OpenCityCouncil

Transcription Metadata


        Whisper API Version 1


      Generated 2024-08-10 05:31:16 UTC


      Archive URI berkeley_3d342cb2-185a-11ef-b231-0050569183fa.ogg

Segment 1

Segment 2

Segment 3

I don't think this is the way I think what this does.
It wasn't done in consultation that I can see with the mental health division.
The special care unit.
Contractor knows nothing about it.
I don't understand what the costs are associated with it.
It says that you're creating a pilot program and is only cost staff time.
But how does this fit into the overall architecture of the social services that are happening in this city.
Right now for a full service partnership.
The average cost is $9,000 a month.
That's what we're seeing in this city.
That's what we're spending $9,000 a month per person to receive the highest level of services that Berkeley mental health division can provide.
That's what we're told.
So to add on to that.
I think the question we need to ask is why is that not working.
Why are you going.
Why are we doing workarounds.
One of the most expensive divisions in our city.
If it's not working somebody needs to poke their head in there and find out why.
Why did we have to contract outside the city for a special care unit.
Why do we still have $770,000 a year budgeted for the mobile crisis team when they have two people.
And that expenditure has been running for years.
And that is where corruption lies.
And that is why I am advocating on the mental health commission as are others for an audit of the mental health division.
Clearly we are not getting the services that we are paying for and that all this, you know, all these, all these core like RBA, all these new core assessments, not in the budget.
The mental health division has not produced a budget that we can read for a couple of years.
And so I urge you not to go through with this and instead ask why isn't what we're doing now working.
Thank you.
Next speaker, please.
Hi there.
I'm Glenn Turner, District 6 is it or 5? I can't read the number.
So I'm a resident here, my grandson, my kids went to school here, high school, grandsons, grandparents.
Lived here.
I'm a Berkeley old timer.
You might say my roots go deep and I'm very disappointed that we don't have the robust.
We have lots of intentions.
We have lots of virtue signaling, but I don't see actual output, actual outcomes.
We say we have fewer homeless people, but frankly, I just feel like you start to just clarify what agenda am I addressing on the consent calendar.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Sorry, I'm not used to speaking before your council.
This is one of my first times.
But I feel very strongly about this.
I had a schizophrenic daughter and services have been very poor.
I work with family advocates for the seriously mentally ill.
This program is not a bad idea, but it doesn't have the transparency or the community family and mainly the community input.
So this shouldn't be just something that someone off the cuff says we're going to do this.
The city manager has taken off over a lot of the responsibilities that used to be in the Berkeley mental health division.
But suddenly the homeless out stuff is all city managed.
And supposedly the mental health division is not hiring now.
Well, why aren't they getting help from the human resources? Why aren't they getting people? There are people out there.
Lots of the hospitals don't have a lack of staffing.
I would like to see a big community gathering and discussion of this on a consent calendar.
This needs community input and involvement.
Hello.
I'm Dave.
I want to speak in support of item two.
This is the one that prohibits discrimination on the basis of relationship structure, specifically in support of polyamorous relationships and people involved in consensual non-monogamy.
I realize we've been at this a very long time and it's kind of come to a moment of truth here.
I want to thank everybody who has helped us on the council here.
Several of you joined the circus recently.
I want to thank you all for that.
And it's a very emotional day for me seeing this finally come to a peak here.
I realize earlier today that these things sort of go through two phases.
One is the balls in the court of people who are the utopians and visionaries who dream up this sort of a project in the first place.
And then it gets handed to people who, like you, who have to think of how to do this in reality and how is it actually going to affect law enforcement in a particular community, what's going to really happen to people when we actually enact and try to implement this type of a law.
So it's been a very emotional day.
So it's been taken out of our hands of the visionaries, and it's now been put in your hands.
So I ask you, please don't drop it.
I have every confidence that you will handle this well.
Thank you very much.
Good evening.
My name is Paul Blake.
I'm here to address item 14.
I want to begin by saying I'm in agreement with everything that you've heard about that up to now, and that leaves me with a lot of reservations about the program in general.
But unlike people who are willing to let that go any further while you study it more, while commissions study it more, I'm willing to go ahead right now and support it.
I talk to these people who are in the streets constantly.
I have families coming to me saying that they are beset with violence.
They're scared.
They're ripped apart.
Every time they see something in these headlines, they're more worried.
It's time for us to move on this now.
The other problems that were presented, we have to face those now.
We can't wait.
I can't wait for you to make up your minds about things.
We're currently running a special care unit that is dreadful.
We went ahead and we did it, but it is dreadful at this point.
And it may turn out that this item 14 may also be headed for that.
But I'm willing to take a stand now and fight for it.
And I'm urging you to take a stand now and fight for it to avoid any more tragedies and to treat the people that it's impacting with compassion and dignity.
It's ripping people apart.
Thank you very much.
First is to item 2.
I recall at the Council Agenda Committee meeting, there was an item 14.
I'm going to go ahead and move on to item 14, where Council Member Wengraf was a sponsor.
On item 14, on item 14, yes, absolutely, go ahead with it.
These are existing providers.
These are the people who are already going out on the streets.
Let's try this model again.
I'm going to go ahead and move on to item 14.
I'm going to go ahead and move ahead.
It's really badly needed.
One of the issues that's a problem, though, is also the community.
You have many people in the community, and I don't know how education is going to be built into this, who are just extremely intolerant of anyone who has serious mental health issues or is homeless and they don't know how to deal with that.
I'm going to go ahead and move on to item 14.
I'm going to go ahead and move forward.
If we can please not have any side conversations.
If you'd like to have a conversation, please briefly step outside.
Thank you.
There is such low tolerance for people who are different, and these people on the streets are suffering in their own way.
We also have to work with educating the community.
I believe that, again, we should move forward.
Council should also be making recommendations to the county on the care court process so that it's clear who's going to be prioritized for the care courts.
This shouldn't be something that just comes down from the county on us.
We want to make sure that they're prioritizing properly our persons in Berkeley.
There was a comment made about a Berkeley mental health not hiring.
That's their decision.
It has nothing to do with HR.
It's because of Prop 1 that they don't know how Prop 1 is going to impact on their services and possibly they might be moving people around so they don't want to do anything.
Thank you.
Good evening.
I want to thank Council Member Hahn and Bartlett for their emergency proposal this evening based on the consent of the members of the Council.
I just want to share over the last few years I've had the incredible good fortune to participate and witness mostly various of the people that this measure seeks to support.
They are mentors to children.
They organize events in the community all in their own time, often paying out of their own pocket after having done a full day's work.
Many of the mentors that I know who are here to support them, they don't live in Berkeley anymore, but they still love the city so deeply that they come here in the evening hours, in the weekends, deeply, deeply committed.
But this is all volunteer work and it's not fully sustainable.
I've also seen the kids who look up to them, who credit them for still being in school, for actually passing grades, for being able to comport themselves well in the schools, against all odds at times.
They look up to these mentors in ways that, well, I don't need it in the same way, but I wish I could have had a mentor like that.
They love and care that these mentors show the men and women who are doing this day in and day out.
They look into these kids' eyes, see if they need food, and then they buy it.
Some time ago I mentioned to somebody that we can't probably know how many kids in the school district play yellow, but how many school children in the school district go to bed hungry.
We don't actually have the data to figure that out.
But in the community, we know.
In the community, these mentors actually do see these kids and do know when they go to bed hungry, and they make sure that if they can, this doesn't have to happen.
So thank you very deeply for the support.
I think this is the beginning of a collaboration, community-city collaboration.
Thank you so much.
≫ Thank you.
≫ Good evening, mayor and council.
My name is Logan Bowie and I'm a resident of Berkeley as well as a certified paralegal.
I graduated from Merritt College to get the paralegal certificate.
But regarding item 14 on the consent items, I just wanted to advise a piece of literature that I've been reading called conservatorship inside California's system of coercion and care for mental illness by Columbia University Press.
And clearly this issue affects a lot of people.
So it's just a good read.
There you go.
Thank you.
≫ Are there any other members of the public here in person who wish to address the consent calendar? If not, we'll go to speakers on Zoom.
I see we have two raised hands on Zoom on the consent calendar.
We're only taking public comments on the consent calendar.
So Balark is our first speaker.
Please forgive my pronunciation of your name.
≫ No, that is perfect.
Can you hear me? Hello? ≫ We can hear you, yes.
≫ Hi, I'm Balark.
I'm with twice resident of Berkeley.
Once when I was in college and once now back that I moved from San Francisco.
A lot of big causes here.
It seems like my first meeting.
I just want to speak towards item number 20.
That's the speed bump situation on Russell Street.
I know it's a small thing by comparison, but this is something we can actually solve, possibly even today.
It's next to an archery street of Ashby and with more traffic there.
People spill over and drive on to Russell.
I know there's a fear that if Russell asks for more speed bumps than other streets might, too, but would that necessarily be a bad thing? Would we not want to be seen as more of a bicycle and pedestrian-friendly streets and lessen things like the event that took place on Halloween when a trick-or-treater got run over just down the street from us? Thank you very much.
All right.
We'll go to Kelsey Oakert.
Hi there.
Can you hear me? Yes.
Thank you.
I'm going to speak something related to action.
Item 21, the budget.
My name is Kelsey.
We're not on the budget.
We're still on the calendar.
Oh, okay.
Please hold your comments until we get to the budget.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
We'll go to the next item.
Item 22, the budget.
I'm going to speak something related to action.
Item 22, the budget.
My name is Kelsey Oakert.
We're not on the budget.
We're still on the calendar.
Okay.
Please hold your comments until we get to the budget.
Thank you.
Okay.
Thank you.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We have a lot of questions from friends and neighbors in our coalition.
And as you have already heard, these are really busy streets.
We have numerous schools.
Sylvia Mendez and Malcolm X are all within walking distance.
With Kim King.
Ashby is like a huge artery right down the street and cars are constantly just running past us.
We are working with both north-south and east-west on just like ignoring the stop sign.
And we've really, it's been clear to us, we've all been neighbors for more than 10 years.
It's clear to us that we need something more than just those stop signs.
They're not working.
And people, there have been too many near misses and we don't want to have to wait until something tragic happens, something more tragic.
So thank you for co-sponsoring this.
And that's all.
Thanks so much.
Thank you.
Okay.
This is the last call for public comment on the consent calendar.
If you would like to speak to a consent item, please raise your hand at this time.
Okay.
This will be the last speaker we will recognize.
Cindy Augsdust should now be able to speak.
Hi there.
Thank you for letting us speak.
Can you hear me? Yes.
I'm a neighbor.
I live one door down from King and Russell.
I'm a member of the coalition for safety on King and Russell.
And I'd like to echo the comments of others and add some more ideas.
Maybe it's because of the nature of the intersection.
We have a T-shaped intersection where Russell is a straight through street.
And King is the intersecting street.
For this reason, I believe that drivers are not, drivers are not, they're not wanting to stop.
They just see it as a straightaway.
Even drivers that stop, they will smile at you and they will go right through.
They will cruise through.
One hour ago I came home from working at a Berkeley public school.
I'm a teacher.
I work at Berkeley adult school.
I have two children that go to elementary school one block away at Malcolm X.
One hour ago I came home with my child in the car.
I saw eight bicycles at that intersection.
And I witnessed four cars go through that intersection.
Each car slowed, did not stop, and cruised through.
None of those cars made a complete stop.
This is very typical of that intersection.
It's the nature of the intersection.
For this reason, the neighbors believe that we need an environmental traffic calming measure.
Environmental meaning not a physical directive, a sign.
Something that compels people to stop.
Such as a speed bump or a circle.
But obviously a speed bump would make more sense on a T-shaped street.
So I'm going to leave it at that.
That's the nature of the intersection.
It compels people.
Thank you.
Okay.
That completes public comment on the consent calendar.
I'll bring it back and say with respect to item 20, the request for consideration of a speed bump at Russell and King.
Russell is a bicycle boulevard.
I have had a near accident riding my bike on Russell Street.
And I know many people who live in that neighborhood also face the same issues.
So I'm going to leave it at that.
I think it's important to look at better solutions to improve safety on this intersection.
Thank you for bringing this forward.
I want to see if I can be added as a cosponsor.
Certainly.
Okay.
Thank you.
Briefly on item 14, I really appreciate the comments that people made about how we can improve our mental health division in Berkeley.
I think those are all very relevant and important points.
I'm going to move on to item 15, which is the next step in our plan.
We're going to be looking for 5 to 10 people who are frequently calling for our fire department personnel and specialized care unit and other resources for services to implement a friendship or care team.
Basically to have an outreach team that will do whole person care and work with those people and to be a constant bridge to them.
I think that's a good thing.
It augments the existing resources we have.
And I want to thank Miss Pritchett, you're out of order.
We had this came to us from actual parents of clients who brought this idea forward.
And I want to thank former council member Linda Mayo who has been working with my office on the issues.
Miss Pritchett, please stop interrupting the meeting.
You're not allowed to.
You're not allowed.
You can talk to yourself, but don't talk loudly so you're interrupting the meeting.
Okay.
I don't want to have to take have us take a recess, please.
Let's proceed.
So I want to thank former council member Mayo for her work and her work with parents of clients who brought this issue forward.
The consultation with parents of clients with Berkeley mental health and with service providers and as part of the process of developing this pilot program, we will engage mental health staff.
We will engage the mental health commission.
We will engage service providers.
So I want to thank everyone for the comments, and I think it's important we take the step tonight to begin this work.
I'll move the consent calendar.
Okay.
Is there any further discussion? Please call the roll on the consent calendar.
Council member Hannon.
Yes.
Council member Kastorwany.
Yes.
Council member Kappelin is absent.
Bartlett.
Yes.
Nguyen.
Yes.
Munapahra.
Yes.
Humbert.
Yes.
And mayor Arrigat.
Yes.
Okay.
The consent calendar is approved.
We now proceed to the action items.
Item 21, item 22, item 23, item 24, item 25, 26 proposed budget and public hearing number one.
I just asked the city manager if it was okay for us to go first to public comment on the budget because I know people have been waiting for a couple hours now to speak.
Can I get a show of hands how many people here in the audience would like to speak to item 21 and if anyone on Zoom would like to speak to item 22.
Okay.
Okay.
So pursuant to our rules if there are more than 10 speakers wishing to address an agenda item, we will allot one minute per speaker, but you can yield your minute to another speaker for a maximum of four minutes.
So if you have like a representative of an organization, you can yield your minute to that representative for a maximum of four minutes.
So if you want to spend a few more seconds completing your thought, we will give you that opportunity as well.
So we'll go first to in-person speakers.
Mr.
Kainer, would you like to start? Hi, John Kainer, CEO of downtown Berkeley association and downtown neighbor.
First want to urge your support of the merchandise measure for the Aurora theater.
We need to keep them going.
They're key to the arts community.
They're key to the arts community.
They're key to the arts community.
You've heard from a number of other people from our group.
And then I want to particularly talk about safe city connect.
You should have received our letter from Berkeley alliance of business organizations, the chamber, visit Berkeley, DBA, telegraph avenue, North Shattuck, Solana, West Berkeley and university avenue board just added to the name.
And I just want to say this is an affordable, scalable security program after this pilot program.
San Francisco is 1500 cameras.
Oakland is 200 and is growing.
And the cost is only 3,000 per each additional camera.
We can do private-public partnership on that.
I just have a comment, anonymous comment from somebody, and she didn't want to be identified.
And if I can, I don't know, can anybody lend me a minute or half a minute to read this anonymous comment? It's quite touching.
But if we don't have time, that's okay.
What? Well, it's just talking about the issues that they face in the downtown.
Okay.
Okay.
Thank you.
A local 29-year-old woman on Saturday newly moved to Berkeley had just finished having coffee with a friend.
She paused for 10 seconds near the southwest corner of Addison and Shattuck to check her map.
A 40-year-old male wearing dark clothing approached her and yelled obscenities at her and her friend.
You'll be the first bitch to die.
I'm going to fuck you up so much.
The man then swung a fist at her stopping just beside her head.
She could feel the fist near her head but did not make contact.
She avoided eye contact, slowly stepped away while the man continued to push her down.
The man then called the police report.
We need these video cameras.
We need to provide protection for our merchants, visitors, workers to discourage crimes and then also prosecute when they happen.
Thank you so much.
Good evening, Mayor, Eric Gein, council, city manager.
My name is Chuck Fanning.
I'm a founder and board member of Berkeley Food Network.
I want to thank you for your support and I yield my time to our executive director, Andrew Crispin.
Hello, council and mayor.
My name is Debra Lewis and I'm the board chair down and I'm Debra Lewis and I'm the board chair at the Berkeley Food Network.
Thank you for your support and I yield my time to our executive director, Andrew Crispin.
Mayor, city council, city manager, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak tonight.
I'm Andrew Crispin.
I'm the one that time was yielded to.
I'm the executive director of the Berkeley Food Network.
Since the Berkeley Food Network's founding in 2016, the Berkeley Food Network has grown to provide food assistance to thousands of community members each week.
Our diverse distribution programs fill the gaps and social safety net to ensure our neighbors have access to food.
Because of the support that Berkeley Food Network has received from the city in the forms of subsidized rent and the recent $200,000 allocation, BFN has become a reliable source of food for many Berkeley residents.
BFN could not be in this position without the support from the city.
On behalf of our community, I want to acknowledge and thank all of you for the support.
Berkeley Food Network plays an integral role in many Berkeley organizations.
These organizations rely and benefit from BFN's food and warehouse to support their own communities within Berkeley.
To name a few of these organizations, Berkeley Adult School, Berkeley City College, UC Basic Needs Center, Berkeley Food Pantry, Berkeley Youth Alternatives, Berkeley Unified School District, Berkeley Public Schools Fund, City of Berkeley's Aging Services, City of Berkeley's Health, Housing, Community Services, Dorothy Day House, Good Shepherd Episcopal Church, Multicultural Institute, Oregon Park Senior Apartments, Redwood Gardens, Strawberry Creek Lodge, The Bread Project, The Covenant Church, Women's Drop-In Center.
Thanks to strategic initiatives and investments by Mayor Arreguin and this council, recent reports have indicated that homelessness in Berkeley has nearly halved due to increased funding for housing and support for the unhoused.
Through food assistance, Berkeley Food Network is also providing homelessness prevention, supporting community health, and creating slack in the budgets of our vulnerable neighbors.
As the council prepares this next year's budget, it is critical that you use this opportunity to address historically high levels of food insecurity head on.
Guaranteed funding for food assistance will ensure well-equipped organizations like Berkeley Food Network are able to support the needs of the community.
The Berkeley Food Network has become the largest food assistance organization in northern Alameda County.
As we chart our path to become a resolute pillar of the nonprofit community, we will only become more compassionate, more impactful, and more supportive in helping our neighbors when they need it most.
I urge the council to provide the Berkeley Food Network with ongoing multiyear funding of $150,000 per our community agency development grant request.
To guarantee uninterrupted service to Berkeley residents and our distribution partners.
This partnership is the best opportunity to make a significant impact in reducing food insecurity in a dignified way.
Thank you.
Hi, there.
Thanks for taking comments.
So my name is Mauricio Garza, and I'm a longtime Berkeley resident, and I have a background in economics, and I had a chance to volunteer with the Berkeley Food Network over the past several years.
It's been a remarkable experience.

Segment 4

Segment 5

Segment 6

Segment 7

that has been earned on those investments.
Our ending balance is about 19 million.
Our fiscal year 24 contribution is close to 5 million, which is close to our goal.
The goal being a contribution of about 5.5 million annually.
Again, we're able to have a higher contribution in fiscal year 24 through a combination of several strategies.
We've pre-funded the trust of about 2 million, and we've also utilized the council fiscal policy that a portion of our investment revenue that came in over our baseline also contributed to the trust.
And we also allocated the savings by making our CalPERS pension payments in advance in July, rather than spreading it out over quarterly payments.
That savings, which is typically about 1.5 million, also is allocated to the trust.
So our trust balance as of fiscal year 24 estimated to be just under 25 million.
That would be a 75% of our goal.
Again, if we assumed a contribution rate of about 5.5 million starting in fiscal year 2019, our balance would be 33 million.
So again, we've made significant progress and toward the trust.
We have a situation in terms of our budget where our pension costs have really grown significantly in fiscal year 25.
However, we are also looking at not pre-funding the trust in fiscal year 25 or 26 like we did in previous years to help balance the budget.
So again, looking at our short-term and long-term needs related to the use of the trust.
Next slide, please.
And then general fund reserves, of course, that's also a possibility in terms of using the reserves.
Again, a lot of our projected increases are ongoing and related to operations.
General fund reserves particularly are a stability and catastrophic reserve.
They have really been used in previous times for more of those natural disasters or other phenomena such as the pandemic.
However, there is language also related to economic conditions.
But this is our snapshot, excuse me, snapshot of our general fund contribution for fiscal year 24.
Again, we've used a series of strategies related to the reserves.
We have pre-funded the reserve.
We've used the excess equity calculation as part of the reserve policy.
And again, we used the council policy related to investments and a third of our investment over our baseline going into the reserves.
This resulted in a contribution of about 7.5 million to the stability reserve, 6 million to the catastrophic reserve.
This also has achieved the goal of council replenishing the 11 million that was borrowed from the reserve for the pandemic.
Our current percentage reserves about 20%.
Our goal is 30% of revenue by 2027.
So again, making some progress on the reserves.
We again will not be recommending pre-funding the reserves in fiscal year 25 or 26 to help balance the budget.
Next slide, please.
And then again, in conclusion, as previously mentioned, there will be continued opportunity for public engagement on the budget for the council and for members of the public.
We did have a series of meetings with the Budget and Finance Policy Committee in May 8th, May 9th, and May 13th.
Those included departmental presentations, some initial discussion on measure P and U1 and discussion on balancing the budget.
And those materials and recordings are available on the city website.
We do have a meeting tomorrow to continue to talk about funding requests and budget balancing discussions, a meeting on June 4th with council and adoption on June 25th.
And that concludes the presentation.
I'm available to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
Thank you so very much for the extensive presentations that are walking us through revenues, expenditures, the proposed baseline budget.
We took public comments.
So colleagues, it's now in order for us to take any questions or comments.
We will also have another budget discussion on June 4th, and then obviously the budget vote on the 25th.
So anyone have any questions or comments? I've seen a lot of this previously because it's been presented to the Budget and Finance Policy Committee.
And I asked my questions at that time.
So I will defer.
Council Member Caselwani? Thank you very much, Mr.
Mayor.
Thank you, Ms.
Friedrichson, for the lengthy presentation.
Thank you, Madam City Manager, for your opening remarks.
It is getting rather late and I think we have some other items.
So I just wanted to clarify a couple of things for myself and the public.
One, Madam City Manager, when you talked about pausing until we have a clearer budget picture, when do you expect that to occur? And when do you think you would feel more comfortable authorizing new expenditures beyond what is proposed here? I would propose that a pause would take effect from July until the year-end close, which would be around November of 2024.
So we would come back to Council with the AO1.
That's when you'll know how the year ends, this previous year ends.
That's when you'll know the results of any ballot measures and the impacts or non-impacts of those.
You'll also be finished up with your labor negotiations.
You will have all of your numbers in front of you and it is a better opportunity.
We may also know if the feds will increase, will lower rates, interest rates.
So that could also push us into higher revenues.
So the timing of it all comes after the budget.
So we're pretty clear that we can bring you a balanced budget, but anything beyond the streets measure, as you've seen on the Performa, anything beyond that is going to require budget strategies that help us close the budget.
Any more spending will require additional budget strategies to close the budget.
Okay, thank you very much for that, Madam City Manager.
And I also wanted to just emphasize what Ms.
Friedrichson had presented around the personnel costs.
And maybe if it's possible to bring that slide back, I believe the pension costs that are known, well, maybe I need the slide.
I think it was 9.8 million.
This is the slide that has the expenditures expenditures in descending order by their percentage.
So, well, while we try to find that, so the pension costs are growing, the salaries and wages are growing.
I had noted that both of those were exceeding 9 million.
I think those were the two largest costs.
And if we can't find that slide, the slide that I am seeing is just the revenue and expenditure trends.
So this is really the takeaway that expenditures are growing at a rate of 15% in fiscal year 24, 25.
And then the revenues are only increasing by 3%.
And a lot of that is driven by, as the City Manager alluded to, high interest rates that are affecting the property transactions, which is a big source of revenue for us.
So that's really the takeaway.
And I know that you showed one budget balancing measure, which is a holiday on depositing into the Workers' Compensation Fund.
It looks like, from what you had said, we could just barely afford that because our projection was that the fund balance was right at what we expect the cost to be.
Did I catch that? Is that accurate? Council Member Castellano, the estimated amount that we should have to cover our liabilities, again, with 80% confidence level, was that 46 million mark.
And yes, if we take the holiday and again, based on other uses of the word holiday, and based on other uses of the worker compensation, we're at about 46 million right now.
So we would cover our projected liabilities at 80% barring a new actuarial study that will be forthcoming.
But there are multiple balancing strategies.
So we talked about using fund balance.
We talked about taking a holiday in Workers' Comp, for pension, the increased pension costs using the reserves, and then holding off on funding the reserves.
So those are all- Yes, I'm gonna get to those, Madam City Manager, but thank you.
So, but what was presented tonight was only using the workers' compensation.
Well, actually, there were other things suggested, but the final slide sort of only used the workers' compensation holiday to balance.
So I just wanted to call that out, that it looks like that is something that we could do and still have the ability to continue to make those payments.
So I just wanted to note that.
And then I did want to touch on some of those other strategies, Madam City Manager, that you were talking about.
So the first one I wanted to touch on was the salary savings target.
So increasing that.
Was that covered in this presentation? Actually, I don't recall if it was.
It was definitely covered in the Budget Committee.
And you're correct, Council Member Kaswani, that is a strategy that we presented to Budget and Finance, and that we'll be continuing to discuss tomorrow.
And it was oversight that we did not have that on the slide, but that is the area that we're looking at as well.
Okay, so are you prepared to explain, Ms.
Friedrichson, how much more we could increase the salary savings target, or should we save that discussion for tomorrow? I could have that discussion with Budget and Finance tomorrow.
Again, it's gonna be somewhat incremental.
We already have 10 million loaded into the budget each fiscal year.
So again, some of the departments that we may potentially consider increasing the salary savings target for, for example, our public safety, their vacancy rates are offset by overtime.
So again, we're trying to find that appropriate balance there.
And again, really sort of looking through what departments may have vacancies above that 8%.
Again, being mindful that our Human Resources Department is doing really good work, and there are some departments that are filling their vacancies.
So again, it's sort of averaging that out.
So I can continue to sort of refine that and discuss with Budget Committee.
Okay, yeah, I think what I would want to understand better is if we do increase that target, we don't have to do the full amount that was floated the other day at the Budget Committee, but what does that entail? Does that involve hiring freeze of certain positions? Does that involve, especially with the public safety departments like police and fire, how are they impacted? I think that's what I'd like to understand better.
And how much more do we think we can assume without having a hiring freeze, for instance, and without touching police and fire and other departments that are doing a lot of work that's beyond what we expect on the natural to occur.
I think it would be helpful to just understand a little bit more of what we might be able to do there on the salary savings target.
And let me say about some of the other suggestions, like using the Section 115 Trust, which is supposed to be our piggy bank for pension costs, if I understand correctly, to pay the pension costs.
And I would like to see us not dip into things like Section 115 Trust and reserves, because while we have a budget problem, I don't feel that our current situation is like the pandemic situation.
And we have slightly higher interest rates.
This is just part of the economic cycle.
So I'd like to see us be able to manage this with the level of prudence and responsibility measures that we have put in place that some of my colleagues have led on.
So that's what I would say there.
Like I'm a little bit less comfortable with Section 115 use and the use of reserves.
And I'll note the use of reserves, what was floated the other day was not even that much.
So it seems like it's not really worth it to dip into that.
And then I think the other issue on the other side of the ledger with expenditures obviously, I don't know how much the budget items total.
I think we have an amount.
Oh, I think they total, well, I don't even know if we have a total on the city council referral.
Someone can total that up, but it's multi-million.
I believe it's around 14 million or so in the first for fiscal year 25.
Oh, okay.
So it's a number.
23.6 million for both fiscal years.
Oh, okay, okay.
So, and I think Ms.
Fredrickson said 14 million for one of them for the first year, perhaps.
So I think at the outset, we know that we just don't have the resources to fund all of that or most of that or half of that, right? We have to make very hard choices.
And I appreciate that the city manager has come to us this evening with, I just wanna clarify what we got tonight is an update to the tier one, two, three and four, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, and 10.
And I'm asking you to actually say that within tier one, there are certain things that are mandates that you have built in to pay for, correct? But not the other tier one that you didn't consider as mandates.
Is that accurate? Can you repeat that? Because I think I'm gonna miss it.
So to clarify, okay, I'm in the 141 page document from the city manager, but some of them now say mandate.
So are the mandated lines built in? Nothing is built in.
Oh, wow.
Yeah, tier one has not been funded.
But I, okay, but you didn't fund even, for instance, some of these say mandate, like HHCS mandate to do labor, city's labor standards and workforce development.
Like that, for instance, that position, that's not in, what was- It's not built into the baseline budget.
Oh, okay.
So we have to fund the mandates in tier one.
Because it's like the council policy, or you have to pass a policy.
But yes, you'd have to fund the mandate.
Okay, because, for example, just so my colleagues know, like, for instance, the fair work week, which applies to the city, is listed here as mandate in tier one, but that's not in- The baseline.
So I think what we can do, or maybe our staff can help us with this, is calculate how much the mandates in tier one cost.
And we'll start to talk about that at tomorrow's budget committee.
And then that will require looking at the salary savings a little more to see how do we fund the mandates, at least.
I think that's a starting point.
We can also look at the mandates and say, well, do we believe that they are all, in fact, mandates? I mean, that we can also try that as well.
And there may be some things on here that are not listed as mandate that we believe are mandates.
I don't want to misuse that word.
Say that my priorities are mandates, but, you know, because I, you know, I, anyhow.
Okay, so I think that's all I have for now.
And I hope I made a little bit, provide a little bit of clarity of what I'd like to discuss tomorrow.
So having some clarity on the total around the mandates and the salary savings, I think those to me look like the two areas where we have to try to look more closely if we want to fund some of these things without dipping into some of those other solutions that were suggested.
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you.
Any other questions or comments this time? Vice Mayor Weingraf? Yeah, thanks.
I'm not on the budget committee, so I haven't been following this as closely as some of my colleagues.
But when we are in a crunch like this, do we have any policies in place, for example, like no new positions? Yes, you have policies in place.
Your policy, your fiscal policy for positions, it's no new positions without new revenue.
So it's a tie to a revenue.
So if you want to add a position, you must have a revenue stream to cover that position at.
Other than the general fund? Other than the general fund.
So you would need to have, it could be a new revenue coming into the general fund.
So it could be general fund dollars, but it would be new revenue for new position.
Okay.
Not existing revenue.
Okay.
I just want to say that I'm generally opposed to going into the reserves to balance the budget.
I'll just put that out there for now.
The reserves are kind of sacred in my book and they shouldn't be used for that purpose.
So that's it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Well, this is going to be challenging.
I appreciate the fact that the city manager and staff have already presented some potential balancing strategies.
And I think some of these, I've gone over the list and I have many questions, some of which I'll ask tomorrow and some of which I'll send via email.
Some of the tier one recommendations we have to do, honestly.
They're either mandates or the things that are really essential, like health and safety, like the upgrades to the facilities at the animal shelter, for example.
Yes.
There are just some things that we have to do.
We don't have a choice.
So, you know, in looking at that spreadsheet, the total number of tier one requests total $12.9 million, 6.4 million in FY25 and 6.5 million in FY26.
That doesn't account for our council referrals, which are, you know, substantially more.
So this is gonna be very challenging.
And I think we're gonna have to look very closely at all the totality of requests and really think about what is really needed now and what could be potentially delayed until the November AO or even FY26.
But I just have to say, there are some things we're gonna have.
I think this really gets to the issue we're gonna have to talk about at Budget and Finance is what are the things that we have to fund now? Meaning, can we get these things, these projects done now, these positions done now? I think that's a consideration, the timeliness of certain things as we're considering this.
But the reality is that we just can't fund the baseline.
I'll note that includes the 9 million for streets and not do some of these other things, which are actually really important operational requests.
So it's gonna be very challenging.
Yes.
But we'll work hard over the next few weeks to really look at these things in their totality and think about the timing of the urgency, the importance and the timeliness of a specific request.
Yes.
Mayor, if I just may make one small clarification.
In terms of utilizing the reserves, and I agree, really, that's sacred.
We don't wanna use reserves.
However, I wanna be really clear, that the reserves, the 115 Trust is used for times when your pension costs exceed your current pay go.
And we're exceeding that by $9 million.
So it's hit our budget so hard this year.
That's what the Pension Trust was set up for, was to help smooth our costs.
I just wanna just separate from the Stability Reserve or the Catastrophic Reserve.
That one is totally different.
Okay.
Thank you, Henry Oikami, if you're on the call for the brilliant idea of creating the Section 115 Trust.
Okay.
Any other questions or comments from City Council members? We'll be taking this up next week as well.
And thank staff for the presentation.
With that, we'll proceed to the next agenda item, which is item 22.
We're sitting and adopting the Environmental Health Division Fee Schedule.
Is there a brief staff presentation or are staff available for questions? Staff is available for questions, thank you.
Okay.
Colleagues, any questions on item 22? If not, I'll open the public hearing and we'll move on to the next agenda item.
So, again, item 22, we're sitting and adopting the Environmental Health Division Fee Schedule.
If you wish to speak on this item, please come forward.
Seeing no in-person speakers, are there any speakers on Zoom on item 22? If so, please raise your hand.
Okay.
While Ms.
Morawieck is coming up to speak, I'll ask, are there any speakers on Zoom who wish to address item 22? Okay, Ms.
Morawieck.
Limitations on the revenue you have available, so I'm gonna speak in favor of all of these fees.
And I mean, we need to find money from somewhere, right? Unless we can pull it from some of the consultants that we spend money on, but I'm gonna speak in favor of this and I'm speaking in favor of the building fee later.
I don't know if this is an opportune time to mention it, but do we bring in parking revenue? Because there isn't the type of enforcement that there could be to bring in the revenue.
Another thing is we're not enforcing the no smoking downtown.
If we're gonna pass these laws, we should enforce them or we shouldn't pass them at all.
And there is a lot of smoking that goes downtown and by bus stops and there are no citations being handed out.
I'll speak to you more later.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We'll go to speakers on Zoom.
Former Councilor Davila, do you wish to speak on item 22? Okay, I don't see any other raised hands.
Vice Mayor Weingraf.
Yes, I'd like to move.
Let's move to the close public hearing first.
Okay.
Move to close public hearing.
Second.
Okay.
We don't have any members on Zoom, so I can ask for, is there unanimous consent to close the public hearing? Okay.
That motion carries.
Vice Mayor Weingraf.
Yes, I'd like to move to adopt a resolution rescinding Resolution 69891-NS, which established the current environmental health fee schedule and adopt a new fee schedule as recommended by staff.
Second.
Seconded by Councilor Humbert.
Colleagues, any additional questions or comments? Councilor Luna Parra.
Oh, okay.
Okay, unless there's any further discussion, the motion is to approve the staff recommendation on item 22.
Is there any objection to all of this being recorded as I? Okay, hearing no objection, that motion carries unanimously.
Thank you.
We'll now proceed to item 23, the fee increase for the Senior Center Facility Security Senior Center Facility Rental Security Deposit.
So this is the fees associated with renting our facilities at our senior centers.
Is there any comments from staff before we open the public hearing? No, Mr.
Mayor, our staff are here to answer any questions that you may have.
Okay, I will now, well, we've already opened the public hearing on item 23, so we'll go to any in-person speakers.
So my only comment on this is, are we moving money from one place in the city to another place in the city? Because as I recall, do we not pay for the rooms for commission meetings, for example, and other city activities at the senior center? So by raising this, are we taking money from another city budget and just moving it around? If not, I'm in favor of all fees that can help the revenue, but I think that's an issue.
Okay, are there any other in-person speakers on item 23? Seeing none, we'll go to speakers on Zoom.
Are there any members of the public on Zoom wishing to speak on item 23, the proposed fee increase to the Senior Center Facility Rental Security Deposit? If so, please raise your hand.
Seeing no raised hands, I'll move to close the public hearing.
Second.
Seconded.
Is there any objection to closing public hearing? Hearing no objection, that motion carries unanimously.
Vice Mayor Weingraf? Yeah, this is not an increase in a rental fee.
It's an increase in the security deposit.
So it's not really.

Segment 8

to the city to provide additional services to the facility.
We're not going to be increasing revenue to the city unless there's some damage done to the facility that needs to be corrected.
I just want to clarify that.
And with that, I'd like to move approval of the staff recommendation for number 23.
Is there a second? I'll second for purposes of discussion.
Thank you for that clarification.
All right.
With that, I'd like to move approval of the staff recommendation for item 23.
Is there any objection to all this being recorded as I? Okay.
Hearing no objection, that motion carries unanimously.
Okay.
We'll now proceed to item 24.
This is a public hearing on selected sports field fee increases.
Any comments from staff on this item? Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Staff are here to answer any questions that the council or the public may have.
I'm going to call the public hearing to order.
I'm going to call the public hearing to order.
The public hearing is open on item 24.
Is there an order for members of the public to speak on item 24, which are the proposed fee increases for use of select sports fields? So I did not read the item.
So I don't know if this will impact at all on low-income persons and organizations that want to discourage the use of our sports areas for low-income organizations and persons, especially youth.
So I'm only raising that question.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Are there any additional speakers here in person at 1231 Addison? Okay.
If not, are there any speakers on Zoom on item 24? Seeing no raised hands, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.
Second.
Okay.
Is there any objection from the council to close the public hearing? Hearing no objection, that motion carries unanimously.
And I'll make a motion.
Well, first, Mr.
Ferris or anyone from Parks, Recreation and Waterfront, there was a public comment with respect to how these fee increases may impact lower-income users.
And I'm wondering if staff have any comments on that.
So just briefly, so these increases are at both the Tom Bates Regional Sports Complex and the Harrison Park.
These are the two fields that function as a self-sustaining fund.
And COVID was really hard on that fund, and the parks tax and other city funds picked up the balance for a while.
And so we're trying to bring while other cities have been increasing their fees, we're trying to bring us back into the norm.
Currently, our field reservation policy doesn't have, you know, a lot of the youth groups are non-profits.
They're all kind of non-profits.
And so we don't have any additional reductions in price for any of the non-profits.
But we do, our youth fees still are probably the lowest or some of the lowest in the Bay Area.
So a lot of times we've been increasing adult fees and keeping the youth fees low.
So if you'll review our fees here and the scale throughout the Bay Area, we're still, if not the lowest, right down at the bottom in terms of fields for non-profit youth.
So, yeah, I'll just note that the proposed fee increases for adults were more substantial.
And with respect to the use of the Tom Bates fields, this goes to direct maintenance, right? Correct.
Yeah.
So, you know, there's a need to make sure we have adequate resources to maintain the field so it's usable by all users.
So I'll make a motion to approve the staff recommendation for item 24.
Second.
Okay.
Colleagues, any additional questions or comments? If not, the motion is to approve the staff recommendation for item 24.
Is there any objection to all being recorded as aye on that motion? Hearing no objection, that motion carries unanimously.
Okay.
We'll now proceed to item 25, proposed changes to the planning department fee schedule.
Any comments from the director of planning and development on this item? If not, the motion is to approve the staff recommendation for item 25.
If not, the motion is to approve the staff recommendation for item 25.
Any additional questions that you may have? Okay.
Colleagues, any questions on item 25? Okay.
The public hearing is open.
Are there any public comments on item 25, the proposed changes to the planning department fee schedule? I would definitely support this because I believe upon the first inspection, there's no fee.
There's no fee for the inspection of the property.
There are no fees where the property owner has not done the repairs that need to be done.
They're not charged for the initial inspection where that is.
So there should be a punitive element to it.
And these are absolutely fees that should be increased if the property owner has not done the repairs that need to be done.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Are there any other in person speakers on item 25.
Seeing none are there any speakers on zoom.
Wishing to address and 25 the proposed changes the plan apartment be scheduled.
If so please raise your hand.
Seeing no raised hands will close the public hearing on item 25.
Seeing none.
Hearing no objection that motion cares and mostly the public is closed.
And on to item 25 colleagues any additional questions or comments.
It's not on the staff recommendation from 25 second.
Okay any further discussion.
Okay if not is there any objection to all the speaker court is I on item 25.
Hearing no objection that motion cares and honestly okay I see it's not on the agenda.
Miss Ross you.
So I was mentioned earlier about parking revenue.
And if this is a source of revenue for us I just want to share my frustrating experience today.
And South Berkeley there were three vehicles blocking a bus stop.
And I saw the bus go.
I mean, one of the buses just stopped.
And the bus stop was blocked.
So I was there for almost an hour.
And I try at one point one of the vehicles left.
But so I I called the 9159 hundred number.
I was on a hold for what seemed like forever I think this was almost like an hour altogether.
And then when someone came on they said decided to transfer to 311 where I was on a hold for about an hour.
And the police department came on at the same time and 311 said they didn't know why the police department non emergency had transferred to 311 so that she went put me back on hold and got her supervisor who came back and said they would call the police department back.
Now this is a source of revenue.
I mean, this was an obvious obstruction it wasn't just a bus stop.
I mean, I've seen some of these vehicles are flagrantly blocking a bus stop.
I see it all the time by Wells Fargo downtown.
And I think we need to, you know, look for the revenue wherever we can.
I mentioned the no smoking.
I mean, the no smoking doesn't appear to be enforced by the police.
I've seen it all the time.
I've seen it up again by the Wells Fargo almost always see people smoking I've mentioned it to people in the bus driver told me, oh, is that a law here because he said I even see the police smoking here.
And also elsewhere in downtown Berkeley.
I mentioned it at a DBA ambassador said, right, it was no smoking zone, but nobody smoking here.
So, yeah, I think we need to look for the revenue wherever we can.
Thank you.
Are there any other members of the public here in person who wish to speak tonight on the agenda.
Okay, we'll go to speakers on zoom, call it the number ending 500.
Please press star six to mute.
While we're waiting for that person we'll go to Kelly hammock run.
Yes, tonight during the meeting, we lost the captioners record several times, and some of us really depend on being able to see the caption, the captions and depend on the transcript from the meeting.
So I'm going to turn it over to Kelly.
Thank you.
So, I'm going to start with the transcript from the meeting.
So I asked that in the future we make sure that the captioner captioners record and the captions are actually visible for the public throughout the meeting, and I know it's difficult these evenings are long and this has been a particularly long day for all of you.
But I just want to make sure that the meeting should be paused.
When we lose the captions and we lose the captioners record, and we get that straightened out before we resume.
And so I just ask that for the future.
And for the public.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We'll go back to the call with the agenda.
Last week.
Looks like.
Yes, can you hear me.
Yes.
Okay.
I just want to say in the past, Berkeley, city of Berkeley was the Mecca for all shoppers from the Bay Area to shop and that created a great business great sales tax created income for the city business license everything that totally would have been a hundred bucks.
Now it's 60 bucks or 80 bucks or 200 bucks.
He destroyed the business in Berkeley, and I survived 50 years plus, because I managed to work around that.
We need again to bring business back to the Berkeley in fact I had slogan, city of Berkeley created Emeryville by most businesses, starting from Scuttle Lab who left Berkeley because of the extremely high sales tax.
We need to bring business back to the city.
We need to bring business trades to Berkeley back is starting with our business.
Thank you.
Have a good night.
Thank you.
Seeing no other members of public wishing to speak to an item on the agenda on move to adjourn the meeting.
Seconded by Vice Mayor when graph colleagues any objection.