parcel/unit 144 $ parcel/unit 76$
319$ parcel/unit

Attachment 2

CITY OF BERKELEY - GENERAL ELECTION CALENDAR
November 3, 2026

DAYS PRIOR

TO ELECTION DATE ACTION TAKEN
Public Financing payments are made on the Thursday following the Tuesday submission of matching funds requests.

Fixed Date April 30, 2026
Each committee that makes expenditures in excess of $270 in support of or in opposition to a measure must file campaign statements for quarterly reporting period (1/1/26 - 3/31/26) BMC § 2.12.271
180 May 7, 2026 Suggested Last Day to file initiative petitions. Qualified petitions received after this date will be accepted, but may not be on the November ballot. 158 May 29, 2026
103 July 23, 2026
113 July 13, 2026 FILING PERIOD OPENS - CANDIDATE NOMINATION PAPERS 103 July 23, 2026 Deadline to file Signature In-Lieu petitions with City Clerk.

Fixed Date July 31, 2026 Semi-Annual Campaign Statements due. (1/1/26 - 6/30/26) 90 August 5, 2026 Independent Expenditure Disclosure Period Begins. ($1000+) 90 August 5, 2026 Late Contribution Disclosure Period Begins. ($1000+) 88 August 7, 2026 Deadline to deliver resolution placing a measure on the ballot to Registrar and request election consolidation.
88 August 7, 2026 FILING PERIOD CLOSES - CANDIDATE NOMINATION PAPERS 87 August 8, 2026
83 August 12, 2026
82 August 13, 2026 Secretary of State to conduct Random Alpha Draw for candidate name order on ballot. EC §13111
81 August 14, 2026 Primary ballot measure argument filing deadline (12:00 p.m.). 74 August 21, 2026 Rebuttal ballot measure argument filing deadline (12:00 p.m.). 57 September 7, 2026
14 October 20, 2026
40 September 24, 2026
21 October 13, 2026
40 September 24, 2026 First Pre-Election Campaign Statement due. 29 October 5, 2026 Voting period opens. Ballots mailed to all voters starting 29 days before Election Day.

Offices to be Elected: City Auditor, City Council Districts 1, 4, 7, 8 Rent Board (5 seats); School Board (3 seats)
Voter Information Guide mailing period.

Candidate filing period extended if an incumbent eligible for re-election does not file nomination documents by the 8/7/25 deadline. Incumbents cannot file during the extended period. EC §10225
Filing Period - Candidate Nomination Papers for Write-in Candidates.

Signature In-Lieu of Filing Fee - Candidates may collect signatures during this period to offset the $150 filing fee. Valid signatures are worth $1 each. Charter Art. III, Sec. 6.1, BMC §2.16.020
1

CITY OF BERKELEY - GENERAL ELECTION CALENDAR
November 3, 2026

DAYS PRIOR

TO ELECTION DATE ACTION TAKEN
16 October 18, 2026 48-Hour Late Contribution Reporting Period begins for contributions of $100 - $999 (FPPC Form 497) BMC §2.12.295
15 October 19, 2026 Last Day to Register to Vote for the 11/3/2026 election 14 October 20, 2026 Close of write-in candidate filing period at 5:00 p.m. 12 October 22, 2026 Second Pre-Election Campaign Statement due. 7 October 27, 2026 Campaign contributions list published online and at designated locations in the final seven days before Election Day. BMC §2.12.065 Election Day November 3, 2026 Election Day - EC §1000; Charter Art. III, Section 4. Polls open at 7:00 a.m. and close at 8:00 p.m.

DAYS AFTER

THE ELECTION DATE ACTION TAKEN
15 November 18, 2026 All campaign signs must be removed fifteen days after the Election (BMC §§ 20.08.240, 20.44.030)
Fixed Date December 1, 2026 Taking office date for newly elected officials (actual swearing in at later date). Charter Art. V , Sections 14, 14.1, 15, 16.
30 December 3, 2026 Last day for County to certify election results to City. EC §15372 30 December 3, 2026 Last day to submit matching funds requests (public financing) BMC §2.12.505.J
35 December 8, 2026 Council to certify election results. EC §§9217, 10262, 10263; Charter Art. III, Sec. 10
60 January 2, 2027
All unspent funds held by Public Financing candidate committees must be repaid to the Fair Elections Fund no later than 60 days after the election BMC 2.12.505(H)
Fixed Date January 15, 2027 $50 fee due to Secretary of State for open campaign committees Fixed Date February 1, 2027 Semi-Annual Campaign Statement due. (January 31 is a Sunday, deadline moved to next business day)
Fixed Date March 31, 2027 Campaign funds become surplus (defeated candidate or candidate that withdrew). Surplus funds may not be used for a future election.

EC: Election Code; GC: Government Code; BMC: Berkeley Municipal Code Updated 1/24/2025
2

Attachment 3

Office of the City Manager

March 28, 2025

To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Subject: Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley This memo gives an overview of the City’s implementation thus far of Measure P and provides the Council with a broad overview of the history, expenditures, and accomplishments of the Measure to date.

Measure P is a 2018 ballot measure approving a real property transfer tax that has provided, on average, $11 million
1 in funding annually for general municipal purposes
including navigation centers, physical and mental health supports, rehousing and other services for unhoused people living in Berkeley. As this report demonstrates , the funds had a significant impact on homeless services in the City of Berkeley.

Measure P went into effect on January 1, 2019 and, unless re-authorized by voters, was set to sunset on January 1, 2029. However, with the passage of Measure W in November 2024, the expiration date was removed, and certain tax thresholds for high- value properties were changed.

The City seeks to house people who are unhoused. The primary driver of homelessness is a lack of affordable housing, yet there are also tools and strategies that can help guide some unsheltered people into safer conditions and housing. Measure P has expanded those tools and strategies.

The City addresses unsheltered homelessness and encampments both by coordinating services and shelter for those on the street as well as ensuring safe, clean, and accessible public spaces for all. This interdepartmental work, led by the Homeless Response Team in Neighborhood Services, is a direct result of an allocation of Measure P made by the City Council in 2021.

1 Revenues— which have ranged from ~$6.5M to ~$20M—fluctuate greatly with market conditions .

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

This funding supports the staffing, labor, equipment, and other resources across several departments that participate in its work. These include Public Works, Parks, Recreation & Waterfront and the City Manager’s Office.

This Measure P allocation has also allowed the Homeless Response Team to leverage over $15 million in State resources dedicated to encampments, including the third round of Encampment Resolution Funding, announced by the State on October 4, 2024. This enabled the City to triple its inventory of non-congregate shelter beds and nearly double the shelter acceptance rate of people leaving encampments, especially during an encampment closure.

As a result, over the period of time that Measure P has been in place, we have also seen a sharp decline in the number of unsheltered people in Berkeley, even compared to our immediate neighbors in Alameda County.

Priorities for funding

The City uses Measure P funding to:

• establish new permanent housing for formerly homeless people • address immediate street conditions and hygiene at encampments • prevent households from becoming homeless
• provide emergency shelter and temporary accommodations for those on the street.

Importantly, Measure P is not the City’s only funding for homeless services . W hile a significant source of funding, Measure P also leverages millions of dollars in other local, State and Federal resources. In FY2024 , the City spent approximately $3 5M on

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

homelessness, with Measure P accounting for approximately 66 percent of that total (see graph on the right). State funds accounted for an additional 18 percent, while federal funds accounted for 4 percent more. Other local funds (City of Berkeley General Fund) account for an additional 12 percent.

BALLOT MEASURE

Measure P provides $11 million of funding on average from real property transfer taxes to pay for homeless services. Berkeley voters passed Measure P in November 2018 with

72.4% approval. The original ballot question read:

Shall ordinance raising funds for general municipal purposes such as navigation centers, mental health support, rehousing and other services for the homeless, including homeless seniors and youth; increasing the real property transfer tax for ten years from 1.5% to 2.5% for property sales and transfers over $1,500,000, adjusted annually to capture the top approximately 33% of transfers; generating an estimated $6,000,000 - $8,000,000 annually; and establishing Homeless Services Panel of Experts to recommend homeless services, be adopted?

PROGRESS ON HOMELESS SERVICES PRO
JECTS

Emergency Shelter

Measure P currently funds five projects that provide shelter beds and supportive services for adults seeking to move out of encampments and off the streets. Services include, but are not limited to , housing navigation , job training placement and medical/legal assistance. The City anticipates spending $4.8 million in Measure P funding on the following emergency shelter services through June 2025:

2.00M

0.95M

0.94M

0.57M

0.35M

0.0 M 0.5 M 1.0 M 1.5 M 2.0 M 2.5 M
Pathways STAIR Center
1720 San Pablo Avenue - Supportive
Services
1720 San Pablo Avenue - Master Lease
Dorothy Day House - Emergency Shelter
Storm Shelter - Winter Shelter

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

See below for a short description of each program:

• Dorothy Day House - Berkeley Emergency Storm Shelter (BESS): Operating out of 2134 Martin Luther King Way (Old City Hall) 24 hours a day from December 1 to April 30 to provide relief from inclement weather or other natural events.

• Dorothy Day House - Emergency Shelter: Operating out of the Veterans Building on 1931 Center Street, this is a low-barrier, permanent, congregate shelter that offers services 24/7. Meals are provided three times daily and there is a locker program on-site.

• Dorothy Day House - Beyond Horizon: is a non-congregate shelter that provides 27 motel rooms to encampment residents through a master lease with the Berkeley Inn at 1720 San Pablo Avenue. This non- congregate shelter has been integral in addressing homeless encampments by providing low -barrier private rooms to individuals referred by the Homeless Response Team.

• Bay Area Community Services - STAIR Center: run by Bay Area Community Services, has 45 beds, though they are currently planning a renovation to convert the space from congregate shelter beds to non-congregate through installing pallet shelters which will result in a slight reduction of beds. The Pathway STAIR Center budget includes housing navigation services and rapid rehousing funds to help people move into permanent housing.

• Insight Housing - Campus Motel: is a non-congregate shelter that provides 23 motel rooms to encampment residents through a master lease with the Campus Motel at 1619 University Avenue. This non- congregate shelter has been integral in addressing the needs of our hardest to serve encampment residents by providing low -barrier private rooms to individuals referred by the Homeless Response Team. While t his program is initially being paid for through the state’s Encampment Resolution Funding 2 Program, Measure P will be used as leverage beginning in FY26.

Immediate street conditions and hygiene

Measure P funds currently support six projects aimed at addressing immediate street conditions and hygiene. These projects address the immediate needs of persons currently living on the streets or in vehicles. The projects provide a range of services, including mental health crisis response, outreach workers, and portable toilets . The City anticipates spending $3.4 million in Measure P funding on the following services through June 2025:

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

See below for a short description of each program:

• Bay Area Community Services - Coordinated Entry System, Housing Resource Center, and Shallow Subsidies Programs: The North County Housing Resource Center and Coordinated Entry System is the systematic approach designed by our community to ensure the highest needs unsheltered individuals in Berkeley receive necessary services and interventions to promptly end their homelessness. Coordinated Entry resources include problem solving with participants to utilize all resources available to them, assessing participants for vulnerabilities to make appropriate referrals to programs that match individual needs, and housing navigation to assist clients matched to housing resources with leasing up in their unit. The Shallow Subsidy program targets low -cost housing subsidies to individuals that need minimal support to live independently but cannot afford market rate rent in Berkeley’s expensive and competitive real estate market.

• Berkeley Fire Department - 5150 Response and Transport: Provides emergency medical transport services to individuals that are experiencing a mental health crisis.

• City Manager’s Office - Homeless Response Team: The team’s primary objective is to help guide the more than 400 people who are living on the streets of Berkeley on any given night to ward housing and safety. The team’s outreach workers use motivational interviewing through compassionate conversation, assistance with navigating nonprofit and government resources, and patient problem solving . The team builds relationships, informs people of available resources, provides immediate necessities, and links to supp ortive services. On September 24, 2024 the team was also approved by Alameda County to directly

1.24M

0.81M

0.69M

0.53M

0.10M

0.04M

0.0 M 0.4 M 0.8 M 1.2 M
BACS CES, HRC, & Shallow Subsidies
Fire: 5150 Response & Transport
Homeless Response Team
LifeLong Medical - Street Medicine
Portable Toilets
DBA- Homeless Outreach Worker

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

assess people on the streets , provide immediate housing interventions and add qualified people to the County’s housing queue in real-time. Previously, the team had to rely on nonprofit providers for these assessments – a slower, indirect process that often led to miss ed housing opportunities. Provides street outreach workers and supportive staff to address the immediate street conditions and needs of people who are living unsheltered. Even if people living in encampments are not interested in available shel ter, the team uses Council policies to mitigate immediate health and safety threats to encampment residents and the community at large.

• LifeLong Medical Care – Street Outreach: Provides direct medical care to clients living on the streets. The team also provides housing navigation, services referrals, and case management. Participants are among the over 400 identified unsheltered households living on the streets of Berkeley on any given night.

• City of Berkeley - Portable Toilets: The City of Berkeley also provides portable toilets throughout the city to ensure our unhoused residents have the dignity of an appropriate place to use the bathroom.

• Downtown Business Association - Homeless Outreach Worker: Provides immediate necessities and supportive services to unsheltered people living in the Downtown area. Participants are among the over 400 identified unsheltered households living on the streets of Berkeley on any given night.

Permanent Housing

Measure P currently funds one permanent housing project for individuals/families. This project provides immediate housing and supportive services for single adults that were formerly homeless. Services provided include housing retention services and mental health treatment. The City anticipates spending $ 61,000 in Measure P funding on the following permanent housing project in fiscal year 2025:

61.2 T
00 T 10 T 20 T 30 T 40 T 50 T 60 T 70 T
LifeLong Medical - Maudelle Shirek
Affordable Housing (NPLH)

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

See below for a short description of the program:

LifeLong Medical Care – Maudelle Shirek Affordable Housing: This project is also part of the NPLH program. The Measure P funding provides the supportive services necessary for these 12 units at the site which serves both adults and families with children.

Homekey Housing

In addition to th is project, Measure P contributes one-time funding for two additional permanent supportive housing projects as part of the match requirement for State Homekey funding. The City’s Measure P contributions to these projects (over $15M) leveraged external Homekey funding (over $30M) on a 2:1 basis. The two projects are listed below:

Bay Area Community Services – Project Homekey Golden Bear Inn: This project received $7.3 million in Measure P funding in FY22 to acquire the Golden Bear Inn as a new permanent supportive housing site with 44 units for formerly homeless adults.

Housing Consortium of the East Bay – Project Homekey Rodeway Inn: This project will receive $8.5 million in local funding, likely including Measure P, to acquire the Rodeway Inn as a new permanent supportive housing site with 43 units for formerly homeless adults.

Staffing/Infrastructure

Measure P funds also support key infrastructure necessary to maintain and support homeless services. This category includes city staff working directly on homelessness programming, training, and evaluation. The City anticipates spending less than a million dollars of Measure P funding on the following costs through June 2025:

0.22 M

0.13 M

0.13 M

0.23 M

0.00 M 0.05 M 0.10 M 0.15 M 0.20 M 0.25 M
CMO: Homeless Services Coordinator
HHCS: 50% Senior Management Analyst
Training and Evaluation
HHCS: Limited Term Community Services
Specialist II

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

See below for a short description of each program/position:

Health, Housing and Community Services - Community Services’ Specialist: Works with the program supervisor, other City departments and public agencies, boards and commissions, and the private sector in developing a comprehensive and integrated approach to homeless programs.

Health, Housing and Community Services - Senior Management Analyst: Assists in developing policy, procedure, and budgets for Measure P funded projects. Supervises work including fiscal and program analysis and oversight of contract and grant compliance requirements.

City Manager’s Office - Homeless Service Coordinator : Provides administrative support to the Homeless Services Panel of Experts and assists in coordinating Berkeley’s homeless services providers including the Homeless Response Team.

Leveraging Outside Funding to Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness

In 2021, the Berkeley City Council endorsed the All Home Regional Action Plan, a Bay Area-wide strategic homelessness plan that called for a 75% reduction in street homelessness by focusing on investments to bring people inside and off the streets, and then find permanent solutions for them. Since then, the City has used Measure P to implement that plan, and the source has leveraged roughly $35M in State funding in 3 years by being used as a matching source to:

• Bring in roughly $5 M in State Encampment Resolution Funds to open 23 motel- based, non- congregate shelter beds at the Super 8. The addition of non- congregate shelter to Berkeley’s portfolio has nearly doubled our shelter acceptance rate (from 43% to 79%) among unsheltered people living in encampments.
• Bring in over $30M in State Homekey funding to open 85 units of new permanent supportive housing at two former motels.

The city’s local efforts to fund homelessness programs, alongside the City’s use of Measure P to robustly leverage new State funding opportunities, has contributed to a measurable decrease in homelessness in our city.

Berkeley, in partnership with the Alameda County Continuum of Care, conducts a Point- in-Time Count every two years which provides a snapshot of who is experiencing homelessness on any given night in our community. The most recent count was conducted in January 2024 and showed a major 45% reduction in Berkeley’s unsheltered homeless population and an increase of 57% in our sheltered population from the previous count in 2022. This continued a downward trend in homelessness observed in Berkeley between 2019 and 2022 as well.

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

As shown in the graph s above, Berkeley’s 45% reduction in unsheltered homelessness occurred while other major cities in the county continued to trend upwards. Hayward saw a 4% increase in their unsheltered population and Oakland saw an increase of 10%.

Overall, as seen in the graph below, the county’s homeless population dropped 3% from 9,747 in 2022 to 9,450 in 2024. We also saw a 19% increase of sheltered homelessness, going from 2,612 in 2022 to 3,107 in 2024. Meanwhile, unsheltered homelessness across the county dropped 11%, going from 7,135 in 2022 to 6,343 in 2024. Unsheltered homelessness remains the majority’s experience as 67% of the population experiencing homelessness in 2024 were unsheltered. Berkeley is getting closer to closing this gap, as only 52% of the population experiencing homelessness in 2024 were unsheltered.

308 295 254 399
664
813 803
445
972
1108 1057
844
0 200
4 00
600
800
1000
1200
2017 2019 2022 2024
Berkeley
Sheltered Unsheltered Total
859 861
1718 18261902
3210 3337 3664
2761
4071
5055 5490
0 2000
4000
6000
2017 2019 2022 2024
Oakland
Sheltered Unsheltered Total
84 115 114 234
313 372
267 278397
487
381
512
0 200
400
600
2017 2019 2022 2024
Hayward
Sheltered Unsheltered Total

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

Berkeley’s investment of Measure P funding to permanent housing, immediate street conditions, prevention, and emergency shelter, all contributed to ensuring that the number of people experiencing homelessness in our community continues to decrease over time.

Funds expended to date

The following chart shows the amount of funding spent in each spending category since Measure P began funding projects in FY 2020:

Since FY 2020, $58.3 million has been spent in Measure P funding in the above categories listed. The FY 25 budget allocated an additional $10.9 million in Measure P revenue for a total of $69.2 million spent by the end of this fiscal year.

If current projections remain the same, Measure P will have a 2.2 million-dollar deficit by the end of FY 2026. Without additional revenue or program cuts, this deficit will grow to $19.8 million by the time the Measure sunsets in FY2029. The below chart shows the Measure P revenue that has been collected to- date as well as the projections moving through the measure’s sunset:

1766 1710 2612 31073863
6312 7135 63435629
8022
9747 9450
0 2000
40 00
6000
8000
10000
12000
2017 2019 2022 2024
Alameda County
Sheltered Unsheltered Total

0.0M

5.0M

10. 0M
FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025
Emergency Shelter Homelessness Prevention
Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene Permanent Housing

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

If interest rates, which greatly affect real estate market activity, decline in the coming years, these projections may change as revenues may come in stronger than forecasted.

Alternatively, if the economy enters a recession, real estate activity may slow and deficit projections may worsen.

MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT

The measure also established the Homeless Services Panel of Experts. The Panel was developed to make recommendations on how and to what extent the City should establish and/or fund programs to end or prevent homelessness in Berkeley and provide humane services and support. The panel is composed of members that have expertise in at least one of the following areas:

1. Development, administration, provision and/or evaluation of homeless programs in a government or non-profit capacity,

2. Current or past lived experience with homelessness,

3. Researching the causes, impacts and solutions to homelessness,

4. State and/or local homeless policy, funding or programs,

5. Federal homeless policy and funding administration such as the Continuum of Care Program,

6. Development and financing of affordable housing for formerly homeless persons, and

7. Provision of mental health and/or substance use programs for homeless persons.

The Homeless Services Panel of Experts meets the first Wednesday of each month except for August and December. Members of the public who are interested in learning more about Measure P funds as they are allocated and expended can consult the Homeless Servi ces Panel of Experts’ meeting agendas and materials online, and/or attend the Commission meetings.

Council will review and act on the additional funding required to reduce and address the impacts of homelessness and will undoubtedly continue to rely on Measure P as a source for such efforts until the measure sunsets in 2029.

2.9M

9.5M 10.9M

20. 6M

14.1M

6.5M 8.2M 8.6M 9.0M 9.5M

4.7M

0.0M

5.0M

10.0M

15.0M

20.0M

25.0M
FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29
Measure P Revenue

Measure P and Impact on Homeless Services in Berkeley
March 28, 2025

Information about Measure P can be found in the Bond and Revenue Measures2 section of berkeleyca.gov. Members of the public interested in learning more about the allocation and expenditure of Measure P funds can also consult the Homeless Services Panel of Experts3, refer to their meeting agendas and documents, and/or attend their meetings.

Attachment:
• Spreadsheet of Measure P projects

cc: David White, Deputy City Manager
Peter Radu, Assistant to the City Manager, Neighborhood Services Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing and Community Services Josh Jacobs, Homeless Services Coordinator, Neighborhood Services Sharon Friedrichsen, Budget Director
Matthai Chakko, Communications Director/Assistant to the City Manager Mark Numainville, City Clerk
Jenny Wong, City Auditor
Farimah Brown, City Attorney

2 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/bond-revenue-measures 3 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/homeless-services-panel-experts

Internal

TRANSFER TAX -- MEASURE P PROGRAM BUDGET-----DRAFT
Category of Spending FY 2024
Preliminary
Estimate
FY 2025 Estimate FY 2026 Estimate FY 2027
Estimate
FY 2028
Estimate
FY 2029
Estimate
Revenues
Beginning Fund Balance 19,887,422$ 5,583,073$ 2,603,208$ (1,231,027)$ (10,099,726)$ (14,409,877)$ Measure P Revenues* 6,500,000$ 6,199,580$ 6,509,559$ 6,835,037$ 7,176,789$ 3,588,395$ Total Revenues and Balance of Funds 26,387,422$ 11,782,653$ 9,112,767$ 5,604,011$ (2,922,937)$ (10,821,482)$ LESS: Total Expenses 20,804,349$ 9,179,445$ 10,343,794$ 15,703,736$ 11,486,940$ 11,968,445$ Personnel Costs (1) 530,359$ 780,206$ 842,623$ 666,353$ 719,661$ 777,234$ CMO: Homeless Services Coordinator Staffing/Infrastructure 202,899$ 219,131$ 236,661$ 255,594$ 276,042$ 298,125$ HHCS: Community Services Specialist II Staffing/Infrastructure -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ HHCS: 50% Senior Management Analyst Staffing/Infrastructure 116,560$ 125,885$ 135,956$ 146,832$ 158,579$ 171,265$ HHCS: 2 Year Limited Term Community Services Specialist II Staffing/Infrastructure 17,459$ 226,274$ 244,376$ 263,926$ 285,040$ 307,843$ Non-Personnel Costs/ Program Expenses 20,273,990$ 8,399,239$ 9,501,171$ 15,037,384$ 10,767,279$ 11,191,211$ Fire: 5150 Response & Transport - Measure P portion of contract Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 1,321,605$ 814,302$ 814,302$ 814,302$ 814,302$ 1,321,605$ Dorothy Day House Shelter Emergency Shelter 566,000$ 566,000$ 566,000$ 580,150$ 594,654$ 609,520$ Dorothy Day House Drop In Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 182,000$ -$ -$ 205,916$ BACS Pathways STAIR Center Emergency Shelter 2,499,525$ 2,002,768$ 2,002,768$ 2,002,768$ 2,002,768$ 2,499,530$ BACS Coordinated Entry System (BACS HRC & Shallow Subsidies) Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 829,498$ 1,235,411$ 1,235,411$ 1,235,411$ 1,235,411$ 1,235,411$ BACS Permanent Housing Subsidies / Shallow Subsidies Permanent Housing -$ -$ -$ 1,600,000$ No Place Like Home - Scattered Unit Supportive Services Permanent Housing -$ -$ -$ 105,000$ 105,000$ No Place Like Home - Scattered Unit Supportive Services -$ -$ -$ 138,800$ 138,800$ 43,800$ LifeLong Medical - Maudelle Shirek Affordable Housing (NPLH) 15,300$ 61,200$ 61,200$ 61,200$ 61,200$ 61,200$ Insight Housing Hope Center (NPLH) Permanent Housing 95,000$ -$ -$ 95,000$ Insight Housing - Men's Housing Program Emergency Shelter 170,502$ -$ -$ 170,502$ BDIC Locker Program Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 50,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ LifeLong Medical - Street Medicine Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 525,001$ 525,000$ 525,000$ 525,000$ 525,000$ 525,000$ YSA Tiny Home Emergency Shelter 78,000$ -$ -$ DBA- Homeless Outreach Worker Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 40,000$ 40,000$ 40,000$ 40,000$ 40,000$ 40,000$ Downtown Streets Team Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 225,000$ -$ -$ 225,000$ 225,000$ 225,000$ Shelter at 742 Grayson Street Emergency Shelter -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Shelter at 1720 San Pablo Ave Lease Emergency Shelter 908,796$ 935,160$ 962,315$ 990,284$ -$ -$ Dorothy Day House Berkeley Emergency Storm Shelter (Winter Shelter) Emergency Shelter 350,000$ 350,000$ 358,750$ 367,719$ 376,912$ 386,335$ Dorothy Day House - Inclement Weather Shelter Emergency Shelter 412,185$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TRANSFER TAX -- MEASURE P PROGRAM BUDGET-----DRAFT

Internal
Dorothy Day House Beyond Horizon - 1720 San Pablo Avenue - Supportive Services
Emergency Shelter 950,000$ 950,000$ 950,000$ 950,000$ -$ -$ 1367 University Avenue Step Up Housing Project* Permanent Housing -$ 0 1,066,027 1,092,678 1,119,995 1,147,995 Russell Street Residence Acquisition Permanent Housing 4,500,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ HHCS: Square One Hotel Vouchers Emergency Shelter -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Training and Evaluation Staffing/Infrastructure 133,334$ 133,334$ 133,334$ 133,334$ 133,334$ 133,334$ Homeless Response Team Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 920,085$ 690,064$ 690,064$ 690,064$ 690,064$ 690,064$ Berkeley Relief Fund Homelessness Prevention -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Portable Toilets Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 96,000$ 96,000$ 96,000$ 96,000$ 96,000$ 96,000$ Old City Hall Sprinkler system Emergency Shelter 400,000$ -$ -$ Reimagining Public Safety-Expand Downtown Streets Teams as placement for low-level violations
Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Expand the scope of services for the Downtown Streets Team to address the need for enhanced services around commercial and industrial areas in the Gilman District twice weekly
Immediate Street Conditions and Hygiene 50,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Reimagining Public Safety: Funding to organizations for Respite from Gender/Domestic Violence
Emergency Shelter 220,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 701 Harrison Transition - Site Security Emergency Shelter 88,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Encampment Resolution Fund 2 Awarded Grant Match- Super 8 Emergency Shelter -$ -$ $0 2,527,538$ -$ -$ HCEB Contract- Interim Housing at Rodeway Inn 1,925,256$ -$ -$ Encampment Resolution Fund 3 Tentative Grant Match -$ -$ -$ 2,567,136$ 2,608,840$ Fiscal Year Surplus (Shortfall) (14,304,349)$ (2,979,865)$ (3,834,235)$ (8,868,699)$ (4,310,151)$ (8,380,051)$ Ending Fund Balance 5,583,073$ 2,603,208$ (1,231,027)$ (10,099,726)$ (14,409,877)$ (22,789,927)$ Notes:
(1) Personnel Costs from FY 2025 to FY 2029 assumes an 8 percent increase for increased pension costs

Attachment 4

Office of the City Manager

February 6, 2025

To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Re: Measure O Update

This memo gives an overview of the City’s implementation thus far of Measure O, a 2018 ballot measure dedicated to increasing affordable housing.

Measure O has thus far guided $109M toward an array of projects that will create at least 1,000 new affordable apartments and 44 shelter beds. This includes five completed projects, one project under construction, and a healthy pipeline of new construction projects in various stages of predevelopment and planning. Due to the robust Housing Trust Fund project pipeline, the City is on track to nearly double the number of restricted affordable units in its portfolio since 2018, largely thanks to the impact of Measure O. This powerful expansion of City investment in affordable housing will help low- and middle-income households in Berkeley.

Building permanent affordable housing is complex, challenging and takes significant time. Affordable housing financing in California requires nonprofit developers to braid together funding from multiple sources. County, state, and federal sources usually require committed local funding – making the City’s investment a critical first step for most of these multi-year developments. City staff also use these funds to help project sponsors leverage funding from outside sources. None of this would be possible without highly skilled, creative staff who navigate a labyrinth of regulations, government agencies and nonprofits. Guided by our work, every Measure O dollar multiplies more than 4x.

Permanent affordable housing is just one of the City’s strategies to address the statewide housing crisis, which is at an extreme in the Bay Area. Measure O helps create a more inclusive Berkeley, expanding affordability for neighborhoods across the City and making them available to a broader group of people.

Measure O Update
February 6, 2025

BALLOT MEASURE

Measure O provides $135 million of funding from bond revenue to pay for affordable housing projects. Berkeley voters passed Measure O in November 2018 with 77.5% approval. The original ballot question read:

Shall the measure to issue $135 million in bonds to create and preserve affordable housing for low-income households, working families, and individuals including teachers, seniors, veterans, the homeless, and persons with disabilities; subject to citizen oversight and independent audits, be adopted?

PROGRESS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS

Affordable housing projects funded by Measure O are providing housing for low- and middle-income members of the Berkeley community.

Completed Projects
Five projects are complete, creating 240 new units of affordable housing and modern shelter space with 44 beds.

Jordan Court
1 opened in North Berkeley in spring of 2022. This project created 34 affordable studio units for low-income seniors, with 12 set aside for formerly homeless seniors. Jordan Court serves households earning between 20% and 60% of the area median income (AMI). (Measure O funding: $3.5 million, fully disbursed) Berkeley Way2 opened in Downtown Berkeley in October 2022, and includes three sub-projects that received $13,820,423 in Measure O funding:

• The
Hope Center homeless shelter has 32 beds for homeless individuals and 12 transition beds for homeless veterans. (Measure O funding: $6.9 million, including $6.7 million in loans already disbursed.) • The Hope Center permanent supportive housing has 53 apartments for people with disabilities or other special needs who would benefit from support services. This project serves households earning up to 30% AMI. (Measure O funding: $6.7 million, with all but $10,000 disbursed) • The Berkeley Way Apartments has 89 units of affordable housing, consisting of studios, one- and two-bedroom apartments for households earning between 50-60% AMI. (Measure O funding:
$179,000, with all but $18,000 disbursed)

1 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/jordan-court 2 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/berkeley-food-and-housing-project- bfhp-hope-center

Measure O Update
February 6, 2025

The Grinnell3 (formerly known as Blake Apartments) in West Berkeley was completed in June 2024 and has 63 units of housing, consisting of studios and one- and two-bedroom apartments. The Grinnell serves households earning between 30-60% AMI. (Measure O funding: $7.3 million, fully disbursed)

In Progress Projects
Two additional projects are in progress (either under construction or in predevelopment with site acquisition completed) and will cr eate 141 units of
affordable housing:

Maudelle Miller Shirek Community 4 in South Berkeley will have 87 units of housing, consisting of studios as well as one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments. The units will be affordable to households earning between 20-80% AMI. The project is under construction, with anticipated completion in Fall 2024. (Measure O funding: $12.9 million, including $11.2 million disbursed)

1740 San Pablo
5 in West Berkeley will have 54 affordable homes for families earning between 30% and 60% AMI, including three units reserved for artist households. (Measure O funding $7.5 million, including $6.1 million disbursed)

Projects in Predevelopment
Several projects have Meas
ure O funding reserved but construction has not yet begun:

Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) Workforce Housing Development6 will have 110 apartments affordable to households earning between 30% and 120% AMI, with leasing preference for BUSD employees. Construction start is anticipated in 2025. (Measure O funding: $24.5 million)

City Council reserved $40 million in Measure O funding to support the development of affordable housing at the Ashby and North Berkeley BART (NBB) sites. Ashby is still in the planning stages; the selected nonprofit affordable housing developer(s) will have access to up to $20 million in Measure O.

The City and BART partnered to s
elect a team of developers for NBB, three of which
are nonprofit affordable housing developers. The $26.5 million City subsidy (including $20 million in Measure O) will be split between the following projects:
• NBB BRIDGE Phase 1 Project will have 120 units of family housing, serving incomes between 30% and 70% AMI.
• NBB EBALDC Project will have 45 units of family housing (up to 70% AMI),

3 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/grinnell 4 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/maudelle-miller-shirek-community 5 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/1740-san-pablo-avenue 6 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/berkeley-unified-school-district-busd- workforce-housing

Measure O Update
February 6, 2025

plus 15 units of permanent supportive housing (up to 30% AMI). • NBB BRIDGE Insight PSH Project will have 85 units of permanent supportive housing (up to 30% AMI) serving formerly homeless households.

A fourth NBB affordable project will be subsidized by the market rate developer partnering on the site development.

Additionally, Council approved funding reservations for the following projects that will likely include some Measure O funds. The final mix of funding sources will be determined prior to loan closing, based on available funding at that time. • Supportive Housing in People’s Park
• St. Paul Terrace
• Ephesian Legacy Court
Net Measure O funds received by the City to date are $76,682,000. All of these funds have been committed or reserved for projects. The City will issue the remaining $57 million when there is debt capacity and developments are ready for the funding. The next issuance is anticipated in 2025.

POLICIES GUIDE FUNDING

The City has made Measure O dollars available through the Housing Trust Fund Program, which is subject to Council-approved Guidelines as well as administrative criteria and funding source restrictions. These Guidelines have been in place since 1990 and are updated from time to time. The most recent update was adopted by Resolution No. 69-683-N.S. on January 19, 2021.
7 In addition to staff’s work on
housing developments, the City’s Housing Advisory Commission, made up of community members appointed by Councilmembers and the Mayor, reviews projects and makes recommendations to the full City Council about expenditure of the City’s affordable housing dollars.

Development of affordable housing is traditionally divided into several phases:
• Predevelopment: Project sponsors design the development, engage with the community, apply for financing from multiple sources, obtain a use permit, apply for a building permit, then finally enter into financing agreements and pay for the building permit. Permits and financing are finalized.
• Construction: Staff continue to monitor the developments, disburse City funds, and help resolve issues that may arise.
• Lease-up: This phase starts about 6 months before Construction finishes.

Sponsors begin the Lease-Up phase by clarifying all tenant screening

7 https://berkeleyca.gov/community-recreation/affordable-housing-berkeley/housing-trust-fund

Measure O Update
February 6, 2025

criteria, marketing the housing through community partners, accepting applications, screening tenants, preparing lease and when the building is complete, working with tenants as they move in.
• Operations: The development is occupied and leasing up apartments when someone moves out. Staff monitor Operations for 55 years.

The City’s affordable housing development funds are most often reserved early in the predevelopment process. This allows project sponsors to successfully compete for state and federal funds.

Typically, the City executes a loan agreement once all permits are ready to issue and full financing has been secured, a process which usually takes years. At times City funds are loaned at site acquisition. As a result, funds may be reserved or committed for years before they are expended. Please see Attachment 1: Affordable Housing for details on the Measure O-funded projects, including income ranges served, total City funds, project type, and status.

Measure O has a powerful role. For every dollar in Measure O funding, project sponsors have been able to secure $4.20 in outside funding from state, regional or private sources.

FUNDS EXPENDED TO DATE

Once Measure O funds are committed to a project, they are typically disbursed on a monthly (or less frequent) schedule when the project sponsor has incurred eligible project expenses as well as satisfied various conditions of the loan agreement. The project sponsor submits an invoice along with documentation of each expense, which is reviewed and approved by multiple City staff before funds are released.

As of 8/12/2024 the City had disbursed $41,585,898 in Measure O funds through seven development loans as detailed in the attached table. Five are complete (Berkeley Hope Center, Berkeley Hope Center Permanent Supportive Housing, BRIDGE Berkeley Way, Jordan Court, and The Grinnell), one is under construction (Maudelle Miller Shirek Community), and site acquisition has been completed for 1740 San Pablo. These represent a total of 240 units and 44 shelter beds completed with Measure O support to date, 87 units currently in construction, and 54 units in predevelopment.

Additionally, $143,347 was disbursed to support external legal services for the Berkeley Way projects. The total Measure O funds expended for all purposes is $41,729,245.

Measure O Update
February 6, 2025

MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT

The Department of Health, Housing, and Community Services manages the affordable housing projects funded by Measure O. Funds are distributed through the Housing Trust Fund, which pools funds for affordable housing construction from a variety of sources and makes them available to developers through one single application process.

The Housing Advisory Commission and City Council review and approve projects to receive Meas
ure O funding. Oversight was previously provided by the Measure O Bond Oversight Committee, which met 10 times from April 2019 - March 2021.

The commission’s role is to review requests for funding, make funding recommendations to Council and receive information about the status of funding reservations and commitments. Neither commission produced its own report assessing the status of Measure O.

The City’s Finance Department contracted with an outside auditor to audit Measure O expenditures as required by the ballot measure. The first fiscal year including Measure O expenditures ended on June 30, 2021 and was the first year to be audited. The draft audit was completed on September 20, 2023 and had no findings.

Information about Measure O can be found in the Bond and Revenue Measures and the Capital Projects8 sections of berkeleyca.gov.9 Members of the public interested in learning more about the allocation and expenditure of Measure O funds can also consult the Housing Advisory Commission, refer to their meeting agendas and documents, or attend their meetings.10

Attachment: Spreadsheet of Measure O projects

cc: Tasha Tervalon, Interim Deputy City Manager
Sharon Friedrichsen, Interim Deputy City Manager/Budget Manager Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Margot Ernst, Manager, Housing and Community Services
Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance Department
Matthai Chakko, Assistant to the City Manager
Mark Numainville, City Clerk
Jenny Wong, City Auditor
Farimah Brown, City Attorney

8 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects 9 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/bond-revenue-measures 10 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/housing-advisory-commission

Project Name Project Address Development Partner Description Units1 Affordability Total Measure O
Funds Committed or
Reserved2
Measure O
Disbursements
Through June 2024
Total City Funds
Reserved Projected Sources of Funds3 Project Status
BRIDGE Berkeley Way 2012 Berkeley Way BRIDGE Housing
89 affordable homes and services
for low- and very low- income
families.
89 50-60% AMI $179,494 $161,544 $2,774,925 Measure O, HTF Completed Berkeley Hope Center 2012 Berkeley Way Insight Housing / BRIDGE Housing
32-bed homeless shelter, 12
transitional beds for homeless
veterans, a community kitchen and
wrap-around services for mental
health, substance abuse, job
training and social activities.
44 0-30% AMI $6,909,837 $6,652,191 $16,964,507
Berkeley's Housing Trust Fund
(HTF), Measure U14 (U1),
Measure O
Completed
Berkeley Hope Center Permanent
Supportive Housing 2012 Berkeley Way Insight Housing / BRIDGE Housing
53 permanent supportive housing
apartments. 53 0-30% AMI $6,731,092 $6,721,092 $7,727,630 Measure O, HTF Completed Jordan Court 1601 Oxford Street Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (SAHA)
34 affordable studio units for
seniors. 12 units will also be set
aside for formerly homeless
households.
35 20-60% AMI $3,501,884 $3,501,884 $6,026,927 HTF, Measure O Completed The Grinnell (formerly Blake
Apartments)
2527 San Pablo
Avenue SAHA
62 affordable apartments for
families and individuals. 12 units
are prioritized for people with an
intellectual or developmental
disability.
63 30-60% AMI $7,266,032 $7,266,032 $12,000,000 Measure O, U1, State Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF) Completed
Maudelle Miller Shirek Community 2001 Ashby Avenue Resources for Community Development (RCD)
86 apartments
for families and individuals. 12
units will also be set aside for
formerly homeless households.
87 20-80% AMI $12,932,000 $11,225,017 $17,000,000 Measure O, U1, LHTF Under Construction 1740 San Pablo Avenue 1740 San Pablo
Avenue BRIDGE Housing
53 new affordable homes for
families. 3 units will be set aside
for artist households.
54 30-60% AMI $7,500,000 $6,058,137 $7,500,000 Measure O Predevelopment Berkeley Unified School District
(BUSD) Workforce Housing
Development
1701 San Pablo
Avenue BUSD/SAHA/Abode
109 affordable apartments.

Employees of BUSD and their
households will have a leasing
preference.
110 30-120% AMI $24,500,000 - $24,500,000 Measure O Predevelopment NBB BRIDGE Phase 1 North Berkeley BART
Site BRIDGE Housing 119 affordable apartments for
families and individuals. 120 30-70% AMI - $11,563,636 Measure O, HTF Predevelopment NBB EBALDC Project North Berkeley BART
Site
East Bay Asian Local
Development Corporation
(EBALDC)
59 affordable homes, including
family housing and 15 units of
permanent supportive housing
60 0-70% AMI - $5,926,364 Measure O, HTF Predevelopment NBB BRIDGE Insight PSH Project North Berkeley BART
Site
BRIDGE Housing + Insight
Housing
85 permanent supportive housing
apartments 85 0-30% AMI - $9,010,000 Measure O, HTF Predevelopment Ashby BART Projects Ashby BART Site TBD TBD TBD TBD $20,000,000 - $26,500,000 Measure O, HTF Planning >800 New Units $109,520,339 $41,585,897.62 $147,493,989 Supportive Housing at People's Park 2556 Haste Street TBD 118 affordable units with 62 units
set aside for formerly homeless
households.
119 10-50% AMI FR5 - $14,359,593 TBD Planning
St. Paul Terrace 2024 Ashby Avenue
Community Housing
Development Corporation
(CHDC)
49 affordable units, including 11
studios, 6 one-bedrooms and 17
two-bedrooms, and 15 three-
bedrooms.
50 30-60% AMI FR5 - $12,250,000 TBD Predevelopment
Ephesian Legacy Court 1708 Harmon Avenue CHDC 79 one-bedroom units. 80 30-60% AMI FR5 - $18,087,701 TBD Predevelopment 249 New Units $44,697,294
4 General Funds generated pursuant to Measure U1
5 FR = Funding Reservation that the City Council has approved from currently available affordable housing funds. Final mix of funding to be determined at development loan closing.

City of Berkeley
Affordable Housing Projects Supported by Measure O
Total Authorized Bonds = $135M
Projects with Measure O Commitments and Reservations
1 total units, including managers' units
2 committed = in contract, and reserved = set aside for a particular project 3 the final mix of funds is determined at loan closing
Projects with City Funding Reservations
Measure O Impact
$20,000,000

Attachment 5

Department Project Count Estimated Costs Project Summary PRW 19 107,600,003$
This portfolio of park, facility, sports field, and shoreline improvements advances community well-being by delivering safe, accessible, and resilient public spaces across Berkeley. The projects modernize aging community and aquatic facilities, improve play areas and restrooms, expand high-demand park amenities, upgrade sports infrastructure, and address critical shoreline and sea-level-rise vulnerabilities to protect public access and essential infrastructure for the long term.

PW 8 97,445,061$
This set of facility, seismic, and accessibility projects strengthens the City’s civic infrastructure by addressing life-safety risks, modernizing aging public buildings, and ensuring essential services remain resilient, functional, and accessible for decades to come. Together, these investments reduce long-term liability, improve ADA compliance, and advance a safer, more reliable built environment that supports community well-being and equitable access to public services.

FIRE 4 102,272,678$
These projects modernize essential emergency response facilities, strengthening the City’s long-term resilience and ability to protect public safety amid evolving climate and operational demands. Together, they advance a future-ready infrastructure system that harmonizes with the community’s broader goals for safety, reliability, and sustainable investment.

TOTAL 31 307,317,742$

Bond Measure Proposed Projects
Total Reccomended Projects: 19
Total Amount: $102,272,678
PRW
Item # Projects Description/ Justification Percentage of full funding needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept
Priority
1 Frances Albrier Community Center (no pool)
Facility Modernization. The only major community center not rebuilt or seismically upgraded; San Pablo Park’s high use requires a modern, appropriately sized facility.
100% of project cost needed. Limited eligibility
for FEMA and sustainable energy grants; small
support possible from Parks Tax.

Community Facilities 30,000,
000.00$ Yes P arks Tax; FEMA grant for seismic Yes 2 High
2 Aquatic Park: Dreamland Area Plan Implementation. Advances the community-vetted Dreamland Area Plan to support increased recreation and waterfront activation. 25% of project cost needed. Eligible for State
grant funds; requires a 25% local match if
development funding is not secured.

Park Amenities 2,100,000.00$ Yes Parks Tax; Prop 4 grant; Developer Funds No 2 High
3 Cedar Rose 2-5 Play Structure Facility Modernization. Upgrades the heavily used 2–5 play area to current safety and accessibility standards.
100% of project cost needed. May be partially
supplemented with limited Parks Tax funds. Park Amenities 2,500,000.00$ Yes Parks Tax No 1 High 4 Cedar Rose Restroom New Restroom . Adds a high-volume restroom along the Ohlone Greenway to meet growing demand.
100% of project cost needed. May be partially
supplemented with limited Parks Tax funds. Park Amenities 500,000.00$ No Parks Tax No 1 Medium 5 Codornices Restroom Facility Modernization. Replaces the aging, high-use hills restroom with a permanent Smart Restroom facility.
100% of project cost needed. May be partially
supplemented with limited Parks Tax funds. Park Amenities 500,000.00$ No Parks Tax No 6 Medium 6 Dog Park - City Wide New Facilities. Adds 4–6 dog parks across Berkeley to address significant community demand.
50% of project cost needed. Good candidate for
grants and potential Parks Tax support. Park Amenities 2,500,000.00$ No Parks Tax No All High 7 Glendale LaLoma Park Improvements: Playgrounds, Parking Lot, Pathways Facility Modernization. Improves play structures, parking lot, and pathways for safety and ADA access.
100% of project cost needed. Site not grant
eligble Park Amenities 3,500,000.00$ Yes P arks Tax No 6 High 8 Harrison Field Conversion to Artificial Turf Full Conversion. Replaces failing natural fields with artificial turf to double field capacity and reduce maintenance.
100% of project cost needed. May be
supplemented with limited Parks Tax and small
state grants.

Sports Facilities 6,000,000.00$ No Parks Tax No 2 High 9 Harrison Park Restroom Facility Modernization. Advances restroom improvements designed under T1 Phase 2.
100% of project cost needed. May be partially
supplemented with limited Parks Tax funds. Park Amenities 750,000. 00$ Yes Parks Tax No 1 High 10 King Pool (25 Meter) & Locker Room Replacement Facility Modernization. Rebuilds locker rooms and replaces existing pools with a modern, competition-capable 25-meter facility. 100% of project cost needed. Difficult to secure
grants for pool facilities; Parks Tax cannot be
used.

Community Facilities 25,000,
000.00$ Yes N
one No 5 High
11 Live Oak Soccer and Basketball Courts and Lighting Facility Modernization. Levels basketball courts, converts soccer practice field to turf, and improves lighting.
66% of project cost needed. Remaining costs
may be funded with Parks Tax. Sports Facilities 3,000,000.00$ No Parks Tax No 5 Medium 12 San Pablo Sports Field Irrigation and Drainage System Replacement. Fixes failing irrigation and drainage at the City’s most used sports fields.
100% of project cost needed. Maintenance-
focused project; not eligible for grants. Sports Facilities 1,600,000.00$ No Parks Tax No 2 Medium 13 Cesar Chavez Park Restroom and Pathway New Restroom + Pathway Renovation. Improves access and replaces aging facilities at a high-use waterfront park. 60% of project cost needed. Eligible for Parks Tax
support. Park Amenities 3,000,000.00$ Yes
Parks Tax, State Coastal
Conservancy (SSC) grant
eligible
No 1 Medium
Project Summary: This portfolio of park, facility, sports field, and shoreline improvements advances community well-being by delivering safe, accessible, and resilient public spaces across Berkeley. The projects modernize aging community and aquatic facilities, improve play areas and restrooms, expand high-demand park amenities, upgrade sports infrastructure, and address critical shoreline and sea-level-rise vulnerabilities to protect public access and essential infrastructure for the long term.

Bond Measure Proposed Projects
Total Reccomended Projects: 19
Total Amount: $102,272,678
PRW
Item # Projects Description/ Justification Percentage of full funding needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept
Priority
Project Summary: This portfolio of park, facility, sports field, and shoreline improvements advances community well-being by delivering safe, accessible, and resilient public spaces across Berkeley. The projects modernize aging community and aquatic facilities, improve play areas and restrooms, expand high-demand park amenities, upgrade sports infrastructure, and address critical shoreline and sea-level-rise vulnerabilities to protect public access and essential infrastructure for the long term. 14 Marina Docks Timber Pile Replacement - 130 piles Infrastructure Stabilization. Replaces remaining timber piles to extend Marina dock life for 50+ years.
100% of project cost needed. Not eligible for
grants or Parks Tax.

Shoreline & Sea Level
Rise Projects 6,000,000.00$ Yes No ne No 2 Medium 15 Marina Blvd Sea Level Rise and Bay Trail Sea Level Rise Adaptation. Protects shoreline pathways and roadway segments.
50% of project cost needed. The sea level rise
portion of the project is grant-eligible.

Shoreline & Sea Level
Rise Projects 1,900,000.00$ Yes Federal and State grant eligible No 1 and 2 High
16 University Ave Sea Level Rise- Bike Park on University Avenue Sea Level Rise Adaptation. Addresses vulnerabilities at the Bike Park.
50% of project cost needed. The sea level rise
portion of the project is grant-eligible.

Shoreline & Sea Level
Rise Projects 2,750,000.00$ Yes Prop 4 and SSC grant eligble No 2 High
17 South Cove Seawall Replacement Full Replacement. Prevents imminent seawall failure that would close public access to South Cove.
100% of project cost needed. Minimal grant
eligibility due to maintenance scope; not eligible
for Parks Tax.

Shoreline & Sea Level
Rise Projects 5,000,000.00$ Yes SSC grant eligble Yes 2 High 18 Univ Ave / Seawall Dr / Bay Trail / Plaza Shoreline Improvements. Advances CEQA/NEPA-ready shoreline upgrades funded by multiple partner sources.
20% of project cost needed. Requires local
matching funds to unlock potential state and
regional shoreline resilience grants.

Shoreline & Sea Level
Rise Projects 5,000,000.00$ Yes
SSC grant eligble,
Measure FF, future 199
Seawall tennant
No 2 High
22 Adeline Corridor Open Space New Open Space. Aligns with the Adeline Corridor Plan to expand park access in an equity-priority area.
100% of project cost needed. Portions of the
project are grant-eligible, though transportation
elements are a stronger fit for competitive grant
program
Park Amenities $ 6,000,000.00 Yes Misc. Transportation grants No 3 High
Total - Recommended PRW Projects 107,600,002.50$

Total Reccomended Projects: 11
Total Amount: $97,445,061
Public Works
Item # Projects Description/Justification Percentage of Full Funding Needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept Priority
23 Veterans Memorial Bldg (VMB) Ph 1
Renovation - Seismic Upgrades
Seismic Upgrade. Strengthens the historic 1928 Veterans Memorial Building as the first phase of the Civic Center restoration effort; the building lacks seismic integrity and has not received structural reinforcement since 1993.
20%–100% of project cost needed. FEMA
grant application (2025) requested $21M; if
awarded, a $6M City match is required. No
other City funding available.

Facilities $ 13,941,742 Yes FEMA Grant pending Yes 4 High 24 Maudelle Shirek Bldg (MSB) Ph 1
Renovation - Seismic Upgrades
Seismic Upgrade. Improves seismic performance of the historic 1909 building, which predates seismic codes and is structurally deficient, posing significant life-safety risk; work brings the facility to Damage Control Plus standards.
20%–100% of project cost needed. FEMA
grant application (2025) requested $21M; if
awarded, a $6M City match is required. No
other City funding available.

Facilities $ 6,719,513 Yes FEMA Grant pending Yes 4 High 25 Berkeley Mental Health Services Building
Renovations
Facility Replacement. Constructs a new two-story mental health services building to expand program capacity and replace aging structures with significant deferred maintenance.
40-50% of project cost needed. Pending
grant is not secured. $1.7M in cash match
has been identified with exiting funding for
the project.

Facilities $ 3,249,
900 Yes Grant pending No 3 Medium
26 50/50 Sidewalk Program
Sidewalk Repairs (ADA). Funds backlog of sidewalk safety and accessibility repairs through the City’s shared-cost 50/50 program to address cracked and uneven sidewalks citywide.
50%–100% of program cost needed.

Measure FF may support the City’s share
beginning FY27, but annual availability is
limited to approximately $3M citywide.

Pedestrian/ADA $ 14,000,000 Backlog Measure BB; Measure FF; State Gas Tax Yes Various Medium
27 MLK Civic Center Annex Modernernization
(1947 Center)
Facility Modernization. Addresses deferred maintenance through seismic upgrades, HVAC, electrical, elevator replacement, hazardous materials abatement, and ADA improvements.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Facilities $ 18,306,000 Yes None Yes 4 Medium 28 MLK Civic Center Building Modernization
(2180 Milvia)
Facility Modernization. Replaces end-of-life mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, addresses hazardous materials, and includes waterproofing and ADA improvements for the 89,000 sq. ft. civic building.Need exterior envelope waterproofing. ADA Improvements are included.
100% of project cost needed. Deferred
maintenance remains unfunded; no
dedicated funding source beyond baseline
corrective maintenance.

Facilities $ 11,745,
040 Assessment None No 1 Medium
29 Animal Services Facility Modernization
Facility Modernization. Repairs roofing, HVAC, drainage, electrical, plumbing, and interior finishes to address deferred maintenance and improve operational efficiency.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Facilities $ 1,995,400 Yes None No 2 Medium Project Summary: This set of facility, seismic, and accessibility projects strengthens the City’s civic infrastructure by addressing life-safety risks, modernizing aging public buildings, and ensuring essential services remain resilient, functional, and accessible for decades to come. Together, these investments reduce long-term liability, improve ADA compliance, and advance a safer, more reliable built environment that supports community well-being and equitable access to public services.

Total Reccomended Projects: 11
Total Amount: $97,445,061
Public Works
Item # Projects Description/Justification Percentage of Full Funding Needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept Priority
Project Summary: This set of facility, seismic, and accessibility projects strengthens the City’s civic infrastructure by addressing life-safety risks, modernizing aging public buildings, and ensuring essential services remain resilient, functional, and accessible for decades to come. Together, these investments reduce long-term liability, improve ADA compliance, and advance a safer, more reliable built environment that supports community well-being and equitable access to public services. 30 Public Safety Building Modernization
Fa
cility Modernization. Updates the 24-hour essential services building by repairing roof leaks, improving interior finishes, replacing doors and hardware, and completing accessibility upgrades.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Facilities $ 8,404,398 No None No 4 Medium 31 West Berkeley Family Wellness Center
Modernization
Facility Modernization. Repairs and upgrades windows, flooring, HVAC, seismic components, electrical systems, and ADA features to address deferred maintenance.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities; scope not included in
current T1 improvements.

Facilities $ 6,500,000 No None No 1 High 32 South Berkeley Senior Center
Improvements
Mechanical System Upgrade. Replaces end-of-life HVAC and related mechanical components to ensure reliable operations at the senior center.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities; scope not included in
current T1 improvements.

Facilities $ 3,900,000 Yes None No 3 High 33 ADA Self Evaluation Barrier Removal
Projects
ADA Barrier Removal. Funds backlog of accessibility improvements required under the ADA Transition Plan to address path-of-travel, restroom, signage, and facility access barriers.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 4,341,534 Backlog None No Various Medium 33a Fire Department Warehouse
45 items, including: Ramps, Doors, Signage, and Restrooms. 100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 63,400 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 2 Medium
33b Fire Station #1
51 items, including: Parking, Curb Ramps, Path of Travel, Doors, Signage, Restrooms, Break/Conference Room, Accessible Showers, and Reach Ranges.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 49,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 2 Medium

Total Reccomended Projects: 11
Total Amount: $97,445,061
Public Works
Item # Projects Description/Justification Percentage of Full Funding Needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept Priority
Project Summary: This set of facility, seismic, and accessibility projects strengthens the City’s civic infrastructure by addressing life-safety risks, modernizing aging public buildings, and ensuring essential services remain resilient, functional, and accessible for decades to come. Together, these investments reduce long-term liability, improve ADA compliance, and advance a safer, more reliable built environment that supports community well-being and equitable access to public services. 33c Fire Station #2 56 items, including: Parking, Path of Travel, Doors, Signage, Restrooms, Drinking Fountains, and Reach Ranges.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 74,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 4 Medium
33d Fire Station #3 36 items, including: Path of Travel, Doors, Signage, and Restrooms. 100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 64,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 8 Medium
33e Fire Station #5 50 items, including: Path of Travel, Stairs, Doors, Signage, Restrooms, and Benches.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 112,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 3 Medium
33f Fire Station #7 69 items, including: Parking, Path of Travel, Elevators, Stairs, Doors, Signage, Restrooms, Break/Conference Room, and Accessible Showers. 100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 136,500 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 6 Medium
33g Aquatic Park
378 items, including: Parking, Curb Ramps, Path of Travel, Ramps, Stairs, Doors, Signage, Restrooms, Drinking Fountains, Outdoor Sports Areas, Play Area, Sinks, Picnic Areas, Reach Ranges, Benches, Fitting/Dressing Rooms, Fishing Piers, and Trails.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 753,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 2 Medium
33h Berkeley Yacht Club
278 items, including: Curb Ramps, Path of Travel, Stairs, Doors, Counters, Signage, Restrooms, Food Service Tables, Break/Conference Room, Picnic Areas, Accessible Showers, and Laundry Rooms.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 604,000 B acklog
Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 1 Medium
33i Center Street Garage and Commercial
Space
191 items, including: Parking, Path of Travel, Elevators, Stairs, Doors, Signage, Restrooms, Drinking Fountains, and Reach Ranges. 100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 365,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 1 Medium
33j Cultural Arts Center & Theater
131 items, including: Parking, Curb Ramps, Path of Travel, Stairs, Doors, Counters, Signage, Restrooms, Drinking Fountains, Assembly Areas, Break/Conference Room, and Sinks.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 200,000 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 3 Medium
33k MLK Jr. Civic Center Park 120 items including: Path of Travel, Stairs, Doors, Counters, Signage, Restrooms.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 149,668 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 1 Medium

Total Reccomended Projects: 11
Total Amount: $97,445,061
Public Works
Item # Projects Description/Justification Percentage of Full Funding Needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept Priority
Project Summary: This set of facility, seismic, and accessibility projects strengthens the City’s civic infrastructure by addressing life-safety risks, modernizing aging public buildings, and ensuring essential services remain resilient, functional, and accessible for decades to come. Together, these investments reduce long-term liability, improve ADA compliance, and advance a safer, more reliable built environment that supports community well-being and equitable access to public services. 33l Veterans Memorial Hall
14 5 items, including: Path of Travel, Stairs, Doors, Counters, Signage, Restrooms, Drinking Fountains, Assembly Areas, Break/Conference Room, and Sinks.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 1,297,211 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 1 Medium
33m Rent Stabilization Board Office
131 items, including Path of Travel, Stairs, Doors, Counters, Signage, Restrooms, Drinking Fountains, Assembly Areas, Break/Conference Room, and Sinks.
100% of project cost needed. City lacks
alternative funding sources or immediate
grant opportunities.

Pedestrian/Accessibility $ 473,755 Backlog Funded annual in CIP for
$250,000/year total for
program
No 1 Medium
Total - Recommended PW Projects $ 97,445,061

Bond Measure Proposed Projects
Total Reccomended Projects: 4
Total Amount: $102,272,678
Fire
Item # Projects Description/Justification Percentage of full funding needed Category Est. Cost Conceptual Design done?
Potential additional
funding source
Immediate
safety
consideration
Council District Dept
Priority
35 Fire Station 4 Replacement (1900 Marin)
Facility Modernization. Station 4 is at end of life, undersized for current and future operational needs, and unable to safely support expanded staffing and a second ambulance unit.

Replacement also enables a cost-saving expansion into the adjacent roadway, avoiding the higher cost of relocation. 100% of project cost needed. Grant
opportunities for fire station
replacement are extremely limited; full
bond funding would be required.

Facilities $48,050,297.94 Yes No Yes 5 High
36 Fire Station 6 Replacement (999 Cedar)
Facility Modernization. Station 6 is at end of life and too small to meet projected service demands. A full replacement is required to support expanded staffing, modern apparatus, and safe working conditions for firefighters.
100% of project cost needed. Grant
opportunities for fire station
replacement are extremely limited; full
bond funding would be required.

Facilities $22,243,
520.43 Yes No Yes 1 High
37 Fire/EMS/Police Dispatch Center Remodel (2100 MLK)
Facility Modernization. The 911 Dispatch Center requires renovation to handle rising call volumes, modernize critical infrastructure, and create a safer, efficient workspace.

Improvements include expanding the operations floor,
upgrading technology and HVAC systems, and adding training and wellness spaces to support operational readiness and staff retention.
100% of project cost needed. Dispatch
center renovation is not eligible for
significant state or federal grant
funding; bond funding is necessary.

Facilities $3,978,860.00 Yes No Yes 1 High
38 Fire Training Center Replacement (Harrison x 8-9th)
Facility Modernization. The current training facility is undersized, located in a residential neighborhood, and unable to support essential training activities, scheduling needs, or parking demands. A new, purpose-built training center is required to meet the operational needs of a modern fire department.
100% of project cost needed. Grant
opportunities for fire station
replacement are extremely limited; full
bond funding would be required.

Facilities $28,000,000.00 Partial No Yes 1 High
Total - Recommended Fire Projects $102,272,678.37
Project Summary: These projects modernize essential emergency response facilities, strengthening the City’s long- term resilience and ability to protect public safety amid evolving climate and operational demands. Together, they advance a future-ready infrastructure system that harmonizes with the community’s broader goals for safety, reliability, and sustainable investment.