Berkeley City Council
September 15, 2026

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 1

AGENDA

BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, September 15, 2026
6:00 PM

SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD ROOM - 1231 ADDISON STREET, BERKELEY, CA 94702

ADENA ISHII, MAYOR
COUNCILMEMBERS:

DISTRICT 1 – RASHI KESARWANI DISTRICT 5 – SHOSHANA O’KEEFE DISTRICT 2 – TERRY TAPLIN DISTRICT 6 – BRENT BLACKABY
DISTRICT 3 – BEN BARTLETT DISTRICT 7 – CECILIA LUNAPARRA DISTRICT 4 – IGOR TREGUB 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: 165 877 2214. 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, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 2
Preliminary Matters
Roll Call:

Land Acknowledgement Statement: The City of Berkeley recognizes that the community we live in was built on the territory of xučyun (Huchiun (Hooch-yoon)), the ancestral and unceded land of the Chochenyo (Cho-chen-yo)-speaking Ohlone (Oh-low-nee) people, the ancestors and descendants of the sovereign Verona Band of Alameda County. This land was and continues to be of great importance to all of the Ohlone Tribes and descendants of the Verona Band. As we begin our meeting tonight, we acknowledge and honor the original inhabitants of Berkeley, the documented 5,000 -year history of a vibrant community at the West Berkeley Shellmound, and the Ohlone people who continue to reside in the East Bay. We recognize that Berkeley’s residents have and continue to benefit from the use and occupation of this unceded stolen land since the City of Berkeley’s incorporation in 1878. As stewards of the laws regulating the City of Berkeley, it is not only vital that we recognize the history of this land, but also recognize that the Ohlone people are present members of Berkeley and other East Bay communities today. The City of Berkeley will continue to build relationships with the Lisjan Tribe and to create meaningful actions that uphold the intention of this land acknowledgement.

Ceremonial Matters: In addition to those items listed on the agenda, the Mayor may add additional ceremonial matters.

1. Pledge of Allegiance
City Manager Comments: The City Manager may make announcements or provide information to the City Council in the form of an oral report. The Council will not take action on such items but may request the City Manager place a report on a future agenda for discussion.

Public Comment on Non-Agenda Matters: Up to ten persons will be selected to address matters not on the Council agenda. If five or fewer persons are identified to provide non-agenda comment, each person selected will be allotted two minutes each. If more than five persons are selected to address matters not on the Council agenda, each person selected will be allotted one minute each.

In-person attendees wishing to address the Council on matters not on the Council agenda during the initial ten-minute period for such comment, must submit a speaker card to the City Clerk in person at the meeting location and prior to the moment that the Presiding Officer calls for public comment on non - agenda items. Remote attendees must raise their hand in the videoconference application when the Presiding Officer calls for non-agenda speakers. The first five raised hands on the videoconference application will be selected to speak and the first five cards drawn at the meeting will be selected to speak. The number of in-person and remote speakers selected may be adjusted by the Presiding Officer if fewer than five speakers from either format are identified.

The remainder of the speakers wishing to address the Council on non-agenda items will be heard at the end of the agenda.

Public Comment by Employee Unions (first regular meeting of the month): This period of public comment is reserved for officially designated representatives of City of Berkeley employee unions, with five minutes allocated per union if representatives of three or fewer unions wish to speak and up to three minutes per union if representatives of four or more unions wish to speak.

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 3
Consent Calendar
The Council will first determine whether to move items on the agenda for “Action” or “Information” to the “Consent Calendar”, or move “Consent Calendar” items to “Action.” Three members of the City Council must agree to pull an item from the Consent Calendar or Information Calendar for it to move to Action.

Items that remain on the “Consent Calendar” are voted on in one motion as a group. “Information” items are not discussed or acted upon at the Council meeting unless they are moved to “Action” or “Consent”.

No additional items can be moved onto the Consent Calendar once public comment has commenced. At any time during, or immediately after, public comment on Information and Consent items, any Councilmember may move any Information or Consent item to “Action.” Following this, the Council will vote on the items remaining on the Consent Calendar in one motion.

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 at the time the matter is taken up during the Action Calendar.

Public Comment on Consent Calendar and Information Items Only: The Council will take public comment on any items that are either on the amended Consent Calendar or the Information Calendar. 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 their 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. A speaker may only speak once during the period for public comment on Consent Calendar and Information items.

Additional information regarding public comment by City of Berkeley employees and interns: Employees and interns of the City of Berkeley, although not required, are encouraged to identify themselves as such, the department in which they work and state whether they are speaking as an individual or in their official capacity when addressing the Council in open session or workshops.

Consent Calendar

1. Grant Application: California Strategic Growth Council, Community Resilience Center (CRC) Planning Grant for Civic Center
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or their designee to: 1. Submit a grant application under the California Strategic Growth Council’s Community Resilience Centers (CRC) Program for a Planning Grant for an amount up to $500,000 for planning activities to prepare the two historic buildings in Berkeley’s Civic Center, the Maudelle Shirek Building (“MSB” or “Old City Hall”) and the Veterans Memorial Building (“VMB”) for future structural upgrades including capital improvements and seismic retrofits; 2. Subject to award, accept the grant, execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments, accept any additional funding allocations from the CRC Program and designate the City Manager or their designee as the applicant’s authorized agent.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Eleanor Hollander, Economic Development, (510) 981-7530

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 4

2. Contract: Downtown Berkeley Association for Addison Street Catenary Lighting
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to: 1. Enter into a sole source contract and any amendments with the Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) for the City to provide $150,000 to the DBA for actual incurred costs associated with the Addison Street Catenary Lighting project to support Downtown revitalization and placemaking in the Downtown Addison Street Arts District, and 2. Advance the city’s approval to utilize city property as part of this effort (namely the connection/anchor points for the support guide wires for the lighting on the Addison Street side of the Center Street Garage building located at 2025 Center St).

Financial Implications: See report.

Contact: Eleanor Hollander, Economic Development, (510) 981-7530

3. Loan Administration Board Dissolution; Repealing BMC Chapter 3.72 From: City Manager
Recommendation:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or their designee to assume direct administrative and operational oversight of the Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) program and the RLF Administrative Plan, upon dissolution of the Loan Administration Board (LAB); and

2. Adopt first reading of an ordinance repealing Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter

3.72. Loan Administration Board enabling legislation, thereby dissolving the Loan Administration Board.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Eleanor Hollander, Economic Development, (510) 981-7530

4. Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on September 15, 2026
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Approve the request for proposals or invitation for bids (attached to staff report) that will be, or are planned to be, issued upon final approval by the requesting department or division. All contracts over the City Manager’s threshold will be returned to Council for final approval.

Financial Implications: $25,822,884 - Various Funds
Contact: Henry Oyekanmi, Finance, (510) 981-7300

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 5

5. Contract No. 32200227 Amendment: Fire Aside for Wildfire Resilience Software From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend Contract No. 32200227 with Fire Aside, LLC for defensible space inspection and community chipper management software increasing the amount by $150,000 for an amended total amount not to exceed $410,000 and maintaining the same term which ends on May 17, 2028.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: David Sprague, Fire, (510) 981-3473

6. Purchase Orders for Bauer Compressors Inc. for Firefighting Supplies, Equipment, Service and Maintenance
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager, or their designee to execute annual purchase orders using a piggyback contract and any amendments with Bauer Compressors Inc. using the National Purchasing Partners (NPP) contract No. PS26090 in an amount not to exceed $1,579,472 for Firefighting supplies, equipment and related service and maintenance from October 1, 2026 through March 4, 2030, with an option to extend one (1) year to March 4, 2031.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: David Sprague, Fire, (510) 981-3473

7. Purchase Orders: Stryker Sales for Gurneys, Stair Chairs, and Mechanical CPR Units
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or their designee to utilize Sourcewell Contract No. 041823 to issue piggyback purchase orders and any amendments to Stryker Sales LLC for the lease of ten gurneys, ten powered gurney fastener systems (power load system), and ten evacuation chairs (stair chair), and twelve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) units for Fire Department response vehicles from October 1, 2026 through January 1, 2033 in an amount not to exceed $1,591,355.

Financial Implications: $1,591,355 - Various Funds
Contact: David Sprague, Fire, (510) 981-3473

8. Contract No.32300207 Amendment: Easy Does It for Accessible Wheelchair Van Services for Seniors & the Disabled
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 72,259-N.S and authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to amend Contract No. 32300207 with Easy Does It increasing the amount by $57,000 for the period of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, for a total contract amount not to exceed $307,000. These services support accessible wheelchair van services to customers of the Aging Services Division’s Berkeley Rides for Seniors & the Disabled program.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Scott Gilman, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5100

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 6

9. Revenue Contract: MARU for Aging Services - Information and Assistance Fiscal Years 2027 - 2030
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to accept grant funding and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments with MARU (formally known as Korean Community Center of the East Bay), an East Bay non-profit organization. This funding will support Information and Assistance Services for Berkeley seniors from Fiscal Year 2027 through Fiscal Year 2030 (FY 2027 - FY 2030) in the projected annual amount of $169,347.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Scott Gilman, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5100

10. Revenue Contracts: Aging Services - Nutrition Programs Fiscal Years 2027 - 2030
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt two Resolutions authorizing the City Manager or designee to receive grant funding and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments with Alameda County to provide congregate and home-delivered meals for seniors for Fiscal Year 2027 through Fiscal Year 2030 (FY2027-FY2030):
a. Congregate Meals in a projected annual amount of $696,800; and b. Home Delivered Meals in a projected annual amount of $860,515.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Scott Gilman, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5100

11. Shattuck Senior Homes Loan Modification Request
From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution approving the following actions to modify two existing Housing Trust Fund (HTF) loans for Shattuck Senior Homes, located at 2425 Shattuck Avenue, by: 1. Combining the outstanding principal balances of the two existing loans into one new City loan in the amount of $970,603 plus accrued interest. 2. Reducing the interest rate from 6% to 3% simple interest. 3. Extending the loan maturity date by 55 years to September 1, 2082. 4. Waiving the HTF Guidelines requirement to restrict 20% of units at 30% Area Median Income (AMI) and maintaining affordability requirements at 50% and 60% AMI. 5. Extending the Regulatory Agreement so that it is coterminous with the new loan maturity date of September 1, 2082. 6. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all original or amended documents or agreements to effectuate these actions, including amendments to the existing loan agreements.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Scott Gilman, Health, Housing, and Community Services, (510) 981-5100

Consent Calendar
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 7

12. Grant Application: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT) From: City Manager
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Regional Measure 3 Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT) for up to $25,000,000 for construction of portions of the landside elements of the Berkeley Water Transportation Pier-Ferry Project.

Financial Implications: $25,000,000 (Revenue)
Contact: Scott Ferris, Parks, Recreation and Waterfront, (510) 981-6700

13. Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley From: Environment and Climate Commission
Recommendation: The Berkeley Environment and Climate Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in the City of Berkeley, which would: - Express the City's formal support for a neighborhood decarbonization pilot in Berkeley under Senate Bill 1221 (2024), with the goal of modeling equitable whole- home electrification for a neighborhood zone; and -Commit the City to being an active partner in pilot implementation, asking the City Manager to designate at least one staff member to participate in regular coordination meetings and support collaboration across relevant City departments; and -Affirm the City's intent to work collaboratively with PG&E, community organizations, Community Choice Aggregators, public health advocates, workforce development partners, and regional agencies to advance a pilot and help secure resources for its success.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Sarah Moore, Commission Secretary, (510) 981-7400

14. Whistleblower Program Special Report: Evaluation of Workplace Relationship Policies
From: Auditor
Recommendation: We recommend that City Council receive this report and direct the City Manager to implement Recommendations 1 and 2 consistent with Management’s Response. We further recommend that City Council refer Recommendation 3 to the Agenda and Rules Committee for consideration of whether to pursue adoption of nepotism and cronyism provisions in the Berkeley Municipal Code.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Jenny Wong, Auditor, (510) 981-6750

Council Consent Items
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 8

15. District 1 Support for the Gilman District Merchants Association to Promote Longterm Sustainability and Area Improvements: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to General Fund and Grant of Such Funds From: Councilmember Kesarwani (Author)
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $65,000 from the FY 2026-27 office budget of District 1 Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani to provide a one-time capacity building grant to support the Gilman District Merchants Association (GDMA) to promote economic development, district- wide improvements and long-term sustainability of the Gilman District Street Fair (GDSF).

Distribution of funds should be approved by the Gilman District Coordinating Committee, the representative advisory board established to comply with the fiscal agent, the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce. Use of funds should prioritize: - Salary/stipend for part-time director of the GDMA; Stipends for key volunteers for the Gilman District Street Fair; -Business Administration for the GDMA outside of salaries including: -Publicity, promotion, membership building and website maintenance for the GDMA; -Event planning and execution of GDMA networking and social gatherings; -Public Safety Enhancement Grants to local businesses.

Financial Implications: $65,000
Contact: Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember, District 1, (510) 981-7110

16. Referral for an Information Report Assessing all Housing Related Impact, Development and Local Parcel Tax Fees to Provide Guidance and Better Understand the True and Total Costs of Developing Housing of All Types in the City of Berkeley
From: Councilmember Kesarwani (Author)
Recommendation: Referral to the City Manager to direct Planning staff to prepare a comprehensive housing fee study to be presented to Council as an information report that would:

1. Collect Fee and Parcel Tax Data from Berkeley and other cities to create a housing production comparison matrix. Information should include a summary of categories, amounts, and bases for calculating impact fees, other development fees, and parcel taxes in all cities in the matrix; and

2. Calculate local fee and parcel tax costs for housing development prototypes.

Information should include the total fee burden applicable to several multifamily housing prototypes (examples could include fourplex/town homes; 10 unit small multifamily; 8-story midrise; 18-story high-rise) and estimate each selected jurisdiction’s approximate applicable amount of impact fee, other development fee, and parcel taxes for the respective prototypes.

Financial Implications: Staff time
Contact: Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember, District 1, (510) 981-7110

Council Consent Items
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 9

17. Zoning Ordinance Modification for Manufacturing Research and Development (M-RD) District
From: Councilmember Kesarwani (Author)
Recommendation: Referral to the City Manager and Planning Commission to amend Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 23.206.020 to allow for a reduced level of discretion for Vehicle Repair and Service in the Manufacturing Research and Development (M-RD) District.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember, District 1, (510) 981-7110

18. Resolution in Support of AB 1761 (Rogers) — Electricity: Calculation Methodology: Data Disclosure
From: Councilmember Tregub (Author)
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution in strong support of Assembly Bill (AB) 1761 (Rogers), which would improve transparency in the calculation of the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) and other nonbypassable charges, and distribute copies to Governor Gavin Newsom; Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, Senate Utilities, Energy, and Communications Committee Chair Benjamin Allen and Senator Jesse Arreguín; Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee Chair Cottie Petrie-Norris and Assemblymembers Chris Rogers and Buffy Wicks; and Senator Steven Bradford, Chair of the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee to support its passage.

Financial Implications: Staff time
Contact: Igor Tregub, Councilmember, District 4, (510) 981-7140

19. Resolution in opposition to the handling, storage, and transport of coal and petroleum coke in the San Francisco Bay Region, urging stringent regulation of such facilities by the Bay Area Air District, and in support of Assembly Bill (AB) 40
From: Councilmember Tregub (Author), Councilmember Kesarwani (Co- Sponsor), Councilmember Taplin (Co-Sponsor), Mayor Ishii (Co-Sponsor) Recommendation: Adopt a resolution opposing the handling, storage, and transport of coal and petroleum coke in the San Francisco Bay Region, urging stringent regulation of such facilities by the Bay Area Air District, and in support of Assembly Bill (AB) 40.

Financial Implications: Staff time
Contact: Igor Tregub, Councilmember, District 4, (510) 981-7140

Council Consent Items
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 10

20. Referral to the City Manager: RENAISSANCE (Revitalizing Enterprise and Neighborhoods through Activation, Investment, Safety, Streamlining, Accessibility, Networking, Collaboration, and Equity) – Part 2: Commercial Vacancy Blight Prevention and Mitigation
From: Councilmember Tregub (Author), Councilmember O’Keefe (Co-Sponsor), Councilmember Blackaby (Co-Sponsor)
Recommendation: Commercial Vacancy Blight Prevention and Mitigation Refer to the City Manager and City Attorney the development of an integrated strategy to prevent and reduce unmitigated ground-floor retail vacancies and blight, increase activation, and support the vitality and resilience of local businesses and other community-serving uses in Berkeley’s Commercial Districts.

Recommendations include but are not limited to developing regulations around the following solutions:

1. Subdivision of Larger Storefronts.

Develop policies that encourage the conversion or subdivision of larger storefront commercial spaces to allow for more diverse business and community uses.

2. Flexible Mixed-Use Occupancy.
a. Review Berkeley's existing zoning regulations for live/work, maker, creative, and related uses to identify regulatory barriers to the flexible use of underutilized commercial storefronts and modify the Zoning Ordinance and establish or update performance standards where necessary to address such barriers. b. Explore performance standards to ensure that live/work, maker, and other creative uses help activate and enhance the vibrancy of the adjacent neighborhood.

3. Financial Assurances Tied to Property Maintenance and Site Conditions.

To the extent permissible under state law, develop regulations requiring, as a condition of applicable development permits, performance bonds or other financial assurances sufficient to ensure appropriate property maintenance and site conditions if an approved development project is substantially delayed, suspended, or abandoned.

4. Cold Shell Prevention.
a. Explore a regulatory framework to prevent premature deactivation of tenant-ready commercial spaces (commonly referred to as “cold shelling”) in buildings planned for demolition by considering indicators of project readiness, which could include demonstrated financial capacity, evidence that a portion of project funding is secured, and other relevant factors are considered.
b. Require a permit for the removal or decommissioning of utility hook-ups as part of building safety and habitability standards, to prevent practices that create and perpetuate prolonged vacancy and disinvestment.

5. Warm Shell Development.

Establish requirements and/or incentives to ensure that ground floor retail spaces in new developments are delivered with basic utility connections (commonly referred to as “warm shells”), including utility and electricity hookups, when those services are available and have been connected to the rest of the building.

6. Shared Commercial Facilities.

Explore and, where feasible, facilitate the creation of customer-accessible shared restroom facilities serving multiple ground-floor commercial spaces or buildings,

Council Consent Items
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 11
including through zoning allowances, coordinated development standards, and incentives. These should emphasize cost-neutral or revenue-supporting implementation approaches, such as integration into private development projects, public-private partnerships, or maintenance models funded by participating property owners, while ensuring compliance with applicable building, accessibility, and public health requirements.

7. Demonstration of Utility-Related Delays.

Where delays in utility approvals or service connections are cited, require developers to provide reasonable documentation from utility providers demonstrating that such delays are outside of the developer’s direct control. Explore opportunities for improved coordination with utility providers and City processes to help mitigate such delays and support the timely delivery of usable ground floor commercial space.

8. Utility Equipment Undergrounding.

Develop regulations requiring large new residential and commercial mixed-use developments to locate transformers and other large utility equipment below grade, to the extent feasible and consistent with applicable utility requirements.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Igor Tregub, Councilmember, District 4, (510) 981-7140

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 their 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 – Old Business
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 12
21a. Resolution Reinstating the Berkeley Police Department’s Ability to Use Tear Gas for Critical Life-Threatening Incidents Only and Lifting the COVID-19 Moratorium on Smoke and Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) Spray (Continued from July 14, 2026) (Item Contains Supplemental Material) (Reviewed by the Public Safety Policy Committee)
From: Councilmember Kesarwani (Author)
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution amending the Berkeley City Council's June 9, 2020 direction regarding smoke, OC spray, and tear gas to allow the Berkeley Police Department (BPD) Special Response Team (SRT) to use tear gas under circumstances in which there is a significant risk of injury or death, maintain the prohibition on the use of tear gas solely for crowd control, and lift the temporary moratorium on the use of smoke and OC spray.

Policy Committee Recommendation: To send the item with a Qualified Positive recommendation to Council that includes:

1. Making the resolution text explicit regarding permissible uses and policy limitations (particularly defining “critical incident” and excluding crowd control use),

2. Clarifying and attaching relevant use policies for public transparency, and

3. Developing an appropriate after-action reporting framework aligned with existing reporting and Transparency Hub practices.

Financial Implications: See report
Contact: Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember, District 1, (510) 981-7110

21b. Social Justice Implications of Proposed Use of Controlled Weapons and Other Policing Tools (Continued from July 14, 2026)
From: Peace and Justice Commission
Recommendation: Adopt a Policy approving the following actions with regard to the appropriateness of certain chemical weapons and other tools:

1. Retain the existing 2020 bans on chemical weapons (CS and OC), and the 1982 bans on police dogs and helicopters.

2. Retain the 1997 requirement for public reporting of each use of pepper spray.

3. Request the City Manager to engage an academic institution such as UC Berkeley, UCSF, or Stanford to study the health impacts of tear gas and other chemical weapons and canine support, potential short-term and long-term impacts on vulnerable populations and possible alternatives to the use of chemical weapons that provide officer safety, suspect safety, and safety to the general public.

Financial Implications: None
Contact: Tasha Tervalon, Commission Secretary, (510) 981-7000

Public Comment – Items Not Listed on the Agenda
Adjournment
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

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 13
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

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.

Attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various scents, whether natural or manufactured, in products and materials. Please help the City respect these needs.

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.

If you have obtained interpretation services for your use during a City Council meeting and would like to request assistance, please contact the City Clerk Department at (510) 981 -6900, [email protected], or in-person during the meeting.

Questions regarding public participation may be addressed to the City Clerk Department (510) 981 -6900 or by email at [email protected].

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 14
I hereby certify that the agenda for this meeting of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on September 3. 2026.

Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Communications
Council rules limit action on Communications to referral to the City Manager and/or Boards and Commissions for investigation and/or recommendations. All communications submitted to Council are public record. Copies of individual communications are available for viewing at the City Clerk Department and through Records Online.

Earthquake Prevention

1. John J. Parman

Mural

2. Gael Alcock

Red Curb Installation

3. Lindsay Schachinger

4. Sarah Siefke-Cottle

Green Waste Bin

5. Genevieve Nonet

6. Brent Blackaby

Housing/Housing Concerns

7. Riti Dhesi

8. Vicki Sommer

9. David Lerman

10. Maxwell Davis on behalf of the Sierra Club

11. Patrick Kennedy (2)

12. Russbumper

UA Theater

13. Laura Linden

14. Melanie Lawrence and John Smail

Parking

15. Heather Siglin on behalf of the North Shattuck Association

16. Alvin Ludwig

17. Lisa M. Asta

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 15
Noise Concerns

18. Hani Haris

19. Lucia Hammond

Speed Limit Concerns

20. Anne Whyte

21. Scott Sacherer

Sidewalk Concern

22. Laura

Flags at Half Mast Concern

23. Deirdre Duhan

Proclamation Enquiry

24. Dhruv Pandrangi

Flock Concerns

25. Jose Vilar

26. Summer Brenner (2)

27. James Northrup

28. Camille Snyder

29. Margot Smith (2)

30. Janice Schroeder

31. Jack Kurzweil

32. Nancy Bartell

33. Jeanie Dooha

34. Glenn Turner

35. Sam Holtzman

36. Karen Dabrusin

37. Russbumper (2)

ADA Concerns

38. Steven Schuyler (4)

Harrison Street

39. Jennifer Kamenetz

40. Eric Friedman

41. Cecelia Mautner

42. Russbumper

43. Alan Mond (2)

Tenant Concern

44. Alex Merenkov

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 16
Taxi Scrip

45. Leonard Talmy

Middle East Conflict

46. Aaron Balbo

Music History Plaque

47. Eddie Jones

Safety Concerns

48. Charles Van Tassel

49. Patricia Bruning

50. Lauren Parsons

51. David Lerman

Animal Shelter Concern

52. Francesca Agrusa

1820 University Ave

53. Avi Nevo

Zone 0 Regulations

54. Zohra Kalinkowitz

1130 Oxford Street

55. Claire Kahane

56. Marc Bernstein

57. Gloria Frym

58. Dennis Fantin

59. Derek Abbassi

60. Jessica Samuels

AAHRC

61. Eric Friedman

Traffic Safety Concern

62. Joe Clucas

63. Kenny Yu (2)

Municipal Submission

64. Nadelyn Zoe King (2)

Citation Concern

65. Chase Lenzley

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 17
Request for Policy Review

66. Concerned Resident

UC Berkeley Concerns

67. Steven Schuyler

EBMUD

68. Eduardo Teixeira

Raise a Glass to Berkeley

69. Jeffrey Church
Supporting Elderly Citizens

70. Dawn Howard

Encampments

71. David Lerman (2)

Natural Grass Soccer Field Concerns

72. Ted Steen

Lighting Nuisance

73. YMCA Concerned Resident

Senior Housing

74. Doanld Anderson

PG&E Transformers

75. Patrick Kennedy

2025 ARDA

76. Jennifer Cogley

Public Safety

77. Jason Martens

Parade Invitation

78. Allen Cain

Berkeley Adult School

79. Jessica Hahn

Proclamation Request

80. Katharine Bierce

Francisco Street

81. David Lerman

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 18

Invitation

82. Mohamad Rawoas

Parking at Berkeley Marina

83. Solange Gould

Coal Facilities

84. Jack Kurzweil

Crosswalk Concerns

85. Bruce Brody

Police Dogs

86. Direct Action Everywhere

Dumping Concerns

87. Eli Kehler (5)

BAMM

88. Sheila Kolenc

FY 2027-2031 Paving Plan

89. Tony Benado

Summer Achievers Camp Concerns

90. Nicoletta Karam

Rental Units

91. Kim Ambrocio

Officer Commendations

92. Office of the Director of Police Accountability

2700 Shattuck Ave Appeal

93. Alisha Pember

City Concerns

94. Michai Freeman

Public Comment

95. Stephen Alpert (3)

Sanitation and Safety Concerns

96. Brett Cooper

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 19
Community Input Concern

97. Jane White

Willard Park Restroom

98. Kyle Miller

North Berkeley Library

99. Phoebe Thomas

Pause PAB Appointment
100. Eric Friedman
PAVEN
101. Chris Ward Kline

Transportation Program
102. Eric Liddle

Mobile Crisis Team
103. Gabriella Raymond (2)

Sign Repair and Replace
104. Lily Liang

Resorcery Org
105. Jenne King

Youth Mental Health Resource
106. Isabella

Mental Health Response Concern
107. Boona Cheema

Street Rehabilitation
108. Mary Lee Noonan

Underdevelopment Concern
109. Ben Buettner

Nighttime Corridor
110. Tony Smith

Proposed Lien and Hearing Rights
111. Willie Phillips (3)

BMR Rent Clarifications
112. Alex Merenkov (2)

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 20

Demolition and Construction Notice
113. Erik Knaresboro and Guide Vito

BORP Anniversary
114. DP Neyhart

S.A.F.E. Initiative
115. La Monte T. Bannister III

2012 Channing Way
116. Grace Smith
117. Tim Donnelly
118. Travis Bell

Berkeley Bank Concern
119. Geoffrey Lomax

Streetlights
120. Chrissy Hoffman

Invitation
121. Tatiana Hughes

ICE Concerns
122. Margot Smith

HTT Office Coverage
123. Mandy Clafin

John Craner’s Retirement Party
124. The Downtown Berkeley Association

Newsletters
125. Glomax
126. Margot Smith

Zoning/Upzoning
127. Barbara Anscher
128. Linda Gallaher-Brown
129. 22 Similarly worded form letters

Hopkins
130. Howard Goldberg
131. Willard Bohn
132. Margot Murtaugh

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 21
133. Lisa Brenneis
134. Dorothy Gordon
135. Sally Carson
136. Nancie Kester
137. Rob Kirby
138. Phyllis Oyama (3)
139. Barbara Llewellyn
140. Gary Croner
141. Tamara Birdsall (2)
142. Chris Edmunds
143. Keri Ferencz and James Levine
144. Susan Bogas
145. Tony Kaes
146. Mary Ajideh
147. Wendy Hoben
148. Marguerite Lee
149. Virginia Kamp (2)
150. Alan Schoenfeld (2)
151. Hilary Near
152. Eric Taylor
153. Colin Elbasani
154. Jeremiah Maller
155. Ann Rawley (2)
156. Melanie Lawrence and John Smail
157. Mike Olson
158. Abe Hardin
159. Mark Witriol
160. David White
161. Cady Masterman
162. Shaun O’Sullivan
163. Gail Greenwood
164. John and Diane Rice
165. Emilie Strauss
166. John Waters

199 Seawall Letter and Summary
167. Terry Ayyad (2)

E-Scooters
168. Laurie McWhorter
169. Oren (2)
170. Antonio Vargas (3)
171. Joey T
172. Aaron Dickinson (2)
173. Anosh Dumasia (3)
174. Carson Lepre (10)

Tuesday, September 15, 2026 AGENDA Page 22
175. Robert Borghese (22)

Forwards/URLs
176. Russbumper (24)
177. Eid Abdallah (28)

Supplemental Communications and Reports
Items received by the deadlines for submission will be compiled and distributed as follows. If no items are received by the deadline, no supplemental packet will be compiled for said deadline.

• Supplemental Communications and Reports 1
Available by 5:00 p.m. five days prior to the meeting.

• Supplemental Communications and Reports 2
Available by 5:00 p.m. the day before the meeting.

• Supplemental Communications and Reports 3
Available by 5:00 p.m. two days following the meeting.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Eleanor Hollander, Economic Development Manager Subject: Grant Application: California Strategic Growth Council, Community Resilience Center (CRC) Planning Grant for Civic Center

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or their designee to:
(1) Submit a grant application under the California Strategic Growth Council’s Community Resilience Centers (CRC) Program for a Planning Grant for an amount up to $500,000 for planning activities to prepare the two historic buildings in Berkeley’s Civic Center, the Maudelle Shirek Building (“MSB” or “Old City Hall”) and the Veterans Memorial Building (“VMB”) for future structural upgrades including capital improvements and seismic retrofits; and (2) Subject to award, accept the grant, execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments, accept any additional funding allocations from the CRC Program and designate the City Manager or their designee as the applicant’s authorized agent.

SUMMARY
This report requests City Council authorization for the City Manager or their designee to submit a planning grant application up to the maximum eligible amount under the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) Community Resilience Centers (CRC) Round 2 program for the Berkeley Civic Center. If awarded, this action authorizes the City Manager to accept resulting grant funds and execute all related agreements. This grant program does not require a local cash match of funds.

The Berkeley Civic Center, comprising the historic Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park, and the Maudelle Shirek (Old City Hall) and Veterans Memorial buildings, currently faces seismic vulnerabilities and deferred maintenance. Securing CRC funding will allow the City to advance necessary pre-development, planning, design, environmental, architectural, engineering, and structural feasibility assessments required to transform these historic spaces into a modernized network of resilient public buildings for use by the community.

This grant application directly builds upon the City’s foundational investments in the Civic Center Vision and Implementation Plan (approved September 2020) and the Civic Center Design Concept (approved July 2023) previously funded by the Measure T1

Grant Application: Community Resilience Center (CRC), Civic Center CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

Infrastructure Bond and the City’s General Fund. Furthermore, it serves to support a larger pending federal grant application to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program ($16M, submitted in late 2025). Authorization of this grant application ensures the City meets the CRC Planning Grant application deadlines in September 2026, positioning Berkeley to secure near-term planning resources while establishing eligibility for future multi-million-dollar Implementation Grant awards in subsequent CRC funding cycles.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The anticipated amount of the Planning Grant from the CRC award could be up to $500,000. This grant requires no matching funds from the City of Berkeley for the two- year grant duration. If awarded, the City would then be eligible to apply for other implementation grant funding that could underwrite a portion of the construction costs to seismically retrofit two historic Civic Center buildings, the Maudelle Shirek Building or “Old City Hall” and the Veterans Memorial Building. These retrofits will transform both seismically deficient structures into resilient community assets capable of withstanding design-level earthquakes with only limited, repairable damage, preserving their historic fabric, establishing a community resilience center in the heart of Berkeley, and ensuring continuity of essential civic and community functions in Berkeley’s Civic Center.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Berkeley Civic Center represents an important, highly visible, yet severely underutilized municipal footprint that currently fails to meet local resilience demands.

Both the historic “Old City Hall” or Maudelle Shirek Building (MSB) and the Veterans Memorial Building (VMB) do not comply with modern structural safety regulations.

Because of the structural degradation and deferred maintenance, significant portions of these properties are locked, vacant, or highly constrained, depriving the city of dedicated community assembly spaces and forcing municipal bodies to pay annual leasing fees to host public meetings elsewhere in Berkeley. Concurrently, the regional landscape is experiencing an increase in climate-induced hazards, including hazardous air quality from seasonal wildfires and extreme heat events, which disproportionately threaten vulnerable urban populations lacking stable environmental refuge.

The Civic Center Vision and Implementation Plan (approved September 2020) and the Civic Center Design Concept (approved July 2023) call to restore these two historic buildings located at the heart of Berkeley’s Civic Center. MSB, built in 1909, predates seismic codes and last underwent major renovation in the 1970s, which excluded seismic upgrades and other modern resilient building features including energy provision (i.e. electric and solar), and heating, venting, air conditioning or HVAC systems. VMB, built in 1928, similarly lacks seismic design and last received rehabilitation in 1993 without structural strengthening. Both buildings lie less than two miles from the Hayward Fault. Both buildings pose life safety hazards and risk partial or total collapse in a major earthquake and keep the buildings from serving Berkeley’s public on an everyday (non-emergency) basis. Failing to secure state funding or

Grant Application: Community Resilience Center (CRC), Civic Center CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

delaying structural modernizations limits Berkeley's emergency response readiness and prolongs regional community displacement during environmental crises. Submitting this grant application activates the physical transition of these landmarks from deteriorating liabilities into strengthened assets capable of mitigating regional disaster vulnerabilities at the local level. Securing these funds enables safe community access to reliable climate respite during extreme conditions, protects invaluable local historical landmarks, and strengthens a vision and design framework that links continuous civic programming and engagement, with climate resilience and emergency preparedness.

In anticipation of the formal grant application deadline in September 2026, city staff initiated a series of structured pre-application activities including community engagement, partnership building and internal city coordination. These initial activities allowed city staff to review the vision and design concepts for the Civic Center buildings with the community, ensuring that planned HVAC, microgrid, and physical building modifications already meet the strict state definition of an emergency climate-refuge. In addition, the project will also advance Berkeley’s Strategic Plan goals of (1) creating a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared city and (2) providing state-of-the-art, well- maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities.

If awarded, CRC Planning Grant funding would underwrite pre-development, engineering, and site assessment work including further structural feasibility studies, and environmental and site appraisals including funding for Phase I/II environmental site assessments, and geotechnical reports. CRC grant funding could also be applied to permitting and pre-design activities including covering the cost of local permitting coordination, regulatory zoning review, and initial environmental review and compliance.

Fiscal and policy analysis and operations planning are also allowable activities under the CRC Planning Grant, though planning grant funding cannot be used to fund direct construction, building renovations, or land acquisitions.

Grant Award Timeline
CRC Planning Grant applications are due in September 2026, with application and review taking place through Winter 2027. After award announcements, selected lead applicants enter a mandatory two-to-three-month post-award consultation process with SGC staff to finalize the formal work plan, budget sheets, and tracking metrics before signing the final grant agreement. The official grant performance period will begin in Spring 2027 and conclude in 2029, establishing a two-year grant term. If awarded funding, this project will be co-managed by the City Manager’s Office (of which the Office of Economic Development, or OED, is part) and the Department of Public Works (PW) which is charged with construction and maintenance of all municipal building facilities for the City of Berkeley.

Grant Application: Community Resilience Center (CRC), Civic Center CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

BACKGROUND
Berkeley's Civic Center is a National Register-listed historic district in Downtown Berkeley, centering on Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park and featuring significant historic buildings including the Maudelle Shirek Building (formerly City Hall, or often referred to as “Old City Hall”) and the Veterans Memorial Building. The area serves as a vital public space for community events, and government functions, encompassing civic buildings, green spaces, and educational facilities. Planning for the Civic Center is guided by two documents both shaped by extensive stakeholder engagement; the Civic Center Vision and Implementation Plan (adopted September 2020) and the Civic Center Design Concept (adopted July 2023).1
After the adoption of the Civic Center Design Concept in 2023, the project moved to a third phase, one that focuses on the rehabilitation of the buildings and the attainment of funding for advancing the Civic Center Vision Plan and Design Concept. The two structures, Veterans Memorial Building and the Maudelle Shirek Building, in the Civic Center were built in the first quarter of the 1900s and have not been updated to current seismic standards. The California Strategic Growth Council’s Community Resilience Center (CRC) Planning grant would provide the City with necessary financial support to advance the project to a “shovel ready” state. Once rehabilitated, the buildings would become community resilience centers, providing refuge during severe climate hazards, such as extreme heat and wildfire smoke, while delivering year-round community programming.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
Securing CRC Planning Grant funds directly advances the goals of Berkeley’s Climate Action Plan (2009) and the Berkeley Resilience Strategy (2016), and related building electrification frameworks, safety & disaster preparedness, and environmental justice General Plan element updates (2025 & 2026) by improving energy and building resilience and expanding localized emergency response capabilities with the development of a community resilience center.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Applying for CRC Planning Grant funding allows the City of Berkeley to leverage state funds to advance the Civic Center Vision and Design Concept to a “shovel ready” state.

Authorizing this grant application also positions Berkeley’s Civic Center for future multi- million-dollar allocations in subsequent implementation grant cycles to execute physical construction, structural seismic retrofits, and microgrid infrastructure deployment. 1 Civic Center Vision Statement: 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. (Adopted by the Berkeley City Council, September 2020).

Grant Application: Community Resilience Center (CRC), Civic Center CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
No alternatives were considered.

CONTACT PERSON
Eleanor Hollander, Office of Economic Development, 510-981-7536 Attachment:
1: Resolution: Grant Application: California Strategic Growth Council, Community Resilience Center (CRC) Planning Grant for Civic Center

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

AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION TO THE STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL’S COMMUNITY RESILIENCE CENTERS (CRC) PROGRAM FOR BERKELEY’S CIVIC CENTER
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley is committed to strengthening community resilience, emergency preparedness, and climate adaptation for all members of the community; and WHEREAS, the Berkeley Civic Center plays a vital role as a community gathering space and designated location for local emergency response and disaster recovery services; and
WHEREAS, the State of California's Community Resilience Centers (CRC) Program provides grant opportunities to fund facility retrofits, energy independence upgrades, and community resilience hubs; and
WHEREAS, the adopted Civic Center Vision and Implementation Plan (2020) and Civic Center Design Concept (2023) documents are both shaped by extensive community engagement and outline a proposal that will improve structural integrity, indoor air quality, clean energy backup systems, public access, and community programming at the Civic Center; and
WHEREAS, The California Strategic Growth Council’s CRC Planning grant would provide the City with necessary financial support to advance the Civic Center Vision and Design Concept to a “shovel ready” state.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager, or their designee, is hereby authorized to submit a Planning Grant application under the SGC’s CRC Program for up to $500,000 for Civic Center.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager, or their designee, is authorized to accept the grant, and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments and administer the grant funds, if awarded.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council shall retain final discretion to approve, impose mitigation measures, or disapprove the Strategic Growth Council’s CRC-funded projects in light of any environmental impacts disclosed as a result of the CEQA/NEPA review or any other reviews conducted as part of this process.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Eleanor Hollander, Manager, Economic Development Subject: Contract: Downtown Berkeley Association for Addison Street Catenary Lighting

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to:
(1) Enter into a sole source contract and any amendments with the Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) for the City to provide $150,000 to the DBA for actual incurred costs associated with the Addison Street Catenary Lighting project to support Downtown revitalization and placemaking in the Downtown Addison Street Arts District, and
(2) Advance the city’s approval to utilize city property as part of this effort (namely the connection/anchor points for the support guide wires for the lighting on the Addison Street side of the Center Street Garage building located at 2025 Center St).

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The total amount of the contract with the Downtown Berkeley Association is not to exceed $150,000 to be paid in a lump sum. The $150,000 in funding will be paid from the account with budget code: 139-21-208-251-0000-000-446-612990.

On June 23, 2026, the City adopted the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) plan for Fiscal Years 2027-2031 (FY 27- FY 31). Part of this action included a $150,000 allocation for the Addison Street Catenary Lighting Project from the SOSIP (Streets and Open Space Improvement Plan) Fund. Funds will be provided to the Downtown Berkeley Association to reimburse them for actual costs incurred. The contract will be subject to standard City audit and oversight procedures.

The Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) is the Owners’ Association for the Downtown Property Business Improvement District (DPBID). The DPBID finances maintenance and marketing activities for the Downtown business district. It therefore indirectly enhances sales tax, business license tax and other business-related City revenue sources.

Contract: Addison Street Catenary Lighting, Downtown Berkeley Association CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

The DBA will take the lead in designing and delivering the Addison Street Catenary lighting project and providing ongoing maintenance and will serve as the lead applicant for the encroachment permit in the Right-of-Way. The City will review all of the permits and condition the project through the Addison Street Catenary Lighting project contract.

No General Fund tax dollars will be impacted by this action.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Addison Street Catenary Lighting effort is a placemaking and streetscape proposal led by the Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) in collaboration with volunteer arts district leaders and architects and engineers. The project entails hanging overhead lighting across Addison Street that is affixed to buildings between Shattuck Avenue and Milvia Street. As the only property-based business improvement district representing the Addison Street Arts District, the DBA is the one viable source (or single entity) that can deliver and coordinate this effort which involves obtaining the permission of and representing the interests of multiple private property owners (including the city) and the public right-of-way. The DBA will take no management fee for this effort, and is a single, responsible source, that is uniquely positioned to take on this coordinated effort.

On June 16, 2026, the Berkeley City Council as part of the biennial budget process directed Special Fund Allocations1 including Streets & Open Space Improvement Plan (SOSIP) funding for Downtown Berkeley Revitalization Projects2, including the Addison Street Catenary Lighting effort. One time funding of $150,000 SOSIP funds for the Addison Street Catenary Lighting Project, were allocated by City Council referral on December 2, 2025 with the express understanding that the DBA would be the leader of the project, stating “the Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) made this project one of their priorities and are leading a group of volunteer arts district community leaders and architects to work on this project pro bono.”3
The goal of the project is to enhance nighttime ambiance, support public safety, and pedestrian vibrancy during the hours around evening programing at the Berkeley Repertory Theater, Freight and Salvage, and other cultural and commercial institutions in the area to highlight the Addison Street Arts District as a gathering space for culture and community. By improving illumination during evening theater, dining, and performance hours, the project aims to make the Downtown Addison Street Arts District safer, encourage visitors to linger, and spur local economic activity.

The proposed design elements of the catenary lighting project include LED “twinkly light” strands draped across Addison Street affixed to buildings on both the north and 1 Berkeley City Council, Proposed FY 2027 and Fy 2028 Biennial Budget and Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Proposed Biennial Budget and Five-Year CIP Public Hearing No. 2, Item 40a, June 16, 2026.
2 Berkeley City Council Consent Calendar, Budget Referral: FY26 AAO1 Downtown Berkeley Revitalization Projects, Item 32, December 2, 2025.
3 Ibid., page 3.

Contract: Addison Street Catenary Lighting, Downtown Berkeley Association CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

south sides of the street. The light strand configuration will be 7 sets of 3 light strands arranged perpendicularly across the street. The strands are to be spaced 5 feet apart within each set, with 50 feet between sets, mounted approximately 20 feet high. The height and layout of the lights avoid a dense "canopy" effect, preserving an open, balanced streetscape while delivering bistro/catenary lighting ambiance. The lights themselves will be energy-efficient LED fixtures that are to be powered by the Berkeley Repertory Theater’s property, and the colors can be adjusted as needed via a computer-based application.

The DBA is uniquely positioned to lead the local property owner and stakeholder coordination that is needed to implement this project. The DBA has organized a group of local architects and engineers to design and implement this project and has worked to secure property owner support and the support of its Board of Directors to improve the Addison Arts District vitality and public realm.

BACKGROUND
The Addison Street Arts District serves as a primary cultural corridor in Downtown Berkeley. Placemaking improvements, such as overhead catenary lighting, have been identified as key strategies to revitalize the downtown core, foster foot traffic, and improve the night-time economy. The DBA has been developing this idea in conjunction with property owners, community members, and city staff, and enlisting the assistance of local design and engineering professionals. The DBA Board formally endorsed this effort at its meeting on July 2, 2026.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The catenary lighting fixtures utilize energy-efficient LED technology, minimizing electricity consumption while maximizing illumination.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
This effort will continue to leverage resources for Downtown vitality and maintenance that has had a positive transformational effect on the physical and economic health of Berkeley’s Downtown Addison Street Arts District area. A sole source contract agreement with the Downtown Berkeley Association is appropriate as the DBA is the management entity for the Downtown Property Based Business Improvement District (PBID) and leads the district-wide vitality effort. Authorizing the use of the Center Street Garage wall provides essential infrastructure access required to bring the project to fruition.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Eleanor Hollander, Office of Economic Development, 510-981-7536

Contract: Addison Street Catenary Lighting, Downtown Berkeley Association CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

Attachment:
1: Resolution: Contract: Downtown Berkeley Association to Implement the Addison Street Catenary Lighting in the Downtown Addison Street Arts District

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

AUTHORIZING A SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT AND AMENDMENTS WITH THE

DOWNTOWN BERKELEY ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADDISON STREET CATENARY LIGHTING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE USE OF CITY PROPERTY AT 2025

CENTER STREET TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) manages the Property Based Business Improvement District (PBID) in Downtown Berkeley and works to enhance the economic vitality, safety, and cultural life of the downtown corridor; and WHEREAS, the DBA has proposed the Addison Street Catenary Lighting Project to improve nighttime visibility, pedestrian safety, and enhanced placemaking within the Downtown Addison Street Arts District; and
WHEREAS, the project requires a contract to transfer dedicated project funds to the DBA for procurement, coordination, and installation of the lights; and WHEREAS, the catenary lighting design requires structural attachment to adjacent buildings, including the Addison Street elevation of the City-owned Center Street Garage structure located at 2025 Center Street.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager to execute a sole source contract and any necessary amendments with the Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA) to pass-through all dedicated project funds for the Addison Street Catenary Lighting project in the amount not to exceed $150,000 for actual costs incurred, aligned with the adopted CIP Plan for FYs 27-31. A record signature copy of said contract and any amendments are to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council grants approval for the utilization of City property, specifically the Addison Street side of the Center Street Garage located at 2025 Center Street, as an anchor structure for the catenary lighting installation, subject to final engineering approval and appropriate liability/indemnification agreements as approved by the City Attorney.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Eleanor Hollander, Economic Development Manager Subject: Loan Administration Board Dissolution; Repealing BMC Chapter 3.72

RECOMMENDATION
1) Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or their designee to assume direct administrative and operational oversight of the Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) program and the RLF Administrative Plan, upon dissolution of the Loan Administration Board (LAB); and
2) Adopt first reading of an ordinance repealing Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter

3.72. Loan Administration Board enabling legislation, thereby dissolving the Loan Administration Board.

SUMMARY
The Loan Administration Board (LAB) was established under Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 3.72 to oversee and approve business loans under the City’s Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) program. The City of Berkeley’s RLF program was established by a $500,000 grant awarded to the City from the federal Economic Development Administration (EDA) in 1980. In 2024, the RLF program was defederalized, and the RLF Administrative Plan was modified to allow for third party fund administration.1 The final step to streamlining the administration of the loan program is to now dissolve the LAB which also aligns with broader City Council goals to consolidate and optimize board and commission structures. Since the LAB is codified under Chapter 3.72 of the Berkeley Municipal Code titled “Loan Administration Board”, dissolving it requires both the attached resolution and a coordinating ordinance amendment to strike Chapter 3.72 from the Berkeley Municipal Code.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Dissolving the Loan Administration Board (LAB) will result in modest administrative cost savings by eliminating staff commission secretary hours required for LAB meeting preparation, agenda management, Brown Act compliance, and minute-taking and posting on the web. Remaining RLF funds will continue to be deployed to eligible 1 City of Berkeley, Consent Calendar, Item 5, Adopt the updated Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) Administrative Plan and transfer RLF program administration to Working Solutions, a federally certified Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI), December 3, 2024.

Loan Administration Board Dissolution CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026

Berkeley businesses by the fund’s third-party administrator, Working Solutions, without impact on the General Fund.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
In October 2024, the Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) Administrative Plan was modified by the Loan Administration Board to allow for the fund to be managed by a third-party administrator, after the RLF was granted defederalization by the federal Economic Development Administration (EDA) in April of 2024. Building on this operational flexibility, the City Council adopted an item on December 3, 2024, approving the LAB’s updates to the RLF Administrative Plan and authorizing a contract with Working Solutions, a federally certified Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI), to handle full third-party loan origination, servicing, underwriting, and technical assistance.

Since this time, Working Solutions, the contracted third-party administrator, has taken over the fund management of the RLF and has reduced the need for the LAB to meet to consider new loans and make decisions related to existing loans. As a result, meeting frequency has declined sharply; over the past two years, the Board has met only once, with its most recent meeting occurring on October 1, 2024. Due to LAB qualification criteria stipulated under Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.72 which requires members to possess specific professional expertise in law, business operations, commercial lending, and finance, prior to 2024, the Board struggled with sustained vacancies and quorum shortages.

With defederalization of the RLF complete and Working Solutions actively managing the RLF portfolio, the traditional oversight function of the LAB has been fully superseded.

Staff resources previously spent serving as commission secretary, managing Brown Act compliance, agendas, and public notices for a redundant commission/board structure can now be reallocated entirely toward supporting other economic development activities including small business and commercial district support.

BACKGROUND
The City Council created the Loan Administration Board (LAB) via ordinance in 1987 and modified it in 1994 to provide oversight and make credit decisions regarding applications to the City's Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) in accordance with the RLF Administrative Plan. The LAB is a City of Berkeley Commission appointed by the Mayor and City Council and is tasked with providing oversite for the RLF program. Office of Economic Development (OED) staff serve as the secretary to the LAB commission, and the LAB meetings are open to the public and subject to the Brown Act. There are special criteria for the LAB members; of the nine seated commissioners, two must have demonstrated business expertise, three must have credit and banking experience, and one must be a lawyer.

Prior to 2024, the LAB was tasked with reviewing underwritten proposals for business expansion, working capital, and equipment purchases. In addition, the LAB was also

Loan Administration Board Dissolution CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026

tasked with outlining policy, guidelines and lending criteria articulated in the Berkeley RLF Administrative Plan based on federal Economic Development Administration (EDA) Terms and Conditions. Prior to defederalization, the final approval for all loans, including determination of the loan amount, rested with the LAB, informed by recommendations issued from a contracted third-party underwriter.

In recent years, the landscape of municipal micro-lending through revolving loan funds has shifted toward third-party community development finance institutions or CDFI partnerships for loan administration services. In this case, Berkeley is no exception. In 2024, the LAB approved a modification to the RLF Administrative Plan to allow for third party administration of the RLF fund, and the city advanced a contract with Working Solutions, a federally certified Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI), to provide fund management including loan origination, servicing, and technical assistance to Berkeley’s existing and future RLF participants for a renewable ten-year term.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects associated with the administrative dissolution of the Loan Administration Board.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
This action will improve efficiency, streamline administrative burdens, and align with best practices consistent with other neighboring jurisdictions. Eliminating the LAB structure for loan approvals in 2024 allowed staff in coordination with designated professional third-party underwriters to process and disburse small business loans significantly faster. This final step now achieves true administrative streamlining, by reducing administrative burden, this action allows staff to focus resources on direct small business technical assistance rather than commission secretarial duties. This step also brings Berkeley into alignment with regional best practices; many neighboring cities including San Francisco, and Oakland long ago transitioned the administration of their revolving loan fund programs directly to contracted CDFIs.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Council could elect to retain the Loan Administration Board with modified quorum requirements or merge its duties into another existing commission. However, this would not achieve administrative streamlining or improve service to Berkeley businesses seeking swift access to capital.

CONTACT PERSONS
Eleanor Hollander, Office of Economic Development, 510-981-7536 Vincent McCoy, LAB Secretary, Office of Economic Development, 510-981-7043 Attachment:
1: Resolution: Loan Administration Board Dissolution
2: Ordinance Repealing Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.72

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

DISSOLVING THE CITY OF BERKELEY LOAN ADMINISTRATION BOARD WHEREAS, the Loan Administration Board (LAB) was established under Chapter 3.72 of the Berkeley Municipal Code to oversee, review, and approve business underwriting and applications for the City’s Revolving Loan Fund (RLF); and WHEREAS, in 2024, the RLF Administrative Plan was modified to allow for third party fund administration; and
WHEREAS, the City partnered with Working Solutions, a community development financial institution, to act as a third-party fund administrator to manage the RLF loan portfolio, including underwriting, servicing, and technical business outreach; and WHEREAS, transferring full administrative and underwriting responsibilities to a specialized third-party administrator has significantly streamlined the loan application pipeline, improved financial efficiency, and increased privacy for local small business applicants; and
WHEREAS, the operational and decision-making duties originally tasked to the Loan Administration Board are now comprehensively and securely performed aligned with the RLF Administrative Plan via its partner third-party administrator; and WHEREAS, the Loan Administration Board has not formally met since October 1, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to optimize municipal resources, reduce administrative redundancies, and modernize local economic programs by sunsetting boards and commissions that no longer serve a distinct operational purpose; and WHEREAS, a corresponding ordinance formally repealing Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.72 and thereby dissolving the Loan Administration Board is before the City Council for consideration.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that upon the effective date of the Loan Administration Board’s dissolution , all remaining advisory or supervisory functions are consolidated into the oversight of the City Manager or their designees.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager or their designee is authorized to take all necessary structural and administrative actions to finalize the wind-down of the Loan Administration Board's activities.

ORDINANCE NO. [XXXX]-N.S.

REPEAL OF BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.72 (LOAN

ADMINISTRATION BOARD) TO DISSOLVE THE LOAN ADMINISTRATION BOARD BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows:

Section 1. That Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 3.72 is hereby repealed in its entirety as follows:

Chapter 3.72 LOAN ADMINISTRATION BOARD
Sections:
 3.72.010Establishment of Loan Administration Board.
 3.72.020Membership--Eligibility.
 3.72.030Conflict of interest.
 3.72.040Exemptions.
 3.72.050Terms of appointment and organization.
 3.72.060Meetings.
 3.72.070Duties and functions.

3.72.010 Establishment of Loan Administration Board.

A Loan Administration Board is hereby established. The board shall consist of nine members selected by the City Council in accordance with the Fair Representation Ordinance, Berkeley Municipal Code Sections 2.04.030 through 2.04.130. (Ord. 5811- NS § 1, 1987)

3.72.020 Membership--Eligibility.

In order to provide community balance, a business and credit orientation, and to facilitate coordination with the City, the Loan Administration Board shall be reflective of the following categories. The intent is that the Loan Administration Board membership have a sufficient business orientation and financial knowledge to make loan decisions.

A. The Loan Administration Board composition will attempt to reflect the proportion of minority and women representation found in the City of Berkeley.

B. At least two out of the nine Loan Administration Board members must be persons who operate a business in Berkeley.

C. In addition at least three out of the nine Loan Administration Board members must be persons who possess knowledge of and reasonable experience with business and/or credit analysis or decisions, or customary lending practices, or representatives of lending institutions (e.g. banks). At least one of these members must be present to constitute a quorum for a loan decision.

D. In addition at least one out of the nine Loan Administration Board members must be a person who possesses knowledge of and reasonable experience with business law. (Ord. 6249-NS § 1 (part), 1994; Ord. 5811-NS § 2, 1987)

3.72.030 Conflict of interest.

To prevent the appearance of a conflict of interest, and any conflict of interest, no person or organization which contracts with the City of Berkeley to package and/or process loans shall make application to the Loan Administration Board. In addition, lender representatives shall abstain from consideration and approval of loans that involve clients of their institutions. Applicable provisions of law and City policies regarding conflicts of interest shall govern operation of the Loan Administration Board. (Ord. 6249-NS § 1 (part), 1994; Ord. 5811-NS § 3, 1987)

3.72.040 Exemptions.

Members of the Loan Administration Board are hereby exempt from the residency requirements of the Berkeley Municipal Code Section 2.04.140. (Ord. 5811-NS § 4, 1987)

3.72.050 Terms of appointment and organization.

Terms of members appointed to the Loan Administration Board shall be as provided in the Berkeley Municipal Code Sections 2.04.070 and 2.04.075.

Said board shall organize by electing from its members one president, one vice- president and such other officers as may be necessary, who shall hold office for one year and until their successors are elected unless their terms as members of the board sooner expire. (Ord. 5811-NS § 5, 1987)

3.72.060 Meetings.

The board shall establish a regular time and place of meeting. All meetings shall be noticed as required by current statutes and the president shall see that minutes for each meeting are recorded, kept and maintained, and that copies thereof are transmitted to staff. (Ord. 5811-NS § 6, 1987)

3.72.070 Duties and functions.

The Loan Administration Board (LAB) is responsible for review and approval of business loan applications submitted under the South Berkeley revolving land fund, which is funded by the economic development administration, and which applications are restricted to business operations and property within the South Berkeley Title IX Target Area. In addition the Loan Administration Board may review and approve loan applications submitted under any other business and commercial development loan program to which the City Council delegates review and approval responsibility. (Ord. 6249-NS § 1 (part), 1994; Ord. 5811-NS § 7, 1987)
Section 2. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to its final passage in the display case located near the walkway in front of the Maudelle Shirek Building, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. City Council shall take final action on this Ordinance within thirty (30) days of its first reading.

Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance Subject: Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on September 15, 2026

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the request for proposals or invitation for bids (attached to staff report) that will be, or are planned to be, issued upon final approval by the requesting department or division.  All contracts over the City Manager’s threshold will be returned to Council for final approval.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Total estimated cost of items included in this report is $25,822,884 PROJECT Fund Source Amount
On-call Roadway Thermoplastic
Marking Services 134 Measure BB $1,250,000
ServiceNow Professional Services 680 IT Cost Allocation $150,000 Zachary’s Corner Project
Construction Services 147 UC Settlement $462,884
Mental Health Services EV Charger
Installation Project 671 Equipment Replacement $180,000.

Animal Shelter EV Charger
Installation Project 671 Equipment Replacement $80,000
City of Berkeley Parking Meters and
Mobile Parking Payment System 631 Parking Meter Fund $5,000,000 Echo Lake Drinking and Fire Water
Study and Design 125 Playground Camp $200,000
Food Service supplies and
Equipment for Residential Camps
125
011
Playground Camp
General Fund $5,000,000
Bus Transportation services for the
Camps Division
125
011
Playground Fund
General Fund $600,000
Berkeley Tuolumne Camp store
Resale items 125 Playground Fund $200,000

Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals CONSENT CALENDAR Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council September 15, 2026 Approval on September 15, 2026
African American Holistic Resource
Center
011
511
General Fund
Measure T1 $12,700,000
Total: $25,822,884

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On May 6, 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 7,035-N.S. effective June 6, 2008, which increased the City Manager’s purchasing authority for services to $50,000. As a result, this required report submitted by the City Manager to Council is now for those purchases in excess of $100,000 for goods; and $200,000 for playgrounds and construction; and $50,000 for services. If Council does not object to these items being sent out for bid or proposal within one week of them appearing on the agenda, and upon final notice to proceed from the requesting department, the IFB (Invitation for Bid) or RFP (Request for Proposal) may be released to the public and notices sent to the potential bidder/respondent list.

BACKGROUND
On May 6, 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 7,035-N.S., amending the City Manager’s purchasing authority for services

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The Finance Department reviews all formal bid and proposal solicitations to ensure that they include provisions for compliance with the City’s environmental policies.  For each contract that is subject to City Council authorization, staff will address environmental sustainability considerations in the associated staff report to City Council.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Need for the goods and/or services.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance, 510-981-7326
Attachments:
1: Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on September 15, 2026
a. On-call Roadway Thermoplastics Marking Services
b. ServiceNow Professional Services
c. Zachary’s Corner Project Construction Services

Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals CONSENT CALENDAR Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council September 15, 2026 Approval on September 15, 2026
d. Mental Health Services EV Charger Installation Project e. Animal Shelter EV Charger Installation Project
f. City of Berkeley Parking Meters and Mobile Parking Payment System g. Echo Lake Drinking and Fire Water Study and Design
h. Food Service supplies and Equipment for Resident Camps i. Bus Transportation services for the Camps Division and other select recreation programs
j. Berkeley Tuolumne Camp Store Resale items
k. African American Holistic Resource Center
Note: Original of this attachment with live signature of authorizing personnel is on file in General Services.

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: September 15, 2026
Attachment 1

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTIO

N OF GOODS
/ SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED
COST

BUDGET CODE TO

BE CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT NAME
& PHONE
26-11796-C On-Call
Roadway
Thermoplastic
Marking
Services
9/16/26 10/16/2026 Installation of
thermoplastic and/or
preformed traffic striping,
installation of
thermoplastic and/or
preformed pavement
markings, removal of
existing striping and
markings by grinding,
installation of no parking
signs, cat tracking, public
notice distribution, and
implementation of
temporary traffic control.

All work shall be
performed in accordance
with these specifications
and the most current
California Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control
Devices/CALTRANS
standards. The work
under this contract will be
installed in the direction
of the Transportation
Division of Public Works.
$ 1,250,000.00 134-54-622-663-0000-
000-431-612990
Public Works/
Transportation
Areli Balderama    510-
981-5214
Wei Sun                510-
981-6389
27-11799-C Zachary's
Corner Project
Construction
Services
9/16/2026 10/16/2026 Construction services for
the Zachary's Corner
Project. The Services
include the mobilization,
demolition, civil, signing
and striping, and
electrical improvements
at the study area
$ 462,884.00 147-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-612310 -
PWTRST2502
PW Transportation Michael Ruiz- Leon
510-981-7773
1 of  5

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: September 15, 2026
Attachment 1
27-11800-C Mental Health
Services EV
Charger
Installation
Project
9/16/2026 10/16/2026 Install two new Level 2 EV
chargers, one dual-port
unit and one single-port
unit, including all
associated ancillary site
improvements
$ 180,000.00 671-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-664110-
Construction
Public Works/Facilities Uriel Gonzalez    510-
981-6627
27-11801-C Animal Shelter
EV Charger
Installation
Project
9/16/26 10/16/2026 Install two new Level 2 EV
chargers including all
associated ancillary site
improvements
$ 80,000.00 671-54-622-668-0000-
000-431-664110-
Construction
Public Works/Facilities Uriel Gonzalez    510-
981-6627
27-11802-C City of Berkeley
Parking Meters
and Mobile
Parking
Payment
System
9/16/26 10/16/26 The City of Berkeley
Public Works Department
intends to enter into a
contract with a qualified
firm to provide new
parking meters and
mobile parking payment
services for the city's
parking customers at all
metered parking spaces in
the City and reservations
at the City's public
parking garages.
$ 5,000,000.00 631-54-622-665-0000-
000-472-612990
FY27: $1,250,000
FY28: $1,250,000
FY29: $1,250,000
FY30: $500,000
FY31:  $500,000
Public Works/
Transportation
Elliott Schwimmer
415-233-0663
Dept Total $6,972,884
27-11803-C Echo Lake
Drinking and
Fire Water
Study and
Design
9/16/26 10/16/2026 Consulting services for
the study and design of
drinking and fire water
improvements at
Berkeley Echo Lake Camp
$ 200,000.00 125-52-545-000-0000-
000-461-612310 -
PRWCP27001
PRW/Recreation Justin Pitcher 510-981-
5123

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTIO

N OF GOODS
/ SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED
COST

BUDGET CODE TO

BE CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT NAME
& PHONE
2 of  5

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: September 15, 2026
Attachment 1
27-11804-C Food Service
supplies and
Equipment for
Resident
Camps
9/16/26 10/16/2026 Food Service supplies and
Equipment for Berkeley
Echo Lake Camp and
Tuolumne Camp
$5,000,000 over 5
years
BTC Camp Fund 125-
52-543-583-0000-000-
461-644110
General Fund 011-52-
543-583-0000-000-461-
644110              Echo
Lake Camps Fund  125-
52-543-582-0000-000-
461-644110
PRW/Recreation Justin Pitcher 510-981-
5124
27-11805-C Bus
Transportation
services for the
Camps Divsion
and other
Select
Recreation
Programs
9/16/26 10/16/2026 Transportation services
for Berkeley Echo Lake
Youth Camp, Berkeley
Day Camp and other
select recreation
programs
$600,000 over 4
years
125-52-543-582-0000-
000-461-634230
125-52-543-584-0000-
000-461-634230
011-52-543-570-0000-
000-461-634230
PRW/Recreation Justin Pitcher 510-981-
5125
27-11806-C Berkeley
Tuolumne
Camp Store
Resale Items
9/16/26 10/16/2026 Wholesale items for sale
at the Berkeley Tuolumne
camp store
$200,000 over 5
years
125-52-543-583-0000-
000-461-642990
PRW/Recreation Justin Pitcher 510-981-
5126

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTIO

N OF GOODS
/ SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED
COST

BUDGET CODE TO

BE CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT NAME
& PHONE
3 of  5

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: September 15, 2026
Attachment 1
27-11807-C African
American
Holistic
Resource
Center
9/16/26 10/16/2026 The project demolishes
the existing building and
constructs a new 6,380-
square-foot, 2 story
building for the African
American Holistic
Resource Center (AAHRC).

AAHRC is a resilience
center dedicated
to
improving preparedness,
equity, and substainability
in the face of physical and
social challenges within
the City of Berkeley's
legacy African American
community. Site
improvements include
vehicle parking spaces,
bicycle spaces and ground-
level open space. The
main program features
multi-use assembly areas
with flexible partitions, a
teaching kitchen, health
and therapy rooms, a
library and offices. The
rooftop includes event
spaces and a community
garden
$ 12,700,000.00 PRW12202
General Fund  011-52-
545-000-0000-000-461-
662110
Measure T1 511-52-
545-000-0000-000-461-
662110
PRW/Recreation Evelyn Chan 510-981-
6430                 Canhui
Li 510-981-6432
Dept Total $18,700.00
27-11797-C ServiceNow
Professional
Services
9/16/26 10/16/2026 This RFP seeks a vendor
to support ServiceNow
(SNOW). The support
includes performing
major version upgrades,
implementing new
modules, enhancing
existing modules and
fixing defects.
$ 150,000.00 680-35-363-384-6005-
000-472-61313
FY27  $25,000
FY28   $50,000
FY29 $75,000
IT/ Business Applications Arnold Chan 510-981-
6517
Dept Total $150,000

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTIO

N OF GOODS
/ SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED
COST

BUDGET CODE TO

BE CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT NAME
& PHONE
4 of  5

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: September 15, 2026
Attachment 1
TOTAL $25,822,884

SPECIFICATI
ON NO.

DESCRIPTIO

N OF GOODS
/ SERVICES
BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX.

RELEASE
DATE
APPROX.

BID

OPENING
DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED
COST

BUDGET CODE TO

BE CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT NAME
& PHONE
5 of  5

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: David Sprague, Fire Chief
Subject: Contract No. 32200227 Amendment: Fire Aside for Wildfire Resilience Software

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend Contract No. 32200227 with Fire Aside, LLC for defensible space inspection and community chipper management software increasing the amount by $150,000 for an amended total amount not to exceed $410,000 and maintaining the same term which ends on May 17, 2028.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The total cost of the contract will not exceed $410,000. Funding will be provided from funds, including, but not limited to, Measure FF (2020), Measure GG (2008), UC Settlement, and the General Fund.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Fire Department continues wildfire-prevention efforts in Berkeley’s fire-prone neighborhoods, including defensible space and home-hardening inspections, vegetation-management programs, resident education, and follow-up on required or recommended mitigation measures. Managing these programs at scale requires a software platform that supports field data collection, property-level documentation, resident-facing reports, program coordination, analytics, and evaluation of progress over time.

Fire Aside provides a mobile, wildfire-specific platform that enables inspectors to document property conditions, GPS locations, photographs, defensible space, and home-hardening characteristics. Since the City entered into its contract with Fire Aside, the platform has expanded to include additional features supporting the Defensible Space Inspection and chipper programs. As these capabilities have been implemented, the original amount authorized by Council has become insufficient to support the contract through the end of its term.

This contract supports the Strategic Plan goal of creating a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared city.

Contract No. 32200227 Amendment: Fire Aside for Wildfire Resilience Software CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

BACKGROUND
In 2022, the City Council authorized a contract with Fire Aside for wildfire inspection and vegetation-management software through a waiver of competitive solicitation, based on the Department’s need for a purpose-built platform that integrated defensible space and home-hardening inspections, resident engagement, and chipper program management.

Since then, Fire Aside has been a reliable and cost-effective vendor for the City.

However, in advance of the current contract’s expiration in May 2028, the Department intends to conduct a procurement process to evaluate available solutions and procure these services for the subsequent contract term.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no direct adverse environmental or climate impacts associated with the contract amendment. The software supports wildfire-risk-reduction programs that promote defensible space, home hardening, vegetation management, and community resilience to climate-driven wildfire hazards.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Continuing to use the Fire Aside software platform will preserve a consistent workflow for inspectors and residents, retain access to property-level program data, and support the Department’s wildfire-resilience programs.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The city could choose to significantly reduce the wildfire prevention work by not funding the contract extension or conduct a separate competitive solicitation now which would require additional staff time in the middle of inspection and wildfire season and could delay continuity of services.

CONTACT PERSON
David Sprague, Fire Chief, (510) 981-3473
Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

CONTRACT NO. 32200227 AMENDMENT: FIRE ASIDE FOR WILDFIRE RESILIENCE

SOFTWARE
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley faces significant wildfire risk and the Fire Department conducts defensible space, home-hardening, vegetation-management, and resident- education programs to reduce that risk; and
WHEREAS, the Fire Department requires a mobile, wildfire-specific software platform to document property conditions, produce customized resident recommendations, coordinate mitigation programs, and analyze progress toward community risk reduction; and
WHEREAS, in 2022, the City Council authorized a contract with Fire Aside for wildfire inspection and vegetation-management software through a waiver of competitive solicitation, based on the Department’s need for a purpose-built platform that integrated defensible space and home-hardening inspections, resident engagement, and chipper program management; and
WHEREAS, since the City entered into its original contract with Fire Aside, the City has expanded use of the software platform to include additional features supporting the Defensible Space Inspection and chipper programs; and
WHEREAS, as these capabilities have been implemented, the original amount authorized by Council has become insufficient to support the contract through the end of its term; and
WHEREAS, funding will be provided from the following funds, including, but not limited to, Measure FF (2020), Measure GG (2008), UC Settlement and the General Fund.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to amend Contract No. 32200227 with Fire Aside, LLC for defensible space inspection and community chipper management software increasing the amount by $150,000 for an amended total amount not to exceed $410,000 and maintaining the same term which ends on May 17, 2028.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: David Sprague, Fire Chief
Subject: Purchase Orders for Bauer Compressors Inc. for Firefighting Supplies, Equipment, Service and Maintenance

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager, or their designee to execute annual purchase orders using a piggyback contract and any amendments with Bauer Compressors Inc. using the National Purchasing Partners (NPP) contract No. PS26090 in an amount not to exceed $1,579,472 for Firefighting supplies, equipment and related service and maintenance from October 1, 2026 through March 4, 2030, with an option to extend one (1) year to March 4, 2031.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Funding up to $1,579,472 through March 4, 2031 which includes the one extension year for turnouts, PPE, firefighting tools, equipment and related service and maintenance.

Funding comes from but it not restricted to the Fire Department’s baseline General Fund, Measure GG, Measure FF (Fire and Emergency Services, 2020) or UC Funds.

The number of turnouts and PPE purchased each fiscal year depends on the number of recruits hired and the number of turnouts and PPE that must be replaced per the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). This is why the figures in the “Amount” column of the table below vary significantly by Fiscal Year.

Firefighting tools and equipment are replaced due to normal wear and tear during fire suppression operations. Firefighting turnouts expire every 10 years per NFPA requirements. Service and maintenance occur as needed or when required by the NFPA.

Year Amount
15%
Contingency
Total Not to
Exceed
FY2027 $242,540 $36,381 $278,921
FY2028 $259,417 $38,913 $298,330
FY2029 $316,251 $47,438 $363,689
FY2030 $297,375 $44,606 $341,981

Purchase Orders for Bauer Compressors Inc.

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026

FY2031 $257,871 $38,681 $296,552
Total $1,373,454 $206,018 $1,579,472

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Turnouts and PPE are necessary protective safety gear for firefighting personnel and are required to fully comply with updated CAL-OSHA and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1971, Standard on Protective Ensembles for Structural Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting. Firefighting equipment is also needed for fire suppression and responding to emergency calls.

These purchases piggyback off a publicly solicited cooperative contract awarded to Bauer Compressors, Inc. This contract is established through a formal competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process conducted by NPP.gov.  Fire Fighting Equipment, SCBA, and Protective Gear, Contact No. #PS26090, RFP Notice September 15, 2025, Awarded January 29, 2026.

Piggybacking off a cooperative contract is an effort to streamline the procurement process, reducing administrative costs and delays associated with an RFP.

BACKGROUND
On October 14, 2020 National Purchasing Partners (NPP) issued RFP No. 2555 for the procurement of “Fire Fighting Equipment, SCBA, and Protective Gear”. The RFP was published in the Daily Journal of Commerce and USA Today on September 15, 2025.

The RFP closed November 14, 2025 and contracts were awarded on January 29, 2026.

NPP Contract No. PS26090 with Bauer Compressors, Inc. which started on March 4, 2026 and ends on March 4, 2030 with a one-year extension to March 4, 2031. This is a publicly solicited contract established through an RFP process conducted by a Lead Public Agency and satisfies Berkeley’s formal competitive bid requirements.

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

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
PPE and equipment are required for firefighters to maintain a state of readiness and be compliant with national and state laws. Relying on NPP.gov’s procurement process will minimize staff hours spent on this project.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None

CONTACT PERSON
David Sprague, Fire Chief, (510) 981-3473

Purchase Orders for Bauer Compressors Inc.

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026

Attachments:
1: Resolution

Purchase Orders for Bauer Compressors Inc.

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026

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

CONTRACT: BAUER COMPRESSORS INC. FOR FIREFIGHTING SUPPLIES,

EQUIPMENT, SERVICE AND MAINTENANCE
WHEREAS, the Fire Department purchases firefighting supplies and equipment including Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for firefighters, and WHEREAS, reliable mission critical tools and equipment are needed for firefighters to perform their duties, and
WHEREAS, the products offered by Bauer Compressors, Inc. meet national, state and local safety standards that provide safe protective clothing and equipment for firefighters engaging in fire suppression and rescue operations, and WHEREAS, this purchase piggybacks off a publicly solicited cooperative contract awarded to Bauer Compressors, Inc., and
WHEREAS, this contract was established through a formal competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process conducted by NPP.gov, and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2020 National Purchasing Partners (NPP) issued RFP No. 2555 for the procurement of “Fire Fighting Equipment, SCBA, and Protective Gear”. The RFP was published in the Daily Journal of Commerce and USA Today on September 15, 2025. The RFP closed November 14, 2025 and contracts were awarded on January 29, 2026. NPP Contract No. PS26090 with Bauer Compressors, Inc. which started on March 4, 2026 and ends on March 4, 2030 with a one-year extension to March 4, 2031.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager, or their designee is authorized to execute annual purchase orders using a piggyback contract and any amendments with Bauer Compressors Inc. using the National Purchasing Partners (NPP) contract No. PS26090 in an amount not to exceed $1,579,472 for Firefighting supplies, equipment, and related service and maintenance from October 1, 2026 through March 4, 2030, with an option to extend one (1) year to Mar 4, 2031.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: David Sprague, Fire Chief
Subject: Purchase Orders: Stryker Sales for Gurneys, Stair Chairs, and Mechanical CPR Units

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or their designee to utilize Sourcewell Contract No. 041823 to issue piggyback purchase orders and any amendments to Stryker Sales LLC for the lease of ten gurneys, ten powered gurney fastener systems (power load system), and ten evacuation chairs (stair chair), and twelve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) units for Fire Department response vehicles from October 1, 2026 through January 1, 2033 in an amount not to exceed $1,591,355.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The annual projected cost of this lease is $218,409. The total not-to-exceed cost for the full seven-year lease including a 15% contingency is $1,591,355. Funding for FY27 will come from Measure GG. Funding for subsequent years include but are not limited to Fire Department General Fund, Measure FF (Fire & Emergency Services, 2020), Measure GG (Fire and Emergency Services), and UC Settlement Funds.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Each ambulance must have a gurney, a gurney fastener system, and stair chairs to move patients from the emergency incident location to the ambulance, and then from the ambulance to the hospital. The current leases for these devices expire in December of 2026, necessitating a new lease.

Each fire engine and fire truck currently carries a mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) commonly called a LUCAS device. The LUCAS devices are an integral part of providing lifesaving care in cardiac arrest patients and have been at the end of their service life since 2023. They are no longer eligible for service and maintenance.

The current fleet of LUCAS devices carried on all first responder suppression apparatus have played an integral role in the City of Berkeley achieving a very high, 21.2% survival rate among cardiac arrest patients. In this context, “survival” refers to patients who suffer a cardiac arrest and are subsequently discharged from the hospital. This

Contract: Purchase Orders: Stryker Sales for Gurneys, Stair Chairs, CONSENT CALENDAR and Mechanical CPR Units September 15, 2026

percentage is the highest in Alameda County (County average of 10% survival) and double the national average (10.5%).

The lease of replacement devices will continue to support the Department’s goal of providing sustained and effective chest compressions to patients in cardiac arrest which sustains blood circulation to the brain, the heart and vital organs. This increases the probability that a victim of cardiac arrest will regain spontaneous circulation and be discharged from the hospital.

BACKGROUND
Mechanical CPR devices became a required piece of equipment by the Alameda County Local Emergency Medical Services Agency in 2011. In 2018 the mechanical CPR devices that were provided to the Fire Department by the Alameda County private ambulance provider (Paramedics Plus) reached the end of their service life. To replace the end-of-life devices, the City purchased a fleet of LUCAS devices. Those devices are the current fleet and reached the end of their service life in 2023 making them ineligible for maintenance and service from the vendor.

Sourcewell conducted a competitive procurement process for Critical Care and EMS Equipment which included the following milestones:
 Public Notice of RFP Published: February 28, 2023
 Proposal Due Date: April 18, 2023
 Proposal Opening: April 18, 2023
 Sourcewell Board of Directors Approval: July 18, 2023 Sourcewell competitively solicited RFP No. 041823, Critical Care and EMS Equipment, and subsequently awarded Contract No. 041823-SYK to Stryker Corporation. The Sourcewell contract provides public agencies with access to a broad range of Stryker critical care and emergency medical equipment, including the devices contemplated under this procurement.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental or climate impacts related to this item.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Gurneys, Power-loaders and Stair Chairs: The replacement of this equipment is a normal operating cost associated with providing transport for sick and injured patients.

The current fleet is at the end of its lease agreement.

LUCAS devices: The devices are an integral part of providing lifesaving care in cardiac arrest patients and we are required to carry them per the Alameda County Local

Contract: Purchase Orders: Stryker Sales for Gurneys, Stair Chairs, CONSENT CALENDAR and Mechanical CPR Units September 15, 2026

Emergency Medical Services Agency. The current fleet of devices are past their end of service life and not eligible for service and maintenance.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
David Sprague, Fire Chief, (510) 981-3473
Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

CONTRACT: STRYKER SALES FOR GURNEYS, STAIR CHAIRS, AND

MECHANICAL CPR UNITS
WHEREAS, each Fire Department ambulance must have a gurney, a gurney fastener system, and stair chairs to move patients from the emergency incident location to the ambulance, and then from the ambulance to the hospital; and WHEREAS, Current leases for these devices and equipment (gurneys, gurney fastener systems (power load system), evacuation chairs (stair chair), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) units) expire in December of 2026, necessitating a new lease, and WHEREAS, each fire engine and fire truck currently carries a mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) device, which are an integral part of providing lifesaving care in cardiac arrest patients and have been at the end of their service life since 2023 and no longer eligible for service and maintenance, and WHEREAS, the current fleet of mechanical CPR devices carried on all first responder suppression apparatus have played an integral role in the City of Berkeley achieving a very high, 21.2% survival rate among cardiac arrest patients.

WHEREAS, the lease of replacement devices will continue to support the Fire Department’s goal of providing sustained and effective chest compressions to patients in cardiac arrest which sustains blood circulation to the brain, the heart and vital organs.

This increases the probability that a victim of cardiac arrest to regain spontaneous circulation and be discharged from the hospital, and
WHEREAS, the Alameda County Local Emergency Medical Services Agency made mechanical CPR devices a required piece of equipment in 2011, and WHEREAS, Sourcewell competitively solicited RFP No. 041823, Critical Care and EMS Equipment, and subsequently awarded Contract No. 041823-SYK to Stryker Corporation. The Sourcewell contract provides public agencies with access to a broad range of Stryker critical care and emergency medical equipment, including the devices contemplated under this procurement.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager or his designee is authorized to utilize Sourcewell Contract No. 041823 to issue piggyback purchase orders and any amendments to Stryker Sales LLC for the lease of ten gurneys, ten powered gurney fastener systems (power load system), and ten evacuation chairs (stair chair), and twelve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) units for Fire Department response vehicles from October 1, 2026 through January 1, 2033 in an amount not to exceed $1,591,355.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Subject: Contract No.32300207 Amendment: Easy Does It for Accessible Wheelchair Van Services for Seniors & the Disabled

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 72,259-N.S and authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to amend Contract No. 32300207 with Easy Does It, increasing the amount by $57,000 for the period of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, for a total contract amount not to exceed $307,000. These services support accessible wheelchair van services to customers of the Aging Services Division’s Berkeley Rides for Seniors & the Disabled program.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Funding for the Easy Does it contract will be from Measure BB direct local distribution funds distributed by the Alameda County Transportation Commission. Funding in the amount of $57,000 is available in the Fiscal Year 2027 (FY 2027) budget in Fund Measure BB (Fund 136).

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
This council item was previously submitted to Council on May 12, 2026. Council approved the contract amendment, increasing the contract amount by $57,000.

However, there was an error listing the not to exceed amount (NTE) as $232,000. The correct NTE amount is $307,000. Staff are resubmitting this request with the corrected not to exceed amount of $307,000.

The City of Berkeley has had a Measure BB funded contract with Easy Does It since 2005. Contract No. 32300207 was set to expire on June 30, 2026, and has been extended with City Manager authorization. The contract with Easy Does It allows Berkeley Rides for Seniors & the Disabled (BRSD) to continue to provide same-day and prescheduled rides for the City of Berkeley’s senior and disabled wheelchair users.

Contract No. 32300207 has a waiver of competitive solicitation at the time the contract was issued. Easy Does It was the only local organization providing on-demand lift- equipped accessible wheelchair van service 7 days a week for BRSD consumers. The

Contract No.32300207 Amendment: Easy Does It for CONSENT CALENDAR Accessible Wheelchair Van Services for Seniors & the Disabled September 15, 2026

City intends to release an RFP for these services during the second or third quarter of the fiscal year.

Effective January 1, 2026, local agencies are required to satisfy noticing requirements for certain contracts for services that meet the criteria outlined in Government Code Section 3504.1 as amended by AB 339. This contract does not meet the criteria in Government Code Section 3504.1 and is exempt from the noticing requirement.

BACKGROUND
BRSD is a supplemental transportation program that provides accessible wheelchair van and GoGo (Uber/Lyft) rides to eligible Berkeley seniors and disabled residents.

Eligible Berkeley residents must be 70 years old or older. Residents registered with East Bay Paratransit services may be any age.

Easy Does It provides accessible wheelchair van service to wheelchair customers enrolled in BRSD. The service includes 7 days a week, same-day and advance- scheduled curb-to-curb transportation, and when necessary, door-to-door and door- through-door service. Customers are transported to destinations within the City of Berkeley and within 15 miles of the jurisdictional boundaries of Berkeley, including Oakland, Richmond, Walnut Creek, San Rafael, Fremont and San Francisco.

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

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Easy Does It provides an essential transportation service to wheelchair-bound City of Berkeley community members, supporting and strengthening their ability to live independently. BRSD continues to receive demand from wheelchair users for affordable and accessible wheelchair transportation services.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Without the Easy Does It contract, the City will face a major gap in affordable, accessible van transportation for seniors and disabled wheelchair users.

CONTACT PERSON
Mary Triston, Transportation Services Coordinator, HHCS, (510) 981-5135 Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

CONTRACT NO. 32300207 AMENDMENT: EASY DOES IT FOR ACCESSIBLE

WHEELCHAIR VAN SERVICE FOR SENIORS AND THE DISABLED
WHEREAS, Berkeley Rides for Seniors and the Disabled is an Aging Services Division transportation services program funded by Measure BB by the Alameda County Transportation Commission; and
WHEREAS, Measure BB funds an accessible wheelchair van program that provides transportation exclusively to wheelchair users needing lift-equipment wheelchair accessible van service; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Contract No. 32300207 with Easy Does It on April 11, 2023, for a not to exceed amount of $175,000 for a term from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2026, via Resolution No. 70,755-N.S., and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Contract Amendment No. 32300207 with Easy Does It on September 30, 2025, to increase the amount by $75,000 for a not to exceed amount of $250,000 for a term from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026, via Resolution No. 71,966-N.S., and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Contract Amendment No. 32300207 with Easy Does It on May 12, 2026, to increase the amount by $57,000 via Resolution No. 72,259- N.S. for a term from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027, the not to exceed amount was calculated incorrectly as it did not include the total amount of the second amendment approved on September 30, 2025, and
WHEREAS, this contract is exempt from the noticing requirements set forth in Government Code Section 3504.1; and
WHEREAS, funding is available for FY 2027 in Fund Measure BB (Fund 136).

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager, or designee, is authorized to amend Contract No. 32300207 with Easy Does It increasing the amount by $57,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $307,000 for the period July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027. A record signature copy of said contract and any amendments shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Resolution No. 72,259-N.S. is hereby rescinded.

Office of the City Manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Subject: Revenue Contract: MARU for Aging Services - Information and Assistance Fiscal Years 2027 - 2030

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to accept grant funding and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments with MARU (formally known as Korean Community Center of the East Bay), an East Bay non-profit organization. This funding will support Information and Assistance Services for Berkeley seniors from Fiscal Year 2027 through Fiscal Year 2030 (FY 2027 - FY 2030) in the projected annual amount of $169,347.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The City of Berkeley anticipates an initial $169,347 grant from MARU for FY 2027.

Funding will increase by 4% annually through FY 2030 to support Information and Assistance Services for Berkeley older adults. Future allocations remain subject to budget appropriations.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City applied for multiple county grants to fund local older adult programming.

However, the Alameda County Area Agency on Aging (AAA) shifted its strategy this funding cycle, selecting a single county-wide vendor, MARU, instead of multiple regional vendors. Once MARU finalizes its contract with the County, it plans to subcontract with Berkeley to help fulfill regional Information and Assistance Services. This funding is secured for FY 2027, with anticipated annual renewals through FY 2030.

Effective January 1, 2026, local agencies are required to satisfy noticing requirements for certain contracts for services that meet the criteria outlined in Government Code Section 3504.1 as amended by AB 339. This is a revenue contract, and it does not meet the criteria in Government Code Section 3504.1 and is exempt from the noticing requirement.

BACKGROUND
The Aging Services Division combines funding from city, county, and state sources, alongside private donations, to serve Berkeley’s senior residents. The department is

Revenue Contract: Information and Assistance CONSENT CALENDAR Fiscal Years 2027 – 2030 September 15, 2026
dedicated to maintaining a vibrant network of community care, providing nutritious meals, recreational activities, social events, educational classes, and direct resource referrals for older adults and their families.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no environmental impacts identified.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
These pass-thru funds from the County through MARU provide critical financial support to ensure the City can continue operating its robust programming at both the North and South Berkeley Senior Centers, as well as maintaining dedicated case management services for vulnerable older adults.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The City reviews all outside funding to ensure it aligns with our community goals. If the City chooses not to accept these grants, it will result in an immediate and significant reduction in vital services available to Berkeley seniors.

CONTACT PERSON
Rhianna Babka, Manager of Aging Services, Health, Housing & Community Services, (510) 981-5410
Attachments:

1. Resolution

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

REVENUE CONTRACT: MARU FOR INFORMATION & ASSISTANCE - FISCAL YEARS 2027-2030
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley Department of Health, Housing & Community Services (HHCS) provides a broad range of community services to the community; and WHEREAS, HHCS’ Aging Services Division provides a broad range of services to Berkeley seniors; and
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley should seek outside funding wherever possible to fund vital senior services; and
WHEREAS, Alameda County awarded funding to MARU to provide Information and Assistance for Alameda County, and MARU will be subcontracting with the City of Berkeley Aging Services Division for Fiscal Years 2027-2030 in the approximate amount of $169,347 with an estimated annual increase of 4% (Revenue Budget Code 327-51- 505-541-2035-000-000-433110-) to support the Berkeley older adult community; and WHEREAS, the funds will support the coordination and delivery of Information and Assistance services to the older adult community (Budget Code 327-51-505-544-2035- 000-444 various); and
WHEREAS, this contract is exempt from the noticing requirements set forth in Government Code Section 3504.1.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager or designee is hereby authorized to submit a contract agreement to MARU for funding for Fiscal Years 2027-2030 for Information and Assistance, and to accept the grants and to execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments in line with the grant awards, including any annual increases and term extensions, and which may be larger or smaller than the projected annual award of $169,347. A record signature copy of said agreements and any amendments shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Subject: Revenue Contracts: Aging Services - Nutrition Programs Fiscal Years 2027 - 2030

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt two resolutions authorizing the City Manager or designee to receive grant funding and execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments with Alameda County to provide congregate and home-delivered meals for seniors for Fiscal Year 2027 through Fiscal Year 2030 (FY2027-FY2030):
a. Congregate Meals in a projected annual amount of $696,800; and b. Home Delivered Meals in a projected annual amount of $860,515.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
The City of Berkeley anticipates receiving two annual grants from the Alameda County Area Agency on Aging (AAA) totaling approximately $1,557,315. This funding will support the designated programs from FY 2027 through FY 2030.

The contracts require a 10% local match of approximately $155,732. The Aging Services Division of the Department of Health, Housing, and Community Services (HHCS/AS) will cover this match using approved General Fund resources. All future funding remains subject to annual budget appropriations.

1. Congregate Meals: The FY 2027-2030 contract is projected for $696,800 annually in the Senior Nutrition (Title III) Fund (Fund 320) and requires a $69,680 local match from the General Fund (Fund 011). Funding supports senior center staff, meal coordination, and catering services for both on-site dining at the North and South Senior Centers and pickup meals.

2. Home Delivered Meals: The FY 2027-2030 contract is projected for $860,515 annually in the Senior Nutrition (Title III) Fund (Fund 320) and requires an $86,052 local match from the General Fund (Fund 011). Funding supports program staff, delivery management, and catering services for home delivered meals.

Revenue Contracts: Nutrition Programs CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Years 2027 – 2030 September 15, 2026

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The HHCS/AS applied for nutrition programs from AAA. As required by the proposal process, the City identified two cost-effective subcontractors to prepare the meals:

Nutrition Solutions (NS) for congregate meals, and Service Opportunities for Seniors (SOS) for home-deliveries. AAA has issued a notice of intent to award the contract to HHCS/AS for both programs. Once funding is secured, funding is for FY 2027 with possible annual amendments and extensions for an additional three years (through FY 2030).

Effective January 1, 2026, local agencies are required to satisfy noticing requirements for certain contracts for services that meet the criteria outlined in Government Code Section 3504.1 as amended by AB 339. This is a revenue contract, and it does not meet the criteria in Government Code Section 3504.1 and is exempt from the noticing requirement. The expenditure contracts related to this work have also been determined to be exempt from this requirement.

BACKGROUND
HHCS/AS receives funding from city, county and state sources as well as private donations to serve the senior residents of Berkeley including the coordination and delivery of the Tri-City Nutrition Program. HHCS/AS is committed to providing a broad range of community services to meet the needs of seniors in Berkeley. HHCS/AS provides nutritious meals, outreach, activities, social events, classes, and individual support and referral services to seniors and their families in the community.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The home-delivered and congregate meal programs compost meal waste.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
These funds provide critical support to ensure HHCS/AS can continue to provide congregate meals at both the North and South Berkeley Senior Centers, and home delivered meals to eligible individuals.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
HHCS/AS assesses each funding source to ensure that it supports the City’s mission and goals. The alternative action of not seeking any of these funding sources would result in a significant reduction in services available to seniors in the community.

CONTACT PERSON
Rhianna Babka, Manager of Aging Services, HHCS, (510) 981-5410 Attachments:

1. Resolution: Congregate Meals

2. Resolution: Home-Delivered Meals

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

REVENUE CONTRACT: ALAMEDA COUNTY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2030

CONGREGATE MEAL PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley Department of Health, Housing & Community Services (HHCS) provides a broad range of community services to the community; and WHEREAS, HHCS’ Aging Services Division provides a broad range of services to Berkeley seniors, and coordinates the delivery of meals to three cities – Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville – as the lead partner in the Tri-City Nutrition Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley should seek outside funding wherever possible to fund vital senior services; and
WHEREAS, Alameda County provides funding to support the Congregate Meal programs for Fiscal Years 2027-2030 in the approximate amount of $696,800 (Senior Nutrition (Title III) Fund 320); and
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley provides a minimum match of $69,680 in General Funds (Fund 011); and
WHEREAS, the funds will support the coordination and management of congregate meals at four sites (North Berkeley Senior Center, South Berkeley Senior Center, Emeryville Senior Center and Albany Senior Center) (Senior Nutrition (Title III) Fund 320); and
WHEREAS, as a condition of the application to Alameda County Area Agency on Aging, Aging Services was required to pre-identify a qualified subcontractor for catering service, and through a streamlined solicitation, Aging Services selected Nutrition Solutions to provide meals for the congregate meal program; and
WHEREAS, the revenue contract is exempt from the noticing requirements set forth in Government Code Section 3504.1, and the resulting expenditure contract has been determined to be exempt from this requirement.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager or designee is hereby authorized to:

1. Submit a contract agreement to Alameda County for funding for fiscal years 2027- 2030 for the Congregate Meal Program, and to accept the grants and to execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments consistent with the grant awards, including any annual increases and term extensions, and which may be greater or less than the projected annual award of $696,800; and

2. Execute and amend any resulting agreement with Nutrition Solutions for fiscal years 2027-2030 for congregate meal services in amounts consistent with the grant awards, which may be greater or less than the projected annual contract amount of $519,362, subject to the availability of grant funding.

A record signature copy of said agreements and any amendments shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk.

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

REVENUE CONTRACT: ALAMEDA COUNTY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2030

HOME DELIVERED MEAL PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley Department of Health, Housing & Community Services (HHCS) provides a broad range of community services to the community; and WHEREAS, HHCS’ Aging Services Division provides a broad range of services to Berkeley seniors, and coordinates the delivery of meals to three cities – Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville – as the lead partner in the Tri-City Nutrition Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley should seek outside funding wherever possible to fund vital senior services; and
WHEREAS, Alameda County provides funding to support the Home Delivered Meal program for Fiscal Years 2027-2030 in the approximate amount of $860,515 (Fund 320); and
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley provides a minimum match of $86,052 in General Funds (Fund 011); and
WHEREAS, the funds will support the coordination and management of home delivered meals to the partner cities in the Tri-City Nutrition Program (Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville) (Fund 320); and
WHEREAS, as a condition of the application to Alameda County Area Agency on Aging, Aging Services was required to pre-identify a qualified subcontractor for catering service, and through a streamlined solicitation, Aging Services selected Service Opportunities for Seniors to provide meals for the home delivered meal program; and WHEREAS, this contract is exempt from the noticing requirements set forth in Government Code Section 3504.1, and the resulting expenditure contract has been determined to be exempt from this requirement.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager or designee is hereby authorized to:

1. Submit a contract agreement to Alameda County for funding for fiscal years 2027- 2030 for the Home Delivered Meal Program, and to accept the grants and to execute any resultant revenue agreements and amendments consistent with the grant awards, including any annual increases and term extensions, which may be greater or less than the projected annual award of $860,515; and

2. Execute and amend any resulting agreement with Service Opportunities for Seniors (SOS) for fiscal years 2027-2030 for home delivered meal services in amounts consistent with the grant awards, which may be greater or less than the projected annual contract amount of $638,066, subject to the availability of grant funding.

A record signature copy of said agreements and any amendments shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing & Community Services Subject: Shattuck Senior Homes Loan Modification Request

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the following actions to modify two existing Housing Trust Fund (HTF) loans for Shattuck Senior Homes, located at 2425 Shattuck Avenue, by:

1. Combining the outstanding principal balances of the two existing loans into one new City loan in the amount of $970,603 plus accrued interest.

2. Reducing the interest rate from 6% to 3% simple interest.

3. Extending the loan maturity date by 55 years to September 1, 2082.

4. Waiving the HTF Guidelines requirement to restrict 20% of units at 30% Area Median Income (AMI) and maintaining affordability requirements at 50% and 60% AMI.

5. Extending the Regulatory Agreement so that it is coterminous with the new loan maturity date of September 1, 2082.

6. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all original or amended documents or agreements to effectuate these actions, including amendments to the existing loan agreements.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
In extending the two existing loans, the City is forgoing full repayment in the short term, collectively estimated at $2,582,214 ($970,603M in principal plus $1,611,611M in accrued interest as of July 31, 2026), to ensure continued affordability. By refinancing the existing loans, the City will be able to extend its affordability requirements without adding new funding. Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (SAHA) will continue to repay the City through residual receipts, when the project has positive cash flow.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
SAHA requested modification of their existing City HTF loans for Shattuck Senior Homes that are nearing or have reached maturity. The property cannot repay the balloon obligations at maturity and reports limited reserves. No additional HTF funds were requested.

Shattuck Senior Homes CONSENT CALENDAR
Loan Modification Request September 15, 2026

On July 2, 2026, the Housing Advisory Commission (HAC) supported SAHA’s loan modification request with the following vote:

Action: M/S/C (Simon-Weisberg/Haycox) to recommend that the City Council approve modification of the City’s existing Housing Trust Fund (HTF) loans for Shattuck Senior Homes, located at 2425 Shattuck Avenue, by:

1. Combining the outstanding principal balances of the two existing loans into one new City loan in the amount of $970,603;

2. Reducing the interest rate from 6% to 3% simple interest;

3. Extending the loan maturity date by 55 years to September 1, 2082;

4. Waiving the requirement to restrict 20% of units at 30% Area Median Income (AMI) and maintaining affordability requirements at 50% and 60% AMI; and

5. Extending the Regulatory Agreement so that it is coterminous with the new loan maturity date of September 1, 2082.

Vote: Ayes: Bell, Haycox, Shere, Simon-Weisberg, Twu, and Vaughn Scott. Noes:

None. Abstain: None. Absent: Micael (excused) and Mirvish (excused).

Effective January 1, 2026, local agencies are required to satisfy noticing requirements for certain contracts for services that meet the criteria outlined in Government Code Section 3504.1 as amended by AB 339. This project does not meet the criteria in Government Code Section 3504.1 and is exempt from the noticing requirement.

BACKGROUND
The City of Berkeley's HTF program provides loans to build and preserve affordable housing. Older loans from the late 1990s and early 2000s - such as the Shattuck Senior Homes loans - have 30-year terms and 6% interest rates. Newer HTF loans carry 55- year terms and 3% interest rates to match current guidelines. City staff reviews loan changes based on financial need, long-term affordability, protection of City funds, and the property's ongoing upkeep.

Shattuck Senior Homes is a 26-unit affordable senior housing development owned by Shattuck Senior Homes Associates LP, with SAHA serving as the nonprofit sponsor (Owner). The property provides affordable housing for low-income seniors and remains an important housing resource in Berkeley.

The existing City loans are summarized below:
 1996 HTF Loan: Original principal of $679,600; maturity date June 30, 2026. As of April 27, 2026, the outstanding balance totals $1,820,703, consisting of $679,600 in principal and $1,831,316 in accrued interest.  1997 HTF Loan: Original principal of $350,000; maturity date August 31, 2027.

As of April 27, 2026, the outstanding balance totals $750,897, consisting of $291,003 in remaining principal and $459,894 in accrued interest.

Shattuck Senior Homes CONSENT CALENDAR
Loan Modification Request September 15, 2026

The new loan would include the combined outstanding principal balance of $970,603, plus the previously accrued interest. No new interest will accrue on the interest portion of the loan. The loan will be due and payable in 2082, 55 years after the original expiration of the 1997 HTF loan. No additional City funding is requested. The proposed loan restructuring would preserve the City's security interest while allowing the property to continue operating as affordable senior housing.

SAHA is working to build the project’s replacement reserves, in anticipation of over $400K in capital needs in the coming years. The project will need to address water intrusion repairs, roof replacement, exterior painting, security system upgrades, paving and walkway repairs, flooring replacement, water heater replacement, and accessibility improvements. These planned investments reflect the substantial capital needs of preserving a nearly 30-year-old affordable housing development.

SAHA also requested that the City maintain the project’s existing affordability levels at 50% and 60% AMI, rather than applying current HTF Guidelines, which would require 20% of the units to be restricted for 30% AMI households. Staff supports maintaining the existing affordability structure. Shattuck Senior Homes is a small project with limited operating margins, and the current affordability mix provides flexibility to continue serving households at deeper income levels (using project-based or tenant vouchers) while reducing financial risk if rental subsidies are no longer available.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
None.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Staff support extending the loan term and aligning the Regulatory Agreement with the revised maturity date to support continued affordability while maintaining the City’s investment in the project. Shattuck Senior Homes continues to provide needed affordable housing for seniors, and the City will gain 55 years of affordability without adding new City funding.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
SAHA is not in a position to repay its HTF loans for Shattuck Senior Homes. Requiring immediate repayment of the maturing loans could jeopardize property operations and result in a loss of long-term affordability and displacement of existing low-income seniors.

CONTACT PERSON
Lourdes Chang, Sr Community Development Project Coordinator, HHCS (510) 981-5263
Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

APPROVING LOAN MODIFICATIONS FOR SHATTUCK SENIOR HOMES
WHEREAS, City Council established a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) program to assist in the development and expansion of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income persons who either work or reside within the City of Berkeley, and authorized the City Manager to implement the HTF program; and
WHEREAS, City Council adopted guidelines (HTF Guidelines) as revised on January 19, 2021, and authorized the HTF program in accordance with the Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City’s older HTF loans, primarily executed between the late 1990s and early 2000s, typically have 30-year terms and 6% simple interest rates, while the current HTF Guidelines establish 55-year terms and 3% simple interest rate, and allow for City Manager approval of any deviations from those standard terms; and WHEREAS, Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (Owner) requested modifications to the terms of their existing City loans for Shattuck Senior Homes (Property) in order to preserve long-term affordability and financial viability; and WHEREAS, the Property, a 26-unit affordable housing development serving very low income seniors for the last 30 years, cannot repay the combined remaining principal balance of $970,603, plus accrued interest at the loan maturity date; and WHEREAS, the Owner is committed to continuing to provide much needed affordable housing for seniors, and requiring immediate repayment of the maturing loans could jeopardize property operations and preservation of long-term affordability; and WHEREAS, this contract is exempt from the noticing requirements set forth in Government Code Section 3504.1; and
WHEREAS, City staff support extending the loan term and aligning the Regulatory Agreement with the revised maturity date to support continued affordability while maintaining the City’s investment in the project without adding additional City funding.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to execute a contract with Satellite Affordable Housing Associates to refinance the existing HTF loans for Shattuck Senior Homes in an amount not to exceed $970,603 plus accrued interest for the term through September 1, 2082, with the following terms:

1. Combining the outstanding principal balances of the two existing loans into one new City loan in the amount of $970,603 plus accrued interest.

2. Reducing the interest rate from 6% to 3% simple interest.

3. Extending the loan maturity date to September 1, 2082.

4. Waiving the HTF Guidelines requirement to restrict 20% of units at 30% Area Median Income (AMI) and maintaining affordability requirements at 50% and 60% AMI.

5. Extending the Regulatory Agreement so that it is coterminous with the new loan maturity date of September 1, 2082.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Manager or designee is authorized to execute all original or amended documents, promissory notes, regulatory agreements, or other instruments necessary to effectuate these loan modifications.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Ferris, Director, Parks Recreation & Waterfront Subject: Grant Application: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT)

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Regional Measure 3 Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT) for up to $25,000,000 for construction of portions of the landside elements of the Berkeley Water Transportation Pier-Ferry Project.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
If awarded, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Regional Measure 3 (RM3) Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT) grant will provide up to $25,000,000 for the construction of portions of the landside elements of the Berkeley Water Transportation Pier-Ferry (BWTPF) Project (“Project”). The grant program does not require matching funds.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Berkeley Pier has been closed since 2015 due to observed structural defects. In 2018, WETA staff initiated discussions with City staff about the possibility of a new ferry terminal at the Berkeley Waterfront. In March 2019, WETA and the City Council authorized an MOU Agreement to jointly fund a planning study on the feasibility of rebuilding the Berkeley Pier for ferry service and recreational access (Resolution No. 68,782, adopted on March 12, 2019). The findings of the Feasibility Study, including the preferred alternative, were presented during a City Council Work Session on December 7, 2021.

The current design and environmental review phase is funded by three sources: a) the project received $2,960,000 as part of a one-time allocation from the state of $15 million for Waterfront improvement projects, administered by the State Coastal Conservancy (Resolution No. 70,629, adopted on December 13, 2022); b) in May 2023, the project received a $5,139,000 grant from Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) for the environmental analyses and permitting for the Project (Resolution No. 70,950, adopted on July 11, 2023); and c) in May 2024, the City and WETA amended the MOU

Grant Application: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Grant Program CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

to use up to $3 million in RM3 funds to cover the current Design / Environmental Phase (Resolution No. 71,325, adopted on May 14, 2024).

The total Project involves the construction of in-water elements (a new public pier and new ferry landing dock with electric vehicle charger), and landside elements (new plaza, new Bay Trail segments, rebuilt sections of University Ave and Seawall Drive with a Class IV cycle track, sidewalks, crossings, and bioretention, and a rebuilt Seawall Parking Lot), along with numerous public amenities (picnic areas, restroom, benches, drinking fountains, washdown area, etc). To-date, construction funding for the project has not been identified. The current construction cost estimate for the entire Project is $105.8M (based on the 60% level of design).

On June 5, 2018, Bay Area voters approved Regional Measure 3 (RM3), and on December 19, 2018, the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) adopted a toll schedule to phase in the resulting toll increases. BATA implemented the first and second dollars of the toll increase on January 1, 2019, and January 1, 2022, respectively. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is listed as the project sponsor and is responsible for administering a competitive process for the Safe Routes to Transit & Bay Trail (SR2TBT) program. The program aims to fund projects to increase the carrying capacity and travel options on Bay Area bridges and along bridge corridors, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase active transportation, reduce congestion, and improve real and perceived safety. The Bay Trail project's mission is to complete the vision of the 500-mile walking and bicycling shoreline trail that serves Bay Area residents' recreation and active transportation needs. Applications for the current cycle SR2TBT program funds (cycle 2) are due on October 5, 2026 and the City will submit a grant proposal for up to $25M to construct portions of the landside elements of the Project.

This resolution authorizes the preparation and submittal of a grant application for the construction of portions of landside elements of the Project. The review of any potential environmental impacts per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is required prior to City approval of the Project or commencement of construction on the Project improvements. Further, construction cannot begin until acquisition of all applicable local, state and federal permits.

BACKGROUND
In July 2015, the Pier was closed to the public indefinitely due to structural safety issues. On June 21, 2017, after conducting a competitive RFP process, the City contracted with GHD, Inc. to perform a structural engineering assessment to identify options and costs for repairing the Pier (Contract No. 10632, Resolution No. 67,856).

The final study identified 11 conceptual options ranging in cost from $22 million to $65 million in 2023 dollars. Since completion of that assessment in 2021, the Pier has continued to structurally degrade. Structural engineers currently working on the Pier

Grant Application: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Grant Program CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

Ferry Project have concluded that the Pier has reached the end of its useful life and repair of the Pier is no longer feasible.

In 2023, the City initiated the design and environmental phase of the Project to complete detailed design, environmental analyses and permitting for the preferred concept. In summary, this phase of work includes:
 Detailed engineering analyses including coastal, geotechnical, parking, transportation demand management and sea level rise studies;  Environmental studies, including existing conditions and project impact analyses;  Development of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
 Analyses and documentation for compliance with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA);
 Public outreach and engagement;
 Project permitting, including City, state and federal permitting agencies with jurisdiction over the Project; and
 Development of bid-ready Project plans and specifications.

The Project involves several state and federal agencies with jurisdiction over portions of the Project. These include California State Lands Commission, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). City staff have initiated early consultation with these agencies and will continue to work closely with them to coordinate permit applications, reviews, compliance and issuance. Project construction would not begin until applicable permits for the work were issued by all agencies with jurisdiction.

The Draft EIR was published in February 2026 for a 60-day public review period. The Final EIR is anticipated to be considered by Council in Fall, 2026. The Project is currently at 60% design development, with 90% design documents anticipated to be completed in Fall, 2026.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The total project would install a new public pier for recreation and a new, zero-emission electric public ferry service between Berkeley and San Francisco. The City’s Climate Action Plan identifies public transit as a more sustainable form of transportation (Chapter 3) and sets a goal to expand under-used modes of transportation, such as ferry service at the Berkeley Marina to connect to San Francisco and other locations.

The Project also includes multiple active transportation / multi-modal zero-emission improvements such as a new bike lane on University Avenue and installation of a section of Bay Trail.

Grant Application: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Grant Program CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Project will help the City advance the following long-term strategic goals:

Goal #1 - Provide state-of-the-art, well-maintained infrastructure, amenities, and facilities; Goal #3 - Create a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared City; Goal #5 - Foster a dynamic, sustainable and locally-based economy; and Goal # 7 - Be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Scott Ferris, Director, Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront, 981-6700 Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

GRANT APPLICATION: SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT AND BAY TRAIL PROGRAM (SR2TBT)
WHEREAS, Bay Area voters approved Regional Measure 3 (RM3) on June 5, 2018, and on December 19, 2018, the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) adopted a toll schedule to phase in the resulting toll increases; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is listed as the project sponsor and is responsible for administering a competitive grant program for the Safe Routes to Transit & Bay Trail (SR2TBT) program; and
WHEREAS, the SR2TBT program aims to fund projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase active transportation, reduce congestion, and complete the vision of the 500-mile walking and bicycling Bay Trail; and
WHEREAS, applications for the current cycle of SR2TBT program funds (cycle 2) are due on October 5, 2026 and the City will submit a grant proposal for up to $25M to construct portions of the landside elements of the Berkeley Water Transportation Pier- Ferry Project; and
WHEREAS, the Project must undergo environmental impact review per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City cannot approve the Project or initiate construction until the necessary review has been completed; and WHEREAS, the Project must obtain permits from local, state and federal agencies with jurisdiction over portions of the Project and the City cannot initiate construction until the necessary permits have been issued.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager or his designee is authorized to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Regional Measure 3 Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT) for up to $25,000,000 for construction of portions of the landside elements of the Berkeley Water Transportation Pier-Ferry Project.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Berkeley Environment and Climate Commission (ECC) Submitted by: Alison LaBonte, Chairperson, ECC
Subject: Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley

RECOMMENDATION
The Berkeley Environment and Climate Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in the City of Berkeley, which would:
 Express the City's formal support for a neighborhood decarbonization pilot in Berkeley under Senate Bill 1221 (2024), with the goal of modeling equitable whole-home electrification for a neighborhood zone; and  Commit the City to being an active partner in pilot implementation, asking the City Manager to designate at least one staff member to participate in regular coordination meetings and support collaboration across relevant City departments; and
 Affirm the City's intent to work collaboratively with PG&E, community organizations, Community Choice Aggregators, public health advocates, workforce development partners, and regional agencies to advance a pilot and help secure resources for its success.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Adoption of this resolution does not require a new appropriation. The primary fiscal commitment is staff time for one City staff member to participate in coordination meetings with PG&E and community partners.

Under SB 1221, essential pilot costs, including zero-emission equipment and installation for participating properties, are funded through avoided gas infrastructure replacement costs, and the resolution conditions Berkeley's participation on the pilot being no additional cost to participating customers. The fiscal opportunity for Berkeley securing an SB 1221 pilot is significant; potentially over $20,000 of utility funds per household are spent to switch the household to a zero-emission alternative from the avoided cost of replacing gas pipeline at a cost of $3 million per mile.1 1 California state Senator Dave Min (D), SB 1221’s author, stated “pipeline replacements... can cost ratepayers over $3 million per mile” during an April 2024 hearing in Sacramento, available at

Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Senate Bill 1221, signed into law in 2024, directs the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to establish a voluntary zonal building decarbonization program.

Under SB 1221, a gas utility may, instead of replacing a gas line that is due for replacement, use the money saved to offer participating properties zero-emission alternatives such as the electrification of all properties served by that line. Up to 30 neighborhood pilot projects may be designated statewide.2 The CPUC sets the following parameters: PG&E may receive approval for up to 14 of the 30 statewide pilot slots (7 in the first application period and 7 at the second submission deadline); PG&E may submit up to three additional proposals in anticipation of attrition; the first application deadline is April 1, 2027; and applications must provide supporting evidence that it is reasonable to expect the required consent from at least 67% of property owners with natural gas service within the proposed pilot boundary.3 Berkeley is a strong candidate for one of these pilot slots. The CPUC has already designated several Berkeley census blocks as initial priority neighborhood decarbonization zones in an earlier decision, as shown on PG&E's SB 1221 map portal.4,5 Because Berkeley has among the strongest building electrification policies in the state, Berkeley residents are more likely than those in other communities to understand and embrace electrification. Resident support of a pilot project over the 67% consent threshold is likely, and would put an application to PG&E for a pilot in the City of Berkeley in a strong position.

SB 1221 requires the Commission to establish a preference for pilot projects that provide prevailing wage and use high road job programs. Berkeley also recognizes that the clean energy transition must deliver equitable economic opportunity alongside emissions reductions. Berkeley, through the Just Transition Residential Electrification Pilot Program completed in July 2026, piloted advancing high-road, family-sustaining jobs in the residential building decarbonization sector.

PG&E is expected to begin active engagement with local governments and community- based organizations following the CPUC's final decision issued July 10, 2026. Cities that have demonstrated institutional commitment through formal resolutions and designated staff contacts will be better positioned to shape pilot design and secure https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/hearings/257885#t=1052&f=097d5bea8096d67ab0da80e4017d8c f2
2California Public Utilities Commission Decision (D.) 26-07-030 Establishing Application Process for SB1221 Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Program issued June 9, 2026, on Rulemaking 24-09-012 available at https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/SearchRes.aspx?DocFormat=ALL&DocID=610760591 3https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/natural-gas/SB-1221-implementation 4California Public Utilities Commission Decision 25-12-042 Designating Initial Priority Neighborhood Decarbonization Zones on Rulemaking 24-09-012 available at https://apps.cpuc.ca.gov/apex/f?p=401:56::::RP,57,RIR:P5_PROCEEDING_SELECT:R2409012 5https://sb1221.pge.com/

Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

selection. San Francisco took this step in December 2025, when its Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted a resolution affirming support for an SB 1221 pilot and committing City staff to coordination.6
At the July 22, 2026 meeting, the Commission took the following action:

Action: M/S/C (Tahara/Kesselman) to approve the SB 1221 Zonal Decarbonization Pilot Recommendation and Resolution for Council with revisions in the July 22, 2026, meeting packet.

Vote: Ayes – Ranney, LaBonte, Tahara, Mahmoudian, Kesselman, Binns, Brown, Athanasiou; Noes – None; Abstain – None; Absent – Syed.

BACKGROUND
Berkeley has been a national leader in building decarbonization for over a decade, passing a first-in-the-nation ban on natural gas in new construction in 2019. In 2021, Council adopted the Berkeley Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy, which explicitly identified neighborhood-scale electrification as a key implementation pathway7. A successful SB 1221 pilot would be a direct expression of that strategy.

SB 1221 addresses a structural challenge in the transition away from gas: the cost of maintaining aging gas infrastructure for a shrinking customer base. By allowing utilities to use avoided gas line replacement costs to fund electrification of all properties on a given line, SB 1221 offers a pathway to managed, cost-effective decommissioning of gas infrastructure, as an alternative to indefinite maintenance.

Today, neighborhood-scale pilots in California require unanimous consent. The lower 67% threshold under SB 1221, combined with Berkeley's electrification-aware population, brings neighborhood scale electrification well within the realm of possibility.

Community engagement will be essential. Broad-based outreach, particularly to renters, lower-income households, and residents less familiar with electrification technologies, will be necessary to ensure the pilot is equitable and the consent process genuinely informed. The City's commitment to staff coordination is a prerequisite to this work happening well.
6San Francisco Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 590-25 (File No. 251192), adopted December 9, 2025. https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=15043538&GUID=CE645F46-8E6A-422C-A60A- 3163C32259DC
7https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Berkeley-Existing-Buildings-Electrification-Strategy.pdf

Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
A successful neighborhood decarbonization pilot in Berkeley would:
• Meaningfully reduce building-sector greenhouse gas emissions across a full neighborhood zone, advancing the City's 2045 carbon neutrality goal; • Improve indoor air quality by eliminating gas combustion pollutants — nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and others linked to respiratory illness and asthma — at the point of origin, particularly benefiting children, the elderly, and other vulnerable residents;
• Reduce methane leak risk and system-wide maintenance costs by decommissioning aging gas lines rather than replacing them; • Improve climate resilience, as all-electric homes with modern heat pumps better maintain comfort during extreme heat events; and
• Create local workforce opportunities for trained electrification contractors in Berkeley and the East Bay.

The pilot would also demonstrate to the state and other cities that neighborhood-scale decarbonization is achievable and replicable.

Equity Considerations
Because the resolution conditions Berkeley's participation on the pilot incurring no additional costs to participating customers, whole-home electrification under the pilot reaches households that could not otherwise afford heat pumps, necessary electrical upgrades, stove, pans compatible with induction stoves, and appliance replacement.

This will deliver improved home comfort, healthier indoor air, and modern all-electric service regardless of income.

Furthermore, retiring entire gas lines, rather than removing scattered geographically dispersed affluent households from gas service, reduces the total miles of gas infrastructure requiring repair, maintenance, and eventual replacement. Every decommissioned line shrinks the cost base that all remaining gas customers must fund.

A neighborhood-scale pilot therefore delivers meaningful equity benefits wherever in Berkeley it is located.

Equity is embedded in pilot selection by statute. Public Utilities Code Section 662(a), subsections (1) through (4), directs the CPUC to consider factors including the presence of disadvantaged or low-income communities in high- or low-temperature climate zones that disproportionately lack cooling or heating; the presence of environmental and social justice communities as defined in the CPUC's Environmental and Social Justice Action Plan; the availability of supportive local government or community partners; and the concentration of gas distribution line replacement projects. The City does not need to construct its own site-selection criteria — the statutory framework ensures equity factors are weighed in every application. Berkeley's most valuable contribution is to maximize the one factor squarely within its control: demonstrating a supportive local government, ready to partner.

Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION

1. Timing is critical. The Commission recommends that Council act swiftly to pass this resolution. PG&E is expected to begin active collaboration with local governments and community organizations as early as July 2026, following the CPUC's decision on SB 1221 implementation issued July 10, 2026. A resolution adopted now positions Berkeley to participate with certainty.

2. Berkeley is uniquely positioned to succeed. Existing electrification policy, CPUC- designated candidate census blocks, and a resident population with high electrification awareness give Berkeley a strong potential for exceeding the 67% consent threshold.

3. Staff designation is the minimum necessary commitment. Without a designated City contact, PG&E and community organizations lack a consistent partner for the engagement and planning work that must precede a pilot application. Staff support is the foundation on which everything else is built.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
n/a

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager concurs with the content and recommendations of the Commission’s Report. This recommendation is consistent with the Berkeley Existing Building Electrification Strategy (2021) and Office of Energy and Sustainable Development work.

CONTACT PERSON
Sarah Moore, Commission Secretary, (510) 981-7400
Alison LaBonte, Chairperson, ECC
Attachments:
1: Resolution

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

SUPPORTING A NEIGHBORHOOD DECARBONIZATION PILOT PROJECT IN

BERKELEY
WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley has long recognized that climate change poses an existential threat to public health, environmental quality, and community resilience, and has committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2045; and WHEREAS, natural gas combustion in buildings is a significant source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and indoor air pollution, including nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter, which pose known risks to public health; and
WHEREAS, as customers transition off gas, remaining customers will bear a disproportionate burden of gas infrastructure costs unless this upward pressure on gas rates is managed through systematic decommissioning and reduction of miles of gas lines requiring repair and maintenance; and
WHEREAS, the Berkeley Existing Buildings Electrification Strategy, adopted by Council in 2021, identified neighborhood-scale electrification as a key implementation pathway, and a zonal pilot would directly advance that strategy; and WHEREAS, the state legislature in 2024 through Senate Bill 1221 directed the allowance for up to 30 neighborhood decarbonization zone pilot projects in California, where a gas utility can, instead of replacing a gas line due for replacement, offer zero-emission alternatives such as electrifying all properties served by the gas line, using the money saved from avoided gas line replacement; and
WHEREAS, community engagement is critical to obtaining community consent for a zonal decarbonization project, as SB 1221 requires that no less than 67% of property owners with natural gas service within a pilot project boundary consent to participation; and WHEREAS, SB 1221 requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to review and approve neighborhood decarbonization pilot projects with a preference for projects that provide prevailing wages and use high-road jobs programs; and WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley is well-positioned to meet this SB 1221 priority, having implemented the Just Transition Residential Electrification Pilot Program which established a direct installation program for residential electrification measures in existing affordable housing buildings and for low-to-moderate income households, and which required all participating contractors to meet rigorous labor standards; and WHEREAS, a neighborhood decarbonization pilot in Berkeley would deliver multiple benefits including elimination of NOx emissions, improved home comfort, local workforce

Supporting a Neighborhood Decarbonization Pilot Project in Berkeley CONSENT CALENDAR September 15, 2026

opportunities, greenhouse gas reduction, and ensuring Berkeley residents are among the first to benefit from a zero-emission alternative.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City hereby expresses its support for a neighborhood decarbonization pilot project in Berkeley under SB 1221, with the stated goal of modeling equitable whole-home electrification for an entire neighborhood zone that will eliminate NOx emissions, improve home comfort, add local workforce opportunities, and ensure Berkeley residents are among the first to benefit from a zero-emission alternative; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley commits to being an active and avid partner in supporting successful implementation of a zonal decarbonization pilot provided the pilot is designed to be no additional cost to participating customers, and asks the City Manager to identify at least one staff member to participate in regular coordination meetings and to support collaboration across relevant City departments; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Berkeley affirms its intent to work collaboratively with Pacific Gas and Electric Company, community organizations, Community Choice Aggregators, public health advocates, workforce development partners, and regional agencies to advance a neighborhood decarbonization pilot, and to help secure resources to support these efforts.

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

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Jenny Wong, City Auditor
Subject: Whistleblower Program Special Report: Evaluation of Workplace Relationship Policies

RECOMMENDATION
We recommend that City Council receive this report and direct the City Manager to implement Recommendations 1 and 2 consistent with Management’s Response. We further recommend that City Council refer Recommendation 3 to the Agenda and Rules Committee for consideration of whether to pursue adoption of nepotism and cronyism provisions in the Berkeley Municipal Code.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with receiving this report or referring Recommendation 3 to the Agenda and Rules Committee. Implementation may involve staff time for policy development, meet-and-confer obligations, training, legal review, and administrative process updates.

CUR

RENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The City Auditor’s Office conducted a policy review following a whistleblower report raising concerns about a workplace relationship involving a supervisor and an employee and the potential for perceived favoritism. While the conduct described was not prohibited under current City policy and the allegation could not be substantiated, the report identified a gap in the City’s policy framework.

The review found that current City policies do not address romantic, dating, or cohabiting re
lationships when those relationships intersect with hiring, supervision, or other employment decisions. As a result, employees are not required to disclose these relationships, and the City does not have a consistent process to manage potential conflicts of interest when they arise.

The review also found that the City’s definition of family relationships is narrower than those used in peer jurisdictions, limiting the City’s ability to identify and address potential or perceived conflicts of interest. These gaps create a risk of actual or perceived favoritism and
may undermine confidence in the fairness and objectivity of employment decisions.

Management reviewed the report and agreed with its findings and recommendations.

Management's response commits to reviewing and updating Administrative Regulation 2.12 through the City's policy development and labor relations process and providing guidance and training following implementation. Recommendation 3 concerns whether broader nepotism and cronyism standards should be established in the Berkeley Municipal Code for elected

CONSENT CALENDAR May 19, 2026 Pg. 2 of 2

officials, Charter Officers, appointed officials, boards, commissions, and employees. Because these standards would extend beyond the City Manager's administrative authority, Council consideration is needed.

BACKGROUND
This review was initiated after the City Auditor’s Office received a whistleblower report through the Whistleblower Program raising concerns about workplace relationships and potential favoritism. Because the conduct described was not addressed under current City policy, the Auditor’s Office did not open an investigation and instead conducted a policy-focused review.

The review included analysis of Administrative Regulation 2.12 (Employment of Near Relatives) and
other relevant City policies, as well as comparison with policies from peer jurisdictions and state-level guidance. This report is issued as part of the City Auditor’s Whistleblower Program to identify and address risks related to fraud, waste, and abuse, including gaps in policy that may allow such risks to occur.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental sustainability or climate impacts associated with this report.

RA

TIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Management has agreed to implement Recommendations 1 and 2 by reviewing Administrative Regulation 2.12 through the City's policy development and labor relations process and providing guidance and training following implementation. These actions will strengthen the City's conflict-of-interest framework related to workplace relationships by addressing a broader range of personal relationships, establishing clear disclosure and recusal expectations, and implementing a consistent conflict-management process.

Re
commendation 3 presents a broader governance question regarding whether the City should establish nepotism and cronyism standards in the Berkeley Municipal Code that apply consistently to City employees, elected officials, Charter Officers, appointed officials, boards, and commissions. Re
ferring this recommendation to the Agenda and Rules Committee would allow the Council to consider the appropriate legislative path forward before determining whether amendments to the Municipal Code should be pursued.

CONTACT PERSON
Jenny Wong, City Auditor, City Auditor’s Office, 510-981-6750 Attachments:
1: Be
rkeley City Auditor Whistleblower Program Special Report: Evaluation of Workplace Relationship Policies April 2026

Special Report
Whistleblower Program:

Evaluation of Workplace
Relationship Policies
August 2026
Jenny Wong, City Auditor
Erin Mullin, Whistleblower Program Manager

Berkeley’s current policies do not address romantic, cohabitating, or extended family relationships, creating potential conflicts of interest and undermining fairness in employment decisions. Expanding and updating these policies would align Berkeley with peer jurisdictions and improve transparency.

Special Report 2 Berkeley City Auditor

Contents
Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 2 Allegation History ............................................................................................................... 3 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 3 Findings .............................................................................................................................. 4 Current City policy does not address disclosure of romantic or cohabiting relationships in the workplace. ............................................................................................................. 4 Berkeley’s definition of family relationships is narrower than peer jurisdictions and creates additional coverage gaps. .................................................................................... 6 Peer jurisdictions have adopted broader policy frameworks to manage conflicts arising from personal relationships. ........................................................................................... 8 Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 9 Implementation Considerations ........................................................................................10 Management Response ......................................................................................................10 Scope and Methodology .....................................................................................................10

Purpose
A whistleblower report raised concerns about a workplace relationship that intersected with City employment and the potential for perceived favoritism. We reviewed the complaint and found that City policy did not address the conduct described and therefore could not substantiate the allegation. However, the report prompted a review of the City’s policies regarding workplace relationships.

Berkeley’s primary policy governing workplace relationships is Administrative Regulation 2.12 (Employment of Near Relatives), which is intended to prevent nepotism by requiring disclosure and restricting supervision among certain family members. This report examines whether that framework, together with other related policies adequately address romantic, cohabiting, and related family relationships that may affect, or appear to affect, employment decisions, such as decisions regarding hiring, promotion, transfer, discipline, or termination.

Allegation History
The Berkeley City Auditor’s Whistleblower Program received a report concerning a romantic relationship involving a manager and an employee within the same work unit, and the potential for perceived favoritism connected to supervisory influence. The allegation highlighted a category of workplace relationships that is not currently addressed by City policy. The information was used solely to inform a policy review. The Whistleblower Program has also received other reports raising similar concerns involving close personal relationships in the workplace that fall outside current policy coverage, indicating the issue is not isolated and reinforcing the need for policy review.

Conclusions
We found that Berkeley’s current policies do not address romantic, dating, or cohabiting relationships in the workplace, leaving the City without a way to identify or manage situations where such personal relationships overlap with hiring, supervision, or other employment decisions. As a result, employees are not required to disclose these relationships, managers may participate in personnel decisions involving a romantic or cohabitating partner, and no formal recusal or conflict-management process applies when supervisory or decision authority is involved. These conditions create a risk of actual or perceived favoritism and can undermine employee confidence in the fairness and objectivity of employment decisions.

We also found that Berkeley’s Employment of Near Relatives policy defines family relationships more narrowly than comparable policies in peer jurisdictions. While Berkeley covers core family members, it does not include certain extended family relationships that San Francisco and Oakland address, even though these relationships can present similar conflict-of-interest concerns. This narrower definition creates additional gaps in the City’s ability to manage potential or perceived conflicts arising from workplace relationships.

Taken together, these findings indicate that Berkeley’s current policies do not fully address the range of personal relationships that may affect, or appear to affect, employment decisions. Updating the City’s policy framework to address romantic and cohabitating relationships and to reassess the scope of covered family relationships would strengthen conflict-of-interest controls, align Berkeley with peer jurisdictions, and support transparency and fairness in the City’s employment practices.

Findings
Current City policy does not address disclosure of romantic or cohabiting relationships in the workplace.

Berkeley’s current policies do not address romantic, dating, or cohabiting relationships when those relationships intersect with hiring, supervision, or other employment decisions. As a result, the City lacks a framework to identify or manage conflicts of interest that may arise from these relationships. While the City has policies governing harassment, discrimination, retaliation, financial conflicts of interest, and the employment of near relatives, none require disclosure of romantic or cohabiting relationships, restrict supervisors from participating in employment decisions involving a partner, or provide a mechanism for managing related conflicts of interest.

The table below summarizes how Berkeley’s policies compare with peer jurisdictions and state-level guidance with respect to coverage, disclosure requirements, and conflict- management tools related to romantic and cohabiting workplace relationships.

Table 1: Comparison of Policies Addressing Romantic and Cohabiting Workplace Relationships
Key Feature Oakland San Francisco California State
Guidance
Berkeley
Who is covered Broad (officers,
officials, and
employees)
Broad (officials,
employees,
interns,
volunteers)
Agencies determine Employees only
Romantic
relationships
covered
Yes Yes Only if cohabitating No
Cohabiting
relationships
covered
Yes (romantic and
non-romantic)
Romantic only Romantic only No
Disclosure required Yes Yes Yes (department
policy required)
Yes (near
relatives only;
not romantic or
cohabiting
relationships)
Restrictions on
hiring or
supervision of
covered
relationships
Yes (direct and
indirect)
Yes (direct and
indirect)
Yes (agency-
defined)
Yes (applies
only to near
relatives; not
romantic or
cohabiting
relationships)
Note: California state guidance provides recommended practices for state agencies and does not impose requirements on local governments.

Source: Auditor analysis of City of Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 2.40; San Francisco Civil Service Commission Family and Romantic Relationships at Work Policy; California CalHR Nepotism Guidance; and City of Berkeley AR 2.12
Peer jurisdictions, including Oakland and San Francisco, have adopted more comprehensive approaches. These cities require disclosure and active management of romantic and cohabitating relationships when such relationships intersect with employment decisions. State-level guidance for California public agencies similarly recommends managing conflicts of interest arising from romantic, cohabitating relationships through disclosure, recusal, and mitigation to address both actual and perceived conflicts.

Berkeley’s existing policy framework focuses on compliance-based risks, such as harassment, discrimination, financial conflicts of interest, and nepotism. Romantic and cohabitating relationships fall outside the scope of these policies and have not been explicitly addressed through an administrative regulation or standalone policy.

Without a policy framework, employees are not required to disclose such relationships, and managers may participate in employment decisions involving a partner without a recusal or conflict-management process. These gaps create a risk of actual or perceived favoritism and can undermine employee trust and confidence in the fairness and objectivity of personnel decisions, even when no misconduct occurs. In the absence of clear disclosure and recusal requirements, the City also lacks a consistent basis for responding to complaints or concerns involving personal relationships that intersect with employment decisions.

Berkeley’s definition of family relationships is narrower than peer jurisdictions and creates additional coverage gaps.

In addition to the absence of policies covering romantic or cohabitating relationships, Berkeley’s Employment of Near Relatives policy reflects a more limited definition of family relationships than those used by peer jurisdictions like San Francisco and Oakland. While all three cities include core family relationships such as spouses, parents, and siblings, Berkeley does not include certain extended family categories that peer jurisdictions address.

The table below compares how Berkeley and peer jurisdictions define family relationships in employment policies, with emphasis on extended and non-traditional relationships that may present similar conflict-of-interest concerns but are not included in Berkeley’s current definition.

Table 2. Comparison of Family Relationships Definitions Relationship
Category
Included in Berkeley Included in San
Francisco
Included in
Oakland
Cousin ✗ ✓ (First) ✓ (First and
Second)
In-laws, Step
Relations
✓ (Specific) ✓ (Broad) ✓ (Broad)
Foster Relations ✗ ✓ ✓
Great-grandparent /
great-grandchild
✗ ✗ ✓
Cohabitants (Non-
Domestic Partner)
✗ ✗ ✓
Spouses, domestic
partner of any
relative or
cohabitant
✗ ✗ ✓
Source: Auditor analysis of City of Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 2.40; San Francisco Civil Service Commission Family and Romantic Relationships at Work Policy; and City of Berkeley AR

2.12 Berkeley does not include certain extended family categories like cousins or foster relationships that San Francisco and Oakland include. These relationships can raise similar conflict-of-interest concerns in hiring and supervisory contexts. While Berkeley includes some in-law and step relationships, it does so through a fixed list rather than a broader categorical definition. As a result, certain relationships, such as a step- grandparent, step-aunt or uncle, or aunt- or uncle-in-law, are not explicitly covered, even though they may present similar risks. By contrast, Oakland defines covered family relationships more expansively by category, extending beyond immediate family to include multiple degrees of relatives, foster relationships, cohabitants, and the spouses or domestic partners of covered individuals. A broader approach allows jurisdictions to identify and manage conflicts of interest across a wider range of familial and household relationships. Berkeley’s narrower definition, by comparison, creates gaps in coverage and limits the City’s ability to proactively identify and manage potential or perceived conflicts of interest arising from personal relationships.

Peer jurisdictions have adopted broader policy frameworks to manage conflicts arising from personal relationships.

Berkeley’s Employment of Near Relatives policy establishes a framework for managing conflicts of interest arising from specified familial relationships. However, the structure and authority of Berkeley’s policy limit its reach. The policy applies only to employees and does not apply to elected officials, appointed officers, or other non-employee City officials. It is established through an administrative regulation issued by the City Manager and is confined to the specific relationships listed in the definition of “near relative.” As a result, the City has limited authority to address conflicts of interest arising from other personal relationships or to apply consistent standards across elected officials, officers, and other individuals working for the City.

Berkeley’s current policy relies primarily on transfer or reassignment authority when a prohibited near-relative supervisory relationship exists. While the City Manager may grant written exceptions to supervisory-relationship prohibitions, the policy does not establish a structured conflict-management plan process for how supervisory conflicts or approved exceptions must be mitigated. In some operational settings, such as small divisions, specialized technical teams, or public safety departments with limited supervisory layers, reassignment alone may not fully remove indirect supervisory relationships. By contrast, San Francisco requires a formal written conflict-management plan when supervisory conflicts cannot be fully removed, and Oakland mandates documented alternate arrangements and mitigation controls through its Personnel Director and City Attorney process.

San Francisco’s policy, adopted by its Civil Service Commission, and Oakland’s policy, codified in its municipal code, apply to a wider range of individuals, including elected officials and City officers. Oakland also requires annual disclosure of specified personal relationships by City officials and supervisors, reinforcing ongoing accountability rather than one-time reporting.

In addition to disclosure requirements, Oakland’s policy explicitly defines and prohibits cronyism, meaning participation in employment decisions involving close personal, professional, political, or commercial relationships that could result in preferential treatment or compromise the appearance of fairness. While this prohibition does not expand disclosure requirements, it establishes broader expectations for individuals covered by the policy to avoid conflicts of interest arising from relationships beyond those specifically identified for disclosure. This approach recognizes that conflicts of interest and the potential for favoritism are not limited to predefined familial relationships.

As a result, the policy provides a clear basis for reviewing and addressing employment decisions influenced by personal relationships that fall outside narrowly defined categories. Oakland’s policy also requires the Director of Personnel to provide an annual report to the City Council describing the nature and number of prohibited relationships disclosed and the alternate arrangements implemented. Together, these features provide broader authority, clearer oversight, and more flexible mitigation tools than those currently available under Berkeley’s policy framework.

Recommendations

1. To ensure comprehensive conflict-of-interest controls within employment and supervisory contexts, we recommend that the Human Resources Department update AR 2.12 to:
• require disclosure of romantic, dating, and cohabiting relationships, in addition to near-relative relationships.

• extend supervisory and decision-making restrictions to romantic and cohabiting relationships that create actual or perceived conflicts of interest.
• update the definition of “near relative” to better align with peer jurisdictions.

• incorporate a clear definition and prohibition of cronyism in supervision and employment decisions.
• establish a documented conflict-management process that clearly defines responsibilities for reviewing relationship disclosures, implementing mitigation measures, maintaining records of all actions taken, and alternate decision authority where needed.

2. To support effective implementation, we recommend the Human Resources Department provide training to supervisors and managers on the updated relationship conflict-of-interest policy.

3. To extend relationship conflict safeguards beyond employees, we recommend the City consider adopting both nepotism and cronyism provisions in the Berkeley Municipal Code. These provisions should apply to all City employees, elected officials, charter offices, appointed officials, boards and commissions, ensuring consistent citywide standard.

Implementation Considerations
Implementation of the recommended policy updates will require coordination among Human Resources, the City Attorney’s Office, and City leadership. Relationship disclosures should be limited to information necessary for conflict management and treated as confidential. Clear guidance and documentation standards will be important to ensure consistent application of recusal, conflict-management measures, and exceptions. The City may also wish to consider how updates to AR 2.12 align with existing ethics and conflict-of-interest policies to support clarity and effective administration. Currently, Human Resources maintains relationship disclosures within individual paper-based personnel files, which may present challenges for consistently tracking and managing disclosures as policy coverage expands.

Management Response
Management agrees that the City should review and update its framework for identifying and managing actual or perceived conflicts of interest arising from workplace relationships. Human Resources will work with City leadership to evaluate potential revisions to AR 2.12, including appropriate disclosure requirements, supervisory and decision-making restrictions, definitions of covered relationships, confidentiality safeguards, and conflict-management procedures.

The specific policy provisions recommended in this report should not, however, be understood as predetermined outcomes. Changes of this nature would affect represented employees and may implicate matters within the scope of representation. Accordingly, any proposed policy changes will require extensive notice, consultation, and meet-and- confer with the City’s labor organizations. The final scope, definitions, disclosure obligations, mitigation procedures, and implementation requirements will be developed and refined through that process. The City must also carefully consider employee privacy, consistent application across departments, operational feasibility, records management, and compliance with applicable law.

Following completion of the policy-development and labor-relations process, Human Resources will provide appropriate guidance and training to managers and supervisors regarding the final requirements and their responsibilities.

Management also agrees that the City should evaluate whether broader nepotism or cronyism standards are appropriate for elected officials, charter officers, appointed officials, boards, and commissions. Because those individuals may fall outside the scope of an administrative regulation issued by the City Manager, any such expansion would require separate legal and governance review, coordination with affected offices, and possible action by the City Council.

Scope and Methodology
We conducted a policy-focused review to assess whether the City’s current policies address romantic and cohabiting relationships that intersect with hiring, supervision, or other employment decisions, and whether the City’s definition of family relationships provides sufficient coverage to manage related conflicts of interest.

Specifically, we analyzed Berkeley’s relevant policies, including:
• AR 2.12 – Employment of Near Relatives
• AR 1.2 – Conflicts of Interest
• Harassment Prevention Policy
• Equal Employment Opportunity Policy
Reviewed workplace-relationship and conflict of interest policies from peer jurisdictions, including Oakland and San Francisco, as well as state-level guidance applicable to California public agencies.

This review was limited to evaluating policy design and coverage in employment and supervisory context. We did not conduct an investigation related to the reported relationship, did not interview individuals, and did not review personnel files, as the conduct described in the Whistleblower Report is not prohibited under current City policy. Additionally, we only examined one specific aspect of conflict-of-interest risks, those arising in employment and supervisory decisions. Other types of conflicts, such as financial interests in contracting, procurement, or policy decisions, as well as other potential conflicts in governance or personal financial dealings, are governed by separate policies and legal frameworks and were outside the scope of this review.

Office of the City Auditor
City of Berkeley

Mission Statement
Promoting transparency and accountability in Berkeley government.

Report Preparation
Erin Mullin, Whistleblower Program Manager

City Auditor
Jenny Wong

Contact Information
Office of the City Auditor
Phone: (510) 981-6750
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-audits

Copies of this report and other City Auditor reports are available at www.cityofberkeley.info/Auditor/Home/Audit_Reports.aspx

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember, District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Author)
SUBJECT: District 1 Support for the Gilman District
Merchants Association to Promote Longterm
Sustainability and Area Improvements: Relinquishment of Council Office Budget Funds to General Fund and Grant of Such Funds

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $65,000 from the FY 2026-27 office budget of District 1 Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani to provide a one-time capacity building grant to support the Gilman District Merchants Association (GDMA) to promote economic development, district-wide improvements and long-term sustainability of the Gilman District Street Fair (GDSF).

Distribution of funds should be approved by the Gilman District Coordinating Committee, the representative advisory board established to comply with the fiscal agent, the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce. Use of funds should prioritize:
● Salary/stipend for part-time director of the GDMA
Stipends for key volunteers for the Gilman District Street Fair ● Business Administration for the GDMA outside of salaries including:
○ Publicity, promotion, membership building and website maintenance for the GDMA
○ Event planning and execution of GDMA networking and social gatherings
● Public Safety Enhancement Grants to local businesses

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The nascent Gilman District Merchants Association Fills a Vital Gap in a Challenging Area. West Berkeley’s Gilman District has long been the city’s industrial heart. Bound by Codornices Creek, Camelia Street, the railroad tracks and San Pablo Avenue, this expansive area now hosts a diverse mix of wineries, breweries, artisanal food producers, startups, nonprofits, maker spaces, auto shops and an urban farm. This sheer variety and physical footprint have made community cohesion among district stakeholders more challenging. For years, self-appointed independent merchants organized periodic networking events with City of Berkeley staff support.

2 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

The official Gilman District Merchants Association, however, launched just last year.

This paid-membership organization now employs a part-time staff member dedicated to advocating for and supporting the district.

This staff person works in a limited capacity though has wide-ranging responsibilities including:
● GDMA publicity and promotion;
● Membership recruitment and acquisition;
● Advocacy for enhanced placemaking and safety improvements; ● Organizing social and networking events; and
● Maintaining a social media presence to encourage additional foot traffic into the district.

Since its Launch in 2023, The Gilman District Street Fair (GDSF) Has Grown into a Premier Annual Event Celebrating the District’s Diversity and Economic Vitality. Originally established to revitalize and uplift a challenging area, the fair has successfully united local volunteers around a shared community vision. Each year, the event showcases local artisans, businesses, food, drink and live music. Its rapid growth culminated in the 2026 fair, which hosted over 200 vendors and 7,000 attendees, earning the Silver award for Best Outdoor Art Event in the East Bay Express Reader’s Poll. Now a highly anticipated citywide tradition for families and residents of all ages, the fair’s expanding scale can no longer be sustained by volunteer labor alone.

Although the Street Fair Fosters Strong Cohesion Among GDSF Volunteer Organizers, the Operational Demands and Expenses Remain Substantial.

Planning for the April event begins each September, and while the 2026 fair generated a $7,225 profit on $29,600 in expenses, these margins are insufficient to fund dedicated administrative staff. Ultimately, sole reliance on volunteer efforts for an initiative of this scale is unsustainable; an allocation of surplus office funds would help secure the long-term viability of the street fair.

BACKGROUND
The District 1 Office Has a Significant History of Materially Supporting the Gilman District and Its Stakeholders. A partial list of the policy and budget referrals and material support include the following:
● ”Resolution for Safe Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parking at Designated City- Owned Parking Lots During Overnight Non-Business Hours”1 - a proposal to address the high concentration of RVs located in the Gilman District: February 2020;
1 February 11, 2020 City Council Meeting, item #17: Resolution for Safe Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parking at Designated City-Owned Parking Lots During Overnight Non-Business Hours:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xf3ozlzlp57own2b7rb1r/2_11_2020-CLK-Agenda-Packet-Public- District-1-REGULAR-Resolution-for-Safe-Recreational-Vehicle-RV-Parking-at-Designated-City- Owned-Parking-Lots-During-Overnight-Non-Business-Hours- Supp.pdf?rlkey=sv7rofsla6eqf3oeassclht6m&st=8io99qd4&dl=0

3 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

● “Refer to the City Manager to Establish a Framework for Parking Benefits Districts in the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts” - a referral to create a framework in which to establish a Parking Benefits Improvement District where revenues from meters would stay within the district to help make streetscape and safety improvements: January 2022;2
● “Budget Referral: Expand Scope of the Downtown Streets Team to Include Services within the Gilman District” - a referral to expand the scope of the Downtown Streets Team that would assist with regular cleaning and street condition improvements in the Gilman District: April 2022;3 ● “Budget Referral: Capacity Building for Merchant Associations in the Gilman and Lorin Districts” - a budget referral for a one-time grant of $10,000 to support economic development within the district with the funds being contingent upon establishing a community advisory board of stakeholders and obtaining fiscal sponsorship. This process led to the creation of the Gilman District Coordinating Committee which is still active: May 2022;4 ● Gilman District Street Fair Organizing Committee - District 1 office support in creating and institutionalizing the award-winning annual street fair showcasing the Gilman District: April 2023 and beyond.

These collected efforts were made in recognition of the unique and valuable aspects of a commercial district in need of institutional support. As challenging conditions remain, so does the need for advocacy and an organizing body such as the Gilman District Merchants Association.

Previous Grants and Budget Allocations Are Insufficient to Ensure Long-term GDMA Sustainability. To date, the Gilman District Coordinating Committee has applied for several grants and thus far has received two: a Commotion West Berkeley grant of $3,000 for civic arts related activities (2023); and a City of Berkeley FY 2026 Civic Arts (Community Festivals) grant. The funds have been used for general street fair expenses and to compensate artists (community muralists), performers (live musicians and dance teachers) and sound technicians for the GDSF in 2024 and 2026.

In FY 2025 and FY 2026, the city allocated $20,000 to the Gilman District. This allocation was redirected from the budget referral to establish a Parking Benefits 2 January 18 2022, City Council Meeting, Item #18: Refer to the City Manager to Establish a Framework for Parking Benefits Districts in the Gilman and Lorin Commercial Districts:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-04/2022-01- 18%20Item%2018%20Parking%20Benefits%20Districts%20in%20the%20Gilman%20and%20Lorin.p df
3 April 26 2022, City Council Meeting, Item #25: Budget Referral: Expand Scope of the Downtown Streets Team to Include Services within the Gilman
District:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-04/2022-04- 26%20Item%2025%20Budget%20Referral%20%20Expand%20Scope%20of%20the%20Downtown% 20Streets.pdf
4 May 24 2022, City Council Meeting, Item #8: Budget Referral: Capacity Building for Merchant Associations in the Gilman and Lorin
Districts:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-05- 24%20Item%208%20Rev%20Kesarwani.pdf

4 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

Improvement District (PBID) in the Gilman and Lorin Districts. The money had originally been earmarked to hire a consultant to draft the enabling PBID legislation, but the endeavor was put on hold due to the longstanding deficit in the City’s Parking Fund. The Gilman District Coordinating Committee, now functioning as the board for the GDMA was allocated $10,000 per year for FY 2025 and FY 2026, and will be allocated an additional $5,000 for FY 2027. The funds have been used for:
● Monthly stipends for GDMA director: $1,050/month ($12,600 annually) ● Acquisition and installation of public art at 5th and Gilman: $5000 ● GDSF 2026 Event Fees including (partial list):
○ City of Berkeley Special Event Permit: $384
○ COB Environmental Health Food Vendor Coordinator Permit: $182 ○ COB Environmental Health Sound Permits: $132
○ City of Berkeley required Traffic Control Plan: $363.14 ○ Insurance for Special Events: $733.38
○ Herc Rentals Delineators and No Parking signs for event set up:
$524.55

FISCAL IMPACT
The District 1 office recommends allocating $65,000 from its surplus office budget to support the Gilman District Merchants Association.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Gilman District Merchants Association provides an essential service for Gilman District stakeholders yet has limited funds to ensure long-term sustainability. To date, the GDMA and the GDSF have been primarily staffed by volunteer labor. As the level of time and responsibilities associated with the association and street fair grow, volunteers are unable to fulfil the needs without compensation. The allocation of surplus District 1 office funds could be used to supplement the stipend for the part- time staff for the GDMA and to more fairly compensate some of the lead volunteers with the GDSF Organizing Committee.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Funds allocated for staff and district-wide improvements could help maintain the overall conditions in the Gilman District, including assisting with addressing garbage, debris and illegal dumping.

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

ATTACHMENT
1) Resolution

5 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]

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

RELINQUISHING DISTRICT 1 OFFICE FUNDS TO PROVIDE A CAPACITY

BUILDING GRANT TO THE GILMAN DISTRICT MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION WHEREAS, West Berkeley’s Gilman District contains a diverse mix of businesses including wineries, breweries, artisanal food producers, startups, nonprofits, maker spaces, auto shops, and an urban farm, making community cohesion and advocacy among district stakeholders a vital need; and
WHEREAS, the Gilman District Merchants Association (GDMA) launched in 2025 as a paid-membership organization employing a part-time staff member dedicated to economic development, membership recruitment, advocacy, and district-wide improvements; and
WHEREAS, the annual Gilman District Street Fair (GDSF), sponsored by the GDMA, has grown significantly, hosting over 200 vendors and 7,000 attendees in 2026, and its expanding scale can no longer be sustained solely by volunteer labor; and WHEREAS previous grants and city allocations are insufficient to ensure the long- term operational sustainability of the GDMA and GDSF; and WHEREAS, Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani has a significant history of assisting this valuable commercial district in need of institutional support and seeks to continue supporting the district’s economic vitality and long-term sustainability by providing financial assistance from the surplus District 1 office budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that funds relinquished by Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani from the FY 2026-27 District 1 office budget up to $65,000 shall be granted to the GDMA as a one-time capacity building grant.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the distribution of these funds shall be approved by the GIlman District Coordinating Committee, acting as the representative advisory board, in compliance with its fiscal agent, the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the use of these funds shall prioritize the following activities:
 Personnel Support: Salary/stipend for the part-time director of the GDMA and stipends for key volunteers of the Gilman District Street Fair.  Business Administration: Publicity, promotion, membership building, website maintenance and the planning of networking and social gatherings.  District Improvements: Public Safety Enhancement Grants to local businesses.

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember, District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Author)
SUBJECT: Referral for an Information Report Assessing all Housing Related Impact, Development and Local Parcel Tax Fees to Provide Guidance and Better Understand the True and Total Costs of Developing Housing of All Types in the City of Berkeley

RECOMMENDATION
Referral to the City Manager to direct Planning staff to prepare a comprehensive housing fee study to be presented to Council as an information report that would:
1) Collect Fee and Parcel Tax Data from Berkeley and other cities to create a housing production comparison matrix. Information should include a summary of categories, amounts, and bases for calculating impact fees, other development fees, and parcel taxes in all cities in the matrix; and 2) Calculate local fee and parcel tax costs for housing development prototypes.

Information should include the total fee burden applicable to several multifamily housing prototypes (examples could include fourplex/town homes; 10 unit small multifamily; 8-story midrise; 18-story high-rise) and estimate each selected jurisdiction’s approximate applicable amount of impact fee, other development fee, and parcel taxes for the respective prototypes.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
California Home Prices Exceed the Rest of the Country and Homeownership Rates are Among the Lowest Nationwide.1 According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office’s California Housing Affordability Tracker, home prices in this state continue to 1 The US Economic Development Administration listed California 49 lowest out of 51 (including District of Columbia) for homeownership rates in 2025:
https://www.statsamerica.org/sip/rank_list.aspx?rank_label=hou20

2 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
be much higher than in the rest of the US.2 At the same time, California incomes have not kept pace with the rising costs of home prices despite the somewhat stabilized housing cost over the last few years. The report found that the annual household income needed to purchase a mid and a bottom-tier home was significantly higher than the median household income, as highlighted in the chart below:

Source: LAO’s California Housing Affordability Tracker (1st Quarter 2026):
https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/793
As housing is typically the largest expenditure for most households, reducing the costs of housing production has been a key policy goal of state and local politicians and a key element of making the state a more affordable place to live.

Housing Costs in California are High, In Large Part Due to Production Costs.

This is true for multifamily housing and single-family homes, both market rate and affordable. Production costs directly influence the costs of both purchasing and renting homes; the higher the production costs, the higher the break-even costs to reach financial viability. High production costs similarly result in less affordable housing built as the gap between break-even rents and the restricted rents that tenants are required to pay increases, resulting in higher required operating 2 LAO’s California Housing Affordability Tracker, April 20, 2026:
https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/793

3 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
subsidies. Thus, the public funds for producing affordable housing in California yield fewer units built. A 2025 Rand report analysed multifamily housing production costs in California, Colorado and Texas and found that the average market-rate apartment in California – the most expensive of the states for multifamily housing production in all cost categories – is roughly two and a half times the cost of producing a similar sized unit in Texas. This study found several contributing factors to California’s high production costs. Among them are:
● Longer production timelines: in California, the amount of time to bring a project to completion is more than 22 months longer than the average time required in Texas;
● Requirements for affordable housing developers in California to pay large architectural and engineering fees, likely related to prescriptive design requirements, as well as above-market wages; and notably ● Municipal impact and development fees: in Texas they are on average $1,000 per unit; in Colorado they are on average $12,000 per unit; and in California they are on average $29,000 per unit.3
While our state and local politicians have valiantly adopted several policy solutions that make it easier to create more infill housing, the financing piece of the equation continues to constrain production. Having a better understanding of the contributing factors to high production costs could help guide Berkeley City Council’s policy recommendations for future housing developments.

While Development and Impact Fees Offset Administrative and Public Costs of New Development… Generally speaking, development and impact fees are levied on contractors and developers to offset administrative costs for related applications, permits and reviews, and to mitigate the effects of new growth on public services, amenities and infrastructure. These fees apply to both market-rate and affordable housing and commercial projects. Some cities, like Berkeley, have adopted specific affordable housing mitigation fees that developers are required to pay to help fund the development of affordable housing, either on-site or elsewhere within the City.

This is one of the primary ways Berkeley adds to our stock of affordable housing.

Developers can choose to either set aside 20 percent of the units to rent or sell at an affordable level or pay an in-lieu fee into our housing trust fund that can only be used for building affordable units elsewhere in the city. Other types of imposed impact fees in Berkeley help fund a range of important infrastructure expansions such as sewer systems, and amenities such as public art. These fees help pay for an array of community benefits such as:
3 Ward, Jason M and Schlake, Luke, “The High Cost of Producing Multifamily Housing in California,” Rand, Research Summary, April 2, 2025: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3743-

1.html

4 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
● Affordable childcare
● Public Art
● Streets and Open Space Improvement Plans (SOSIP)
● Sewer connection fees
● BUSD School facility fees
…They Can Also Significantly Increase Costs of Housing Production. While development and impact fees can be an extremely useful source of revenue, the numerous types of fees, when added up, can significantly increase production costs.

In 2018 The Terner Center published a study entitled: “It All Adds Up: The Cost of Housing Development Fees in Seven California Cities” that chose to look at Berkeley in addition to six other cities and found that “development fees are usually set without oversight or coordination between city departments, and the type and size of impact fees levied vary widely from city to city.” The study also noted that “Individual fees add up and substantially increase the cost of building housing.”4 Having a clear understanding of the different types of fees as well as the total fee burden on developers will provide both City Council and the general public a clearer understanding of why development in Berkeley remains so costly and provide potential access points to lower those costs.

BACKGROUND
The City of Berkeley updated its list of development fees and affordability requirements for potential projects as recently as June 2025.5 It also has a webpage solely devoted to Planning and Development Fees that includes a comprehensive list of fees charged by the various different Planning Divisions (Building and Safety, Land Use Planning, Toxics Management, and the Office of Energy and Sustainable Development) as well as other City departments relevant to building projects (Public Works Engineering and Transportation, and Fire Department Plan Check).6 This webpage and the associated fee schedule was updated and effective as recently as July 2025. However, the fee schedule does not include the full range of impact, mitigation or in-lieu fees that have been enacted by City Council, as noted on the webpage itself. To date, there is no single document that aggregates the range of 4 Mawhorter, Sarah, Garcia, David and Raetz, Hayley, UC Berkeley Terner Center for Housing Innovation: “It All Adds Up: The Cost of Housing Development Fees in Seven California Cities," March, 2018: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2020/12/Development_Fees_Slide_Deck_Final_1.pdf , p. 3. 5 For the most up-to-date list of City of Berkeley Development Fees and Affordability Requirements to which Berkeley projects may be subject see this list found on the City’s webpage on Understanding Impact Fees:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/List%20of%20devt%20fees%2C%20current_0.pdf 6City of Berkeley Website, Planning and Development Fees: https://berkeleyca.gov/construction- development/permits-design-parameters/permit-process/planning-and-development-fees

5 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
different types of fees that may be required of different types of development projects and that charts the total fee burden for different types of housing.

More recently, cities throughout the state have begun evaluating and at times waiving or reducing impact and affordable housing fees as a way to close financing gaps, and particularly to incentivize more affordable housing production.7 Examples of such efforts include:
● Oakland: adopted amendments to the City’s Impact Fee Program to promote housing development, eliminating the Affordable Housing Impact Fee in Impact Fee Zone 3 through the end of Fiscal Year 2027-28 (July 2025).8 ● San Leandro: adopted a resolution to exempt Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) from the City’s Development Fees for Street Improvements and also waived or reduced Park Land Acquisition and Improvement Fees, also for ADUs (July 2025).9
● Sacramento: adopted a new program that provides a zero-dollar impact fee rate for new development of eligible affordable housing units called the “Reduced Residential Development Impact Fees for Affordable Dwelling Units” (May 2019).10
● San Francisco: approved the Housing Stimulus and Fee Reform Plan reducing inclusionary housing requirements on new and already approved development projects and deferring development impact fees (July 2023).11 ● San Jose: adopted a resolution reducing the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in-lieu fees to $0 for eligible projects for the temporary Multifamily Housing Incentive Program that include at least 5% of units onsite at up to 100% area median income; and realigned parkland in-lieu fees (December 2024).12 7 See, for instance, Generation Housing’s Action Plan: Incentivize Affordability Policy Brief, 2024:
https://generationhousing.org/wp-
content/uploads/2024/10/HousingActionPlan_IncentivizeAffordability.pdf 8 CIty of Oakland, Impact Fees Update: City Council Adopts Impact Fee Amendments, July 16, 2025:
https://www.oaklandca.gov/News-Releases/Planning-Building/Impact-Fees-Update-City-Council- Adopts-Impact-Fee-Amendments
9 City of San Leandro Development Impact Fee Update, July 21, 2025:
https://www.sanleandro.org/1475/Development-Impact-Fee-Update 10 City of Sacramento Staff Report: Evaluation of Reduced Residential Development Impact Fees for Affordable Dwelling Units; August 9, 2022 City Council Meeting, Discussion Item 31:
https://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=22&clip_id=5335&meta_id=693032 11 SF.gov News: “Mayor Breed & President Peskin’s Housing Stimulus and Fee Reform Plan Approved by Board of Supervisors, July 25, 2023: https://www.sf.gov/news--mayor-breed-president- peskins-housing-stimulus-and-fee-reform-plan-approved-board-supervisors 12 December 10, 2024 Minutes, City of San Jose City Council Meeting, item 8.2: Multifamily Housing Incentive Program and North San Jose Parks Fee Realignment:
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/120944/638815425510830000

6 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
● El Cerrito: adopted a resolution modifying the Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Transportation Impact Fee, and Open Space In-Lieu Fee for housing projects with active building permit applications (September 2025).13

FISCAL IMPACT
Staff time to draft the information report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Berkeley, like neighbouring cities and cities throughout the state, imposes fees as a way to offset administrative costs and fund key priorities such as improvements to schools, parks and other infrastructure projects, as well as to build affordable housing. While these fees may be necessary, they also add to the cost burden on housing production, making many projects significantly less financially feasible. This item is requesting an information report that the City Council can use to guide future policy decisions to make informed decisions when incentivizing more housing production of all kinds.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Incentivizing particularly infill housing close to transit aligns with the City’s Climate Action Plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

CONTACT
Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember District 1 (510) 981-7110 .
13 El Cerrito City Council meeting September 16, 2025, agenda item number 9 E: Modifications to the applicable Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Transportation Impact Fee and Open Space In-Lieu Fee for Housing Projects with Complete Building Permit Applications:
https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/584/files/report/2043

Rashi Kesarwani
Councilmember, District 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Author)
SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Modification for Manufacturing Research and Development (M-RD) District

RECOMMENDATION
Referral to the City Manager and Planning Commission to amend Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 23.206.020 to allow for a reduced level of discretion for Vehicle Repair and Service in the Manufacturing Research and Development (M-RD) District.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Currently, vehicle repair is permitted in the M-RD zone with a Use Permit Public Hearing (UP-PH) which is time consuming and extends the length of the permitting process. As a result, many potential vehicle repair operators who would otherwise consider starting new businesses or expanding their existing businesses into new, larger spaces do not consider West Berkeley and the M-RD District as a viable location for doing so. This is true for businesses that the City has an interest in attracting, such as repair operations for an emerging class of electric vehicles that provide cleaner alternatives to internal combustion engine vehicles that emit harmful pollutants. Lowering the level of discretion for these types of uses to a zoning certificate (ZC) from a UP(PH) would streamline the review process and encourage these revenue-producing uses to locate in the M-RD district.

BACKGROUND
The M-RD zone was first established in March, 20251 in response to Councilmember Kesarwani’s April, 2021 “Referral to the Planning Commission to Establish a Zoning Overlay at the Pacific Steel Casting Property.”2 The former ten acre Pacific Steel 1 Berkeley City Council Meeting on March 25, 2025, Public Hearing: Establishment of M-RD Zoning District, Associated General Plan and West Berkeley Plan Amendments, and Environmental Impact Report, item #8: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-03- 25%20Item%2008%20Establishment%20of%20M-RD%20Zoning%20District.pdf 2 Berkeley City Council Meeting, April 20, 2021: Referral to the Planning Commission to Establish a Zoning Overlay at the Pacific Steel Casting Property, item #35:

2 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
Casting (PSC) property had been vacant, contaminated and blighted since the company’s bankruptcy in 2018. The referral requested allowances to enable all Mixed Use Light Industrial (MU-LI) uses and override any existing constraints on MU- LI uses for the rezoned site. The intent was to support redevelopment of the property which would contribute to the City’s tax base and be consistent with the overall goals of the General and West Berkeley Plans for manufacturing areas.

More specifically, and as stated in the 2025 staff report for the M-RD public hearing, the goal of the new zoning designation is to:
● Support a mix of industrial and heavy commercial uses, such as light manufacturing and R&D, particularly those which can provide high-quality employment for people at all educational levels and add significantly to the tax base;
● Allow office and laboratory uses that support light industrial and research and development uses;
● Provide flexibility to facilitate the development and reuse of large sites with an urban campus-like environment, demonstrating high-quality design and site planning that includes amenities for employees and customers; and ● Support the development of industrial uses which would satisfy performance standards that protect the environment.

While the zoning referrals had the desired effect and the site was purchased later in 2025, the parcel has seen little development activity as it winds its way through the city’s permitting process. Currently ground conditions remain challenging.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
This referral aligns with Councilmember Kesarwani’s September 2023 “Referral to Rezone Gilman Street to Maximize Revenue Productivity Per Acre,”3 with a goal to maximize revenue productivity and job creation per acre in the Gilman District by encouraging modernized, higher-yield uses and reducing regulatory barriers that slow parcel redevelopment. It similarly aligns with former Councilmember Rigel Robinson’s September 2022 referral: “Keep Innovation in Berkeley,”4 that recommended enhancing development standards to increase the likelihood of redevelopment and the growth and retention of Research and Development (R&D) in Berkeley.

Significantly, the City will soon implement the San Pablo Area Specific Plan that will focus land use policies and economic development programs to support diverse housing options, commercial activities and public amenities which could result in San Pablo Avenue, heavily populated by automotive services and repair operations, less https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2024-11-06_PC_Item%2010_ATT%202_2021-04- 20_PSC%20Zoning%20Overlay.pdf
3 Berkeley City Council Meeting, September 19, 2023: Referral to Rezone Gilman Street to Maximize Revenue Productivity Per Acre, item #19: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2023- 09-19%20Item%2019%20Gilman%20Rezone%20Kesarwani%20Supp%201.pdf 4 Berkeley City Council Meeting September 13, 2022: Keep Innovation in Berkeley, item #30:
https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-09- 13%20Item%2030%20Referral%20Keep%20Innovation%20in%20Berkeley.pdf

3 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7110 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.7111 E-Mail: [email protected]
inviting to emerging technologies for electric vehicles and other innovations requiring large spaces. Modifying the M-RD zoning to allow a lower level of discretion for uses such as vehicle repair and services will provide alternate landing spaces for these types of businesses in an area of Berkeley that would benefit from their existence.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Staff time to amend BMC Chapter 23.206.020. Lowering the level of discretion for vehicle repair and services to a ZC from a UP(PH) would streamline the review process and encourage revenue producing industries to locate in the M-RD zoning district. The city would potentially benefit from the additional tax revenue and expanding business.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILLITY
The impacts of amending BMC 23.206.020 to allow for more uses like vehicle repairs at a lower level of discretion, especially for the emerging class of electric vehicles, could boost the city’s EV economy and potentially incentivize more residents to purchase these vehicles, reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Berkeley.

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

ATTACHMENTS

1. Amended BMC Chapter 23.206.020

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 1 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

23.206.020 Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements.

A.  Allowed Land Uses. Table 23.206-1 identifies allowed land uses and required permits in the Manufacturing Districts. All land uses are defined in Chapter 23.502--Glossary. Permit requirements are described in Chapter 23.406--Specific Permit Requirements. Permits required for land uses shown in Table 23.206-1 apply to both:

1.  The initial establishment of a land use in a new building; and

2.  The change of use in an existing building or portion of a building.

Table 23.206-1. Allowed Uses in Manufacturing Districts Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Residential Uses
Accessory Dwelling Unit NP NP NP See

23.306
NP
Dwellings
Single-Family Residential NP NP NP AUP NP
Multi-Unit Residential NP NP NP ZC* NP 23.206.090(B)(8) Group Living Accommodation NP NP NP UP(PH
)*
NP 23.206.090(B)(8)
Hotel, Residential NP NP NP NP NP
Mixed-Use Residential NP NP NP UP(PH
)*
NP 23.206.090(B)(7)

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 2 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Senior Congregate Housing NP NP NP See

23.302
.070(I)
NP
Public and Quasi-Public Uses
Child Care Center NP NP AUP* UP(PH
)*
AUP* 23.206.040(C) & (D)
Cemetery/Crematory/Mausoleum NP NP NP NP NP
Club/Lodge UP(PH
)*
UP(PH
)*
UP(PH
)*
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)*

23.206.040(F)
Columbaria NP NP NP -- NP
Community Care Facility NP NP NP ZC* NP 23.206.090(B)(3) Community Center NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP
Emergency Shelter NP NP NP -- NP
Hospital NP NP NP NP NP
Library NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP
Low Barrier Navigation Center NP NP NP ZC NP
Mortuaries and Crematories NP NP NP UP(PH
)*
NP 23.206.090(B)(6)

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 3 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Municipal Animal Shelter UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
-- UP(PH
)*
Nursing Home NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP
Park/Playground NP NP NP UP(PH
)*
NP 23.206.040(D)
Public Safety and Emergency
Service
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
Public Utility Substation/Tank UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
Religious Assembly NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP
School NP NP NP UP(PH
)*
NP 23.206.040(D)
School, Vocational NP NP ZC* [1] UP(PH
)
ZC* [1] 23.206.040(R)
Supportive Housing NP NP NP ZC* NP 23.302.070(J)--Support ive Housing
Retail Uses
Alcoholic Beverage Retail Sale NP NP UP(PH
)* [2]
NP * NP 23.206.080(B)(3);

23.206.090(B)(2);

23.310

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 4 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Firearm/Munitions Business NP NP NP NP NP
Industrial and Mining Products AUP
[2]
AUP
[2]
AUP
[4]
NP NP
Pawn Shop/Auction House NP NP NP NP NP
Pet Store NP NP NP NP NP
Retail, General NP NP AUP* AUP*
[3]
AUP* 23.206.040(G);

23.206.090(B)(4)
Smoke Shop NP NP NP NP NP
Personal and Household Service
Uses
Personal and Household Services,
General

NP NP NP AUP NP
Kennels and Pet Boarding NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP
Laundromats and Cleaners NP NP NP AUP NP
Veterinary Clinic NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP
Video Tape/Disk Rental NP NP NP NP NP
Office Uses
Business Support Services NP NP AUP AUP AUP

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 5 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
[6] [3] [6]
Banks and Financial Services,
Retail

NP NP -- NP NP
Insurance Agents, Title Companies,
Real Estate Agents, Travel Agents

NP NP -- -- NP
Medical Practitioners NP NP NP AUP
[3]
NP
Non-Chartered Financial Institutions NP NP -- -- NP
Office, Business and Professional NP ZC* [4] AUP
[4]
AUP
[3]
AUP
[4]

23.206.070(B)(2)
Food and Alcohol Service,
Lodging, Entertainment, and
Assembly Uses
Adult-oriented Business -- -- NP NP NP
Amusement Device Arcade NP NP ZC ZC NP See 23.302.070(B) Bar/Cocktail Lounge/Tavern/Tap
Room/ Wine Tasting
NP NP NP See

23.310
NP
Commercial Recreation Center NP NP -- NP NP
Entertainment Establishment NP NP -- UP(PH
)
NP
Food Service Establishment, Under -- -- AUP* AUP* AUP* 23.302.070(E)

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 6 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
5,000 sq. ft.

Food Service Establishment, 5,000
sq. ft. larger
-- -- UP(PH
)*
UP(PH
)*
UP(PH
)*

23.302.070(E)
Group Instruction ZC ZC -- ZC ZC
Health and Fitness Facility NP NP -- NP NP
Hotel, Tourist NP NP NP NP NP
Motel, Tourist NP NP NP NP NP
Theater NP NP UP(PH
)*
NP NP 23.206.080(B)(4)
Vehicle Service and Sale Uses
Alternative Fuel Station AUP
[4]
AUP
[4]
AUP
[4]

AUP AUP
[4]
Gasoline/Vehicle Fuel Station NP NP NP NP NP
Large Vehicle Sales and Rental -- NP AUP
[4]
NP AUP
[4]
Small Vehicle Sales and Rental -- NP NP NP NP
Tire Sales and Service -- -- -- NP NP
Vehicle Parts Store NP NP NP UP(PH
)
NP

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 7 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Vehicle Repair and Service UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
Vehicle Rentals NP -- -- NP NP
Vehicle Sales, New AUP*
[7]
NP NP NP NP 23.206.060(B)(3)
Vehicle Sales, Used AUP*
[7]
NP NP NP NP 23.206.060(B)(3)
Vehicle Wash NP NP NP NP NP
Vehicle Wrecking AUP
[7]
AUP
[4]
AUP*
[4]
NP NP 23.206.080(B)(5)
Industrial and Heavy Commercial
Uses
Bus/Cab/Truck/Public Utility Depot AUP
[8]
AUP
[8]
AUP*
[4]
UP(PH
)
AUP*
[4]

23.206.040(B)
Commercial Excavation UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)
NP NP
Contractors Yard AUP
[7]
AUP
[7]
AUP
[4]
UP(PH
)
AUP
[4]
Dry Cleaning and Laundry Plant ZC* [9] ZC [9] ZC [1] UP(PH )
NP 23.206.060(B)(2)
Laboratory

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 8 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Commercial Physical or Biological NP AUP
[4]
UP(PH
)*
NP AUP
[4]

23.206.040(P)
Cannabis Testing NP AUP
[4]
UP(PH
)
NP AUP
[4]
Manufacturing
Construction Products ZC [9] ZC [9] UP(PH
)

NP UP(PH
)
Light Manufacturing ZC [7] ZC [7] ZC [1] AUP*
[3]
ZC [1] 23.206.040(H);

23.206.090(B)(5)
Pesticides/Herbicides/Fertilizers NP NP NP -- NP
Petroleum Refining and Products NP NP NP -- NP
Pharmaceuticals AUP
[4]
AUP
[4]
AUP*
[4]
-- AUP*
[4]

23.206.040(J)
Primary Production Manufacturing AUP
[4]
AUP
[4]

NP NP NP
Semiconductors UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)

NP -- UP(PH
)
Material Recovery Enterprise -- -- UP(PH
)
-- UP(PH
)
Media Production ZC [10] ZC [10] ZC [10] AUP
[11]
ZC [10]

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 9 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Mini-storage NP NP NP NP NP
Recycled Materials Processing ZC* [9] ZC* [9] UP(PH
)*
-- UP(PH
)*

23.206.040(L);

23.206.040(M)
Recycling Redemption Center AUP
[7]
ZC [9] UP(PH
)*

AUP UP(PH
)*

23.206.040(M)
Repair Service, Non-Vehicle ZC* [9] ZC* [9] ZC* [1] AUP ZC* [1] 23.206.040(I) Research and Development -- ZC [12] ZC [12] -- ZC [13]
Services to Buildings and Dwellings AUP AUP AUP AUP AUP Warehouse ZC [9] ZC [9] ZC [1] UP(PH
)
ZC [1]
Warehouse-Based Non-Store
Retailer
ZC [9] ZC [9] ZC [1] -- ZC [1]
Wholesale Trade ZC [9] ZC [9] ZC* [1] AUP
[3]
ZC* [1] 23.206.040(S)
Incidental Uses
Amusement Devices NP NP AUP AUP AUP
Alcoholic Beverage Service See 23.310
Cafeteria, On-Site ZC [2] AUP
[2]
ZC [2] AUP ZC [2]
Child Care Center NP NP See 23.206.040(C)

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 10 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
Columbaria -- -- -- -- --
Food Service Establishment, Under
20,000 sq. ft.

AUP* AUP* AUP* AUP* AUP* 23.302.070(E)
Food Service Establishment, 20,000
sq. ft. larger
NP AUP* NP AUP* NP 23.302.070(E)
Home Occupations NP NP NP See

23.206
.040(D
)
NP
Live Entertainment, Unamplified NP NP ZC ZC ZC
Live Entertainment, Amplified NP NP AUP AUP AUP
Retail Sales of Goods Manufactured
On-Site
AUP*
[14]
AUP*
[15]
AUP*
[15]
AUP* AUP*
[15]

23.206.040(N)
Storage of Goods Manufactured
On-Site (>25% gross floor area)

ZC ZC ZC AUP ZC
Wholesale Activities ZC ZC ZC AUP ZC
Other Miscellaneous Uses
Art/Craft Studio ZC*
[10]
ZC [10] ZC*
[10]
AUP
[11]
ZC*
[10]

23.206.040(A)
ATM, Exterior and Attached to Bank AUP AUP -- AUP NP
ATM, Interior or Exterior and Not AUP AUP AUP AUP AUP

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 11 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Manufacturing DistrictsZC = Zoning Certificate
AUP = Administrative Use Permit
UP(PH) = Use Permit
-- = Permitted with an AUP, see

23.206.020(B)
NP = Not Permitted
[#] = Floor Area Permit
Requirement
* Use-Specific Standards Apply

M MM MU-LI MU-R M-RD
Use-Specific
Standards
Applies to uses with an
asterisk following the
permit requirement
(e.g., ZC*)
With Bank
Circus/Carnival NP NP UP(PH
)*
UP(PH
)
UP(PH
)*

23.206.040(E)
Drive-in Uses NP NP NP NP NP
Live/Work NP NP See 23.312 NP NP
Parking Lot/Structure See 23.302.070(G)
Public Market, Open Air -- -- UP(PH
)* [16]
-- UP(PH
)* [16]

23.206.040(K)
Public Market, Enclosed -- -- AUP
[5]
-- AUP
[5]
Short-Term Rental -- -- -- ZC* NP 23.314
Urban Agriculture, Low-Impact ZC ZC ZC ZC ZC
Urban Agriculture, High-Impact AUP AUP AUP AUP AUP
Notes:
[1] Requires an AUP for uses 20,000 sq. ft. to 30,000 square feet. Requires a Use Permit for uses more than 30,000 sq. ft.
[2] Not permitted 20,000 sq. ft. or more.
[3] Requires a Use Permit if 5,000 sq. ft. or more.
[4] Requires a Use Permit for uses more than 20,000 sq. ft. [5] Requires a Use Permit for more than 5,000 sq. ft. of floor area. [6] Not permitted over 3,000 sq. ft.

BMC 23.206.020, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements Page 12 of 12 The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026. [7] Requires a Use Permit for uses more than 40,000 sq. ft. [8] Requires a Use Permit for uses 20,000 sq. ft. to 40,000 square feet. [9] Requires an AUP for uses 20,000 sq. ft. to 40,000 square feet. Requires a Use Permit for uses more than 40,000 sq. ft.
[10] Requires an AUP for uses 10,000 sq. ft. to 20,000 square feet. Requires a Use Permit for uses more than 20,000 sq. ft.
[11] Allowed with Zoning Certificate if under 1,000 sq. ft. Requires Use Permit if over 20,000 sq. ft. [12] Requires an AUP for uses more than 20,000 sq. ft.
[13] Requires an AUP for uses 60,000 sq. ft. to 100,000 sq. ft. Requires a Use Permit for uses 100,000 sq. ft. or more.
[14] Not permitted 1,500 sq. ft. or more.
[15] Requires a Use Permit for sales area 1,501 to 3,000 sq. ft. Not permitted over 3,000 sq. ft. [16] Requires Use Permit for markets over 5,000 sq. ft.

B.  Unlisted Land Uses. Any use not listed in Table 23.206-1 is permitted with an AUP. To approve the AUP, the Zoning Officer must find that the use is compatible with the purposes of the district where it is located. Any use found to be incompatible with the purposes of the district is not permitted.

C.  Use-Specific Regulations. Uses subject to supplemental regulations are shown in Table

23.206-1 with an asterisk (*) following the permit requirement (e.g., ZC*). The Use-Specific Standards column in Table 23.206-1 identifies the location of these standards in the Zoning Ordinance. (Ord. 7978-NS § 36, 2025; Ord. 7957-NS § 2, 2025; Ord. 7955-NS § 14, 2025; Ord. 7945-NS § 3, 2024; Ord. 7898-NS § 13, 2024; Ord. 7882-NS §§5--7, 2023; Ord. 7838-NS § 3, 2022; Ord. 7810-NS § 9, 2022; Ord. 7787-NS § 2 (Exh. A), 2021)
The Berkeley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 8008-NS, passed May 12, 2026.

Disclaimer: The City Clerk’s Office has the official version of the Berkeley Municipal Code. Users should contact the City Clerk’s Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.

City Website: www.berkeleyca.gov
Hosted by ICC Code Solutions.

Igor Tregub, Councilmember District 4

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Igor Tregub
Subject: Resolution in Support of AB 1761 (Rogers) — Electricity: Calculation Methodology: Data Disclosure

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution in strong support of Assembly Bill (AB) 1761 (Rogers), which would improve transparency in the calculation of the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) and other nonbypassable charges, and distribute copies to Governor Gavin Newsom; Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, Senate Utilities, Energy, and Communications Committee Chair Benjamin Allen and Senator Jesse Arreguín; Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee Chair Cottie Petrie-Norris and Assemblymembers Chris Rogers and Buffy Wicks; and Senator Steven Bradford, Chair of the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee to support its passage.

BACKGROUND
The City of Berkeley is a member agency of Ava Community Energy, a Community Choice Aggregator (CCA) serving customers throughout Alameda and San Joaquin Counties. CCAs provide an alternative to electricity generation service to an investor- owned utility (the investor-owned utility is still responsible for the transmission and distribution side of the electrical grid).1
Under California law, customers who leave investor-owned utility generation service for a CCA or Energy Service Provider remain responsible for their fair share of certain 1 https://avaenergy.org

legacy power costs. These costs are recovered in part through the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA).2
The PCIA is a nonbypassable charge associated with the costs of power and other resources procured by investor-owned utilities for customers who subsequently receive generation service from a CCA or other eligible provider.

The PCIA is intended to ensure that customers who depart investor-owned utility generation service do not leave remaining utility customers responsible for costs associated with power contracts and other resources that were procured on their behalf.

The charge is therefore an important component of California's community choice energy framework.

However, there has not been a consistent statutory standard governing the disclosure of all underlying data used in CPUC proceedings to calculate or modify the PCIA. Without timely access to the data underlying PCIA calculations and proposals, CCAs and other load-serving entities may face difficulty independently evaluating calculations, forecasting future costs, and determining the potential effects of proposed changes on their customers.

This lack of transparency can also contribute to repeated disputes over access to information and increase the time and resources required to resolve regulatory questions before the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).

California's CCA framework is intended to provide customers with local control and additional choices regarding electricity generation while ensuring that customers who remain with investor-owned utilities are not disadvantaged by customers departing bundled generation service.

For that framework to function effectively, affected parties must be able to understand and evaluate the costs being allocated through the PCIA. Transparent and timely access to the underlying data can help CCAs forecast future obligations, evaluate proposed changes, participate meaningfully in CPUC proceedings, and provide customers with more reliable information about future electricity costs.3

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
California electricity customers continue to face significant affordability challenges.

Rising electricity costs affect households, local businesses, nonprofit organizations, and 2 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1761 3 Ibid.

public agencies, making enhancements to transparency and predictability in utility rates increasingly important.

Electricity affordability depends not only on the level of rates but also on the ability of public agencies and energy providers to understand, forecast, and effectively participate in the processes that determine those rates.

AB 1761 does not change the PCIA itself or establish a new rate. Rather, it establishes transparency around the information used to calculate and evaluate these charges.

Greater transparency regarding the PCIA would allow CCAs and other affected entities to independently evaluate the assumptions and data underlying proposed charges. This can improve accountability, reduce unnecessary disputes over information, and help identify errors or inconsistencies before they affect customers.

AB 1761 does not eliminate protections for confidential or market-sensitive information.

Instead, the bill provides for disclosure of protected information to a nonmarket- participant reviewing representative under a CPUC-approved nondisclosure agreement.

For Berkeley residential and commercial energy customers, greater certainty regarding PCIA costs can also support more reliable financial planning and reduce the risk of unexpected changes in electricity costs.4

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Minimal staff time is associated with outreach to the recipients.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The proposed action supports Berkeley's energy and climate goals by promoting a more transparent and predictable regulatory framework for community choice energy and electricity costs. Improved transparency can help public energy providers better plan for procurement costs and continue providing clean electricity while protecting customers from unnecessary or unexpected cost increases.

AB 1761 is supported by the California Community Choice Association, Ava Community Energy Board of Directors, and other community choice energy agencies. 4 Ibid.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Igor Tregub, 510-981-7140, [email protected] Olga Bolotina, Chief of Staff, [email protected] Amy Rodas, Legislative Aide, [email protected]

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Letter

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

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 1761 (ROGERS) TO

STRENGTHEN POWER CHARGE INDIFFERENCE ADJUSTMENT TRANSPARENCY

AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
WHEREAS, electricity bills in California continue to rise, in part due to challenging market conditions and outdated regulatory policies, placing a growing burden on families and businesses in our community; and
WHEREAS, Ava Community Energy serves as the Community Choice Aggregator for Alameda and San Joaquin Counties, providing clean, affordable power to more than two million Californians, including residents and businesses within Berkeley; and WHEREAS, the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) is a fee on nearly all energy bills designed to ensure customers who leave investor-owned utility generation service, such as those served by Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) or Energy Service Providers (ESPs), pay their portion of legacy power costs; and WHEREAS, since the PCIA was implemented, there has been no consistent standard for what data must be made available in California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) processes or proceedings regarding the PCIA, creating significant transparency and verification challenges; and
WHEREAS, without adequate transparency and consistent data standards, CCAs and ESPs are unable to verify the accuracy of PCIA charges that their customers must pay and cannot confidently forecast rates – both essential tools for protecting customers from unexpected rate increases; and
WHEREAS, this lack of consistent data has created costly disputes and inefficiencies in CPUC proceedings, diverting resources from consumer protection and energy affordability initiatives; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 1761 (Rogers) addresses these fundamental problems by requiring the CPUC and investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to disclose all data used to calculate PCIA costs, and ensuring that when parties or the CPUC make proposals to change the PCIA, they provide all underlying data informing those proposals; and WHEREAS, greater transparency through AB 1761 will enable CCAs and ESPs to better advocate for their customers, assess proposals to change the PCIA, reduce repeated disputes over information, improve regulatory efficiency, encourage utilities to verify calculations, and shield customers from sudden rate swings; and

WHEREAS, AB 1761 maintains appropriate protections for sensitive information through Commission-approved nondisclosure agreements, a practice already successfully used in other regulatory compliance areas; and WHEREAS, this legislation represents an important energy affordability tool that will strengthen consumer confidence that customers pay their fair share for their service.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Berkeley City Council hereby supports Assembly Bill 1761 (Rogers) relating to Power Charge Indifference Adjustment transparency and consumer protection.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution will be sent to Governor Gavin Newsom; Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, Senate Utilities, Energy, and Communications Committee Chair Benjamin Allen and Senator Jesse Arreguín; Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee Chair Cottie Petrie-Norris, and Assemblymembers Chris Rogers and Buffy Wicks; and Senator Steven Bradford, Chair of the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee to support its passage.

Date: September 15, 2026
The Honorable Gavin Newsom
Governor of California
The Honorable Monique Limón
California Senate President pro Tempore
The Honorable Benjamin Allen
Chair, California State Senate Utilities, Energy, and Communications Committee The Honorable Jesse Arreguín
California State Senator, District 7
The Honorable Robert Rivas
California State Assembly Speaker
The Honorable Cottie Petrie-Norris
Chair, California State Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee The Honorable Chris Rogers
California State Assemblymember, District 2
The Honorable Buffy Wicks
California State Assemblymember, District 14
RE: Support for AB 1761 (Rogers) — Electricity: Calculation, Methodology: Data Disclosure
Dear Governor Newsom, Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Senators Allen and Arreguín, and Assemblymembers Petrie- Norris, Rogers, and Wicks,
On behalf of the City of Berkeley, a member agency of Ava Community Energy, I write to support AB 1761 and ask for your signature. AB 1761 supports energy affordability by improving transparency and certainty in how the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA), a charge on nearly all energy bills, is calculated. Ava Community Energy is the Community Choice Aggregator (CCA) for Alameda and San Joaquin Counties, providing clean, affordable power to more than two million Californians.

Electricity bills in California are on the rise, in part due to challenging market conditions and outdated and inefficient regulatory policies. Families and businesses in our community are feeling the impact. Affordability is a key priority for the City of Berkeley, and lawmakers and regulators need practical, consumer-focused solutions that ensure customers do not pay more than their fair share.

The PCIA is a fee designed to ensure customers who leave utility generation service, like customers of a CCA or Energy Service Provider (ESP), pay their portion of legacy power costs. But since the PCIA was implemented, there has been no consistent standard for what data must be made available in any California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) process or proceeding on the PCIA. Without adequate transparency, CCAs and ESPs are unable to verify the accuracy of the PCIA charges that their customers must pay and cannot confidently forecast rates – both of which are affordability tools needed to protect customers from unexpected rate increases.

Additionally, the lack of consistent data creates costly disputes and inefficiencies in CPUC proceedings.

To address these problems, AB 1761 requires the CPUC and investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to disclose all data used to calculate PCIA costs. It will also ensure that when parties or the CPUC make proposals in a proceeding to change the PCIA, they provide all the underlying data informing that proposal. Sensitive information will remain protected through Commission-approved nondisclosure agreements, a practice already used to protect sensitive information in other compliance areas.

Greater transparency allows CCAs and ESPs to better advocate for their customers and assess proposals to change the PCIA. It reduces repeated fights over information, improves regulatory efficiency, and encourages utilities to verify calculations. It can also inform cost forecasts and shield customers from sudden rate swings, an important issue for the residents and local businesses we serve.

The City of Berkeley strongly supports AB 1761 and asks for your signature, an important energy affordability tool which will strengthen confidence that customers pay their fair share.

Sincerely,
Berkeley City Council
cc: Governor Gavin Newsom
Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón
Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas
Senator Benjamin Allen
Senator Jesse Arreguín
Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris
Assemblymember Chris Rogers
Assemblymember Buffy Wicks

Igor Tregub, Councilmember District 4
Rashi Kesarwani, Councilmember District 1
Terry Taplin, Councilmember District 2

CONSENT CALENDAR
SEPTEMBER 15, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmembers Igor Tregub (Author), Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani (Co-sponsor), Councilmember Terry Taplin (Co-sponsor), Mayor Adena Ishii (Co-sponsor).

Subject: Resolution in opposition to the handling, storage, and transport of coal and petroleum coke in the San Francisco Bay Region, urging stringent regulation of such facilities by the Bay Area Air District, and in support of Assembly Bill (AB) 40

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution opposing the handling, storage, and transport of coal and petroleum coke in the San Francisco Bay Region, urging stringent regulation of such facilities by the Bay Area Air District, and in support of Assembly Bill (AB) 40.

BACKGROUND
The community’s opposition to the transport and handling of coal through the East Bay is longstanding and well-documented. On November 17, 2015, the Berkeley City Council unanimously adopted Resolution No. 67,280–N.S. opposing coal shipment through a proposed multi‑commodity terminal in West Oakland. Regional opposition was formalized again in 2016 via a joint letter from the mayors of Berkeley and ten other East Bay cities, and through separate resolutions passed by the councils of Berkeley, Emeryville, El Cerrito, Oakland, and Richmond.1
1 Zoe Chafe Ph.D., “Analysis of Health Impacts and Safety Risks and Other Issues/Concerns Related to the Transport, Handling, Transloading, and Storage of Coal and/or Petroleum Coke (Petcoke) in Oakland and at the Proposed Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal,” June 2016, p. 100 https://nocoalinoakland.info/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Zoe-Chafe-Analysis-of-health-Impacts-and- Safety-Risks-etc-oak059408-6-22-2016.pdf

The current controversy arises from a June 4, 2026, announcement by President Donald J. Trump of a $75 million Defense Production Act grant to assist private developers in constructing the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal (OBOT), a “massive”2 rail‑to‑ship coal‑export facility at the former Oakland Army Base in West Oakland. Proponents envision the terminal receiving coal by rail, storing it on site, and transferring it to ships for export, with operations potentially starting as early as 2028.

The facility would operate under a 66‑year lease with the City of Oakland.

A primary rail route for delivering coal to OBOT would be the Union Pacific line that runs directly through West Berkeley. The terminal’s initial capacity would be 9 to 10 million tons of coal per year,3 which would require multiple mile‑long “unit” trains to pass daily in each direction through numerous East Bay communities, including Berkeley.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Public Health Exposure
Emissions of coal dust, a well‑established by‑product of coal handling, storage, and transport, significantly increase ambient levels of fine particulate matter (PM 2.5)4 and coarse particulate matter (PM 10).5 According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, particle pollution is linked to premature deaths, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeats, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and respiratory symptoms such as coughing, respiratory irritation, and difficulty breathing. Inhaling fine coal dust is directly associated with increased rates of asthma, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, and reduced lung capacity. Dust from coal and petroleum coke (petcoke) also carries toxic heavy metals, including arsenic, lead and chromium, which carry their own serious health risks.6
Coal trains would transit only 50 to 100 feet from Aquatic Park and the Fourth Street shopping district, as well as Harrison House Shelter, a transitional housing facility catering to families with young children7, and about a quarter‑mile from Rosa Parks 2 https://nocoalinoakland.info/gamechanger-ab40/
3 U.S. Department of Energy, “Energy Department to Use Defense Production Act Funding to Expand Coal Capacity at 13 Plants and Build Export Infrastructure,” June 2026, https://www.energy.gov/articles/energy-department-use-defense-production-act-funding-expand-coal- capacity-13-plants-and
4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ‘Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter,” May 2026 https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effects-particulate-matter-pm 5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Health Effects of Petroleum Coke,“ January 2017, https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/petroleum-coke-chicago/health-effects-petroleum-coke_.html 6 Michael Hendryx, Keith J. Zullig and Juhua Luo “Impacts of coal use on health,” Annual Review of Public Health, 41(1), 397–415, January 2020, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040119-094104 7 https://www.self-sufficiency.org/ursulashermanvillage

Elementary School, Aquatic Park School, and the Urban Adamah outdoor education center. Similar exposure would affect other communities along the rail corridor.

Regulatory and Review Gaps
No agency has conducted a targeted environmental review of the health and environmental impacts of coal and petcoke handling and storage at the proposed OBOT terminal. The last environmental review of the site occurred in 2012, before developers acknowledged that coal would be a primary commodity. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Air District), which will act as a Responsible Agency under CEQA when considering permits for OBOT, has stated it intends to strengthen its regulatory controls on fugitive coal and petcoke dust, but no new rules have yet been adopted.

Proponents of the project assert that the terminal will operate with “unparalleled environmental responsibility” and that fugitive dust will be mitigated to such a degree that local air quality will improve. These claims remain untested and unverified as of the publication of this report.

Assembly Bill (AB) 40 (Bonta), currently on the California Senate floor, would require that new projects for the handling, storage, or export of more than 5,000,000 tons per year of coal of be reviewed in an environmental impact report (EIR) under the CEQA and that certain conditions, including changing the type of coal or increasing the quantity of coal handled, stored, or exported, triggers a subsequent EIR, among other provisions.8

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Local and Regional Water Quality
The rail corridor runs immediately alongside the San Francisco Bay, its estuary system, and key tributaries. Fugitive dust containing heavy metals and other contaminants from uncovered coal trains presents a direct, ongoing threat of toxic deposition into these public trust waters, undermining decades of regional investment in water‑quality improvement and habitat restoration.

Climate and Greenhouse‑Gas Considerations
Facilitating the export of up to 10 million tons of coal per year would enable substantial greenhouse‑gas emissions when that coal is burned overseas. This directly conflicts with Berkeley’s climate mitigation commitments. Promoting fossil‑fuel infrastructure with 8 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB40

a planned 66‑year lifespan locks in carbon‑intensive energy pathways long into the future, at a time when rapid decarbonization is urgently needed.

Regulatory Framework and Precedent
The Air District’s upcoming rulemaking on fugitive coal and petcoke dust represents a critical opportunity to set protective, science‑based standards that prioritize community health over fossil‑fuel export interests. Berkeley’s support for stringent, enforceable regulations would reinforce the principle that projects with significant public‑health and environmental impacts must undergo a complete, up to date environmental review under CEQA before permits are issued.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Limited staff time is required to communicate the city’s position to designated recipients.

CONTACT
Councilmember Tregub, 510-981-7140, [email protected] Olga Bolotina, Chief of Staff, Council District 4, [email protected] Amy Rodas, Legislative Aide, Council District 4, [email protected]

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

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

RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BERKELEY IN

OPPOSITION TO HANDLING, STORAGE, AND TRANSPORT OF COAL AND

PETROLEUM COKE IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION, URGING STRINGENT

REGULATION OF SUCH FACILITIES BY THE BAY AREA AIR DISTRICT, AND IN SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL (AB) 40
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2026, President Donald J. Trump announced a $75 million Defense Production Act grant to aid private developers in construction of the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal (OBOT), a massive rail-to-ship coal export facility in West Oakland that could start shipping coal as soon as 2028; and WHEREAS, proponents have proposed the approval of the OBOT facility at a location on the former Oakland Army Base. The terminal would receive shipments of coal on rail lines, store the coal, and then transfer the coal onto ships for transport. Coal would be transported along a Class 1 rail line, and the most direct and most likely route is the Union Pacific rail line running through West Berkeley; and WHEREAS, OBOT would operate for decades under a 66-year lease. Decisions made now will have local, regional, and global impacts for generations to come; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Energy states that the initial capacity of the proposed terminal will be 9 to 10 million tons of coal per year, passing daily through much of California’s East Bay, including Albany, Berkeley, Crockett, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Martinez, Pinole, Richmond, Rodeo, and San Pablo; and WHEREAS, coal trains traveling through West Berkeley would increase the risk of coal dust escaping into neighborhoods where thousands of people live, work, shop, and recreate each day, passing only 50 to 100 feet away from Aquatic Park and the Fourth Street shopping district, as well as Harrison House Shelter, a transitional housing facility catering to families with young children, and approximately a quarter mile from Rosa Parks Elementary School, Aquatic Park School, and Urban Adamah (an outdoor education center); and
WHEREAS, the residents of Berkeley stand in solidarity with the residents of Oakland in their opposition to the handling, transport and storage of coal and petroleum coke (petcoke), given the well-documented adverse health effects from these activities; and WHEREAS, the Bay Area Air District (the Air District) has indicated that it will consider additional controls on sources of fugitive coal and petcoke dust as part of its commitment to strengthen regulatory controls on fugitive dust; and