Transcription Metadata

Whisper API Version 1
Generated 2024-10-03 00:19:20 UTC
Archive URI berkeley_ccea2b90-80fe-11ef-ab4b-005056a89546.ogg

Segment 1

1 recording in progress.
Good evening, everybody welcome to the special meeting of the Berkeley City Council or Monday, September 30th, 2024.
We have 1 item on our agenda tonight and that is.
To adopt for the municipal code chapter 13.89 community tenant opportunity to purchase act.
This was introduced by former council member Harrison.
So, before we get started, I'd like to read.
I'd like roll call please.
Okay, council member Kesarwani is.
Currently absent, and she's noticed to be.
Participating remotely, um.
Council member Taplin here.
Bartlett present Tregub present.
On present Wengraf present.
Lunaparra here Humbert present.
And Mayor Arreguin is currently absent.
So, quorum is present and then before we get started, we do need to.
Do the script for.
Council member to participate in the meeting remotely.
So, just briefly, council member is participating in the meeting remotely pursuant to the Brown act is amended by.
Under the just cause justification.
A quorum of the council is participating in person at the physical meeting location that was noticed on the agenda.
Which satisfy satisfies the requirement of the Brown act council member Taplin has notified council need to participate remotely.
And council member Tappan this time, please provide a general description of the circumstances related to your need to appear remotely.
As well, my mother's caregivers tonight, I'm responsible for a minister.
Thank you.
Okay, and a cast member Tappan also please disclose if there are any adults age 18 and older that are in the room with you at your remote location from where you are participating.
In this room, I am currently alone.
Okay, and then council member Tappan will participate through both audio and visual technology.
So we can.
Continue Thank you.
Before we get started, I'd like to.
To read our rules of procedure to allow for full participation by all members of the community and to ensure that important city business is able to be completed.
We ask that all attendees conduct themselves in an orderly manner and respect the rights of others participating in the meeting.
Please be aware that the city council's rules of decorum prohibit the disruption disruption of the orderly conduct of the council meeting.
A summary of these rules is available in the 1 page handout on the table in the rear of the boardroom.
The 1 page handout on the table is available in the 1 page handout on the table in the rear of the boardroom.
Disruptive behavior includes, but it's not limited to shouting, making disruptive noises, creating or participating in a physical disturbance, speaking out of turn or in violation of applicable rules.
Preventing or attempting to prevent others who have the floor from speaking, preventing others from observing the meeting, and preventing others from participating in the council dais without consent.
We ask that you observe these rules so that all members of the public may observe, may observe and participate in tonight's meeting.
So, I don't believe we have a staff presentation on this item, so I think we will go directly to public comment.
Thank you, sir.
I'm sorry.
Do you have any speaker cards for the special meetings? No, no speaker cards and how much time does each speaker have.
Well, the rules prescribe that if there are more than 10 speakers on a topic that time.
Is reduced to 1 minute per speaker.
However, speakers can yield time to each other up to a maximum of 4 minutes for any 1 speaker.
Okay, that looks like more than 10 to me, so you'll each have 1 minute unless you yield your time to another speaker.
So you please line up at this side of the room.
Okay, we'll go to public comment on this item.
Thank you.
Hello, good evening.
Welcome Mr.
City manager so wonderful to have you here with us.
Absolutely.
Yes, to Topa.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I have the time to speak to you, but I do want to thank you for your time.
Obviously, you all know, and there's been 4 new commissioners appointed in the past months to the peace and justice Commission, which is happening in 45 minutes.
So it's curious the timing.
Anyway, please follow council member lead say yes to Topa.
We need this and.
Thank you.
Good evening.
Council members.
My name's Renee Denise.
I'm going to read because I'm very nervous.
I'm going to read because I'm very nervous.
I'm in a situation where I've lived in a building for 13 years.
I operate an in-home daycare out of that building.
And last year it was purchased by someone and I have received 5 eviction notices.
I have been asked to pay additional funds for the parking space where I have daycare furniture.
And it's been a horrific year.
Up and down emotionally, and it looks like she is going to get her way.
In my 1 bedroom unit, she's going to enlarge it to a 3 bedroom unit and move strangers in.
So that means I will be displaced.
I will have to shut down my business and the parents who have counted on me for these years will have to look for other places for their children.
This shouldn't happen to anybody.
Hello, my name is Catherine day.
I'm a resident of Berkeley.
I'm coming up to the 10 year anniversary of living in my apartment in Elmwood.
Um, my, my building is being considered by this as part of the small sites project and that we've been working on this project for a couple of years.
And now we're 95% of the way there and we're just hoping and praying that our landlord doesn't put the house on the market before we're able to make a bid.
And so, as the previous speaker said, it's really just common sense in all of these to support all of the projects.
I've got ongoing work to provide affordable housing in Berkeley by adding this, adding this last step to ensure that things aren't dropped at the last minute through misfortune with fortunes with timing.
So, thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you.
Good evening council members.
My name is Christina old field and I am a member of the planning commission, although I'm not here tonight on behalf of the planning commission.
I'm here on behalf of the city of California.
I'm here on behalf of the city of Berkeley and actually around the state of California.
I'm not here on behalf of any of them tonight.
I'm just here on behalf of myself to urge you to support the ordinance moving forward in whatever manner that may be getting more staff analysis first is fine.
I just want to say that the city of California has put in a little extra time to make a deal happen because they have to leverage funding from multiple sources.
And some of those sources have very stringent requirements to make sure that their dollars are being stretched and put to good use.
So, I just want to say that the city of California has put in a little extra time to make a world of a difference.
Thank you.
Good evening.
My name is Karen.
I'm a 17 year Berkeley resident, and I'm also here speaking on behalf of the United way.
Bay area I, we ask you to consider and to pass the tenant opportunity purchase that I'm really excited about Berkeley's commitment of money to the city of California.
To the small sites program, I've seen this happening with land trusts, and it's really an amazing way to keep long term residents in their homes.
With investments like these, we're paving the way for future purchases and helping to ensure that affordable housing stays in the hands of those who live and thrive here rather than speculative buyers.
Um, I'm living that world right now where my landlord passed last year, and the new landlord is doing everything to sell the building right now.
So, after 17 years, we may not be Berkeley residents anymore.
And if we had a topa in place, I think that my husband and I, along with some friends could probably put together enough money to purchase the property.
We've been caring for for 17 years.
Good evening.
My name is George.
I'm a.
Berkeley resident, and I am a new grant.
Without good English, let me share my story.
When I bought my house in 2019.
You have to every new if at that time it has top, I couldn't bottle this.
Property, because I don't have good.
I cannot compete with the organization.
This organization not help people have housing.
They just make money from that.
So, I, right now I become I am not only a home owner.
I also become us.
Very small housing provider, because I do the.
In my yard, I, I supply more housing.
I do by my labor, I lower the rent.
This is a way to have more affordable housing, not top.
Thank you.
Hi, there I good evening.
City council members, I, my name is Raquel Smith and I'm also a.
Property owner and landlord in Berkeley, I'm asking you to support the topa the tenant opportunity to purchase act.
I think this is fair to property owners.
Like, me provides an on ramp a willing buyer and the tenants or supportive nonprofit and helps me not worry about selling the property while still occupied.
Um, it's in line with my values, wanting to support the community around me.
Owners get fair market value for the property that topa process is structured to make sure property owners are not pressured into accepting an offer.
That is too low.
It keeps property ownership within the community to me is really important that people not be forced to leave their homes and it saves the seller.
Quite a bit of money through that partial transfer tax refund, which is a nice bonus, though, even if that wasn't fair, I would support measure ask that you do the same.
Thanks.
Good evening, we need the girl Berkeley resident and urban planner.
Progressive cities have best intentions for communities and conversations around urban growth and development.
But what is sometimes missing that equation is how we can achieve more if we actually prioritize.
What is that most take here? The agency of residents, a sense of belonging in our community and a decision making of who controls the features of our own neighborhoods.
Seeking to protect that isn't unfortunately, yet a shared consideration and a path forward among all city leaders in Berkeley approaches that center race inequity, such as topa.
That would prioritize keeping current presence in place, as opposed to unleashing expensive market development that does not not only benefit current residents, but also robs both the wealth and stronghold for many are urgently needed.
I'm reminded of my friend Matt Gustafson's recent words.
Where does the power lie? Should our systems only favor people who have capital, whether they are a part of the community or not? I strongly urge the mayor and city council to vote in favor of council member, Luna Paris supplemental and make topper reality in Berkeley.
Thank you.
Good evening council members I'd like to yield my time to the next speaker.
Good evening council members Tracy parent with the Bay Area community land trust.
Thanks so much for having a special hearing this evening.
I want to reiterate that the current revised topo ordinance, it's not intended to pay tenants against Berkeley landlords.
It is intended to protect property, radar, and property ownership.
Looking at property radar data over the past 2 years, half of the sales of multi unit buildings in Berkeley were bought by investors who actually don't live in Berkeley gives Berkeley residents a 1st opportunity to make an offer to buy their rental property before an investor has a chance to make an offer.
It does not require the owner to accept the offer just to give them time to make a 1st offer.
So, the current revised topo ordinance, it's intended to protect property, radar, and property ownership.
Half of the sales of multi unit buildings had property tax mailing addresses outside of Berkeley and 60% of buyers of 5 or more unit buildings had property tax mailing addresses outside of Berkeley.
So that is the context in which topo is coming to Berkeley.
The current revised ordinance is intended to protect property before an investor has a chance to make an offer to a property land trust before the property is listed on the market by which time it's just too late to explore a mortgage options.
This revised ordinance, which was 1st submitted back in December of 2023 is the result of focus groups and input from numerous community groups and residents.
Many of whom are represented here tonight.
So, I'm going to turn it over to the city manager to provide some additional support with both supplementals submitted to the council 1 by council members and asking to refer this to the city manager for further administrative review and another 1 by council member Han which asks to really look at the San Francisco model of the copa so please support topo and thank you.
I'm here to speak against topo and I will stay broke for 30 years.
I will help so many, many tenants come among us.
And as a matter of fact, last year, I also sold 1 of my property in Richmond to a long term tenant to us, it's not whether you're a tenant or not, but it's whether you are ready and capable so that you will have a fair chance to compete.
Now, for the government to put his thumb on the other rights, private, transparent and fair transition, I think is going to create a problem.
So don't do it.
We don't want to create a problem to solve a non existing problem.
Thank you.
Oh, good evening.
Good evening.
My name is Betty gray.
I am a resident of 1 of the topo projects.
I was almost homeless.
I'm 75 years old.
Living in this unit has given me hope.
It has changed the trajectory of my life.
At my age, knowing that you don't have some place to lay your head down, it's not a good thing.
But I was very blessed to be living on this property.
And there are so many spring chickens like me that are out there that have nowhere to lay their head down.
I don't have to worry about that anymore.
And there are other there's there's 8 units in my building and we've seen brand new babies born.
We've seen people's lives change.
We've seen things that you, you can't imagine the horrors that we all have had to come through just to have some place to lay our head.
Topa has saved my life and I am truly, truly urging you.
To help them.
Thank you.
Good evening.
Everyone my name is Alfred to here to speak in favor of.
Topa protects tenants as every tenant can tell you the scariest thing is always when the building is sold, because you never know what's coming next.
But I also want to say that Topa is good for investors and owners.
Right now, there's a big scramble whenever buildings.
Being sold and people don't have time to do due diligence to make sure they're not buying something with structural or maintenance problems.
With Topa, there's an orderly process and ultimately the building is sold to the highest bidder.
Whether it's the people that currently live there or somebody else.
And to address the concerns that some of the opponents have raised.
For people who own a house, whether or not it has an 80, you.
The latest proposal for Topa does not apply to you.
So if you're just the homeowner, it was an 80.
you have nothing to worry about.
Nothing will change.
So, once again, we've worked on this for many years.
We support Topa.
Thank you.
Hello, good evening.
I am a, I work at policy link, which is a national equity research Institute and we do all kinds of work on Topa and Copa.
I wanted to share specifically the policy map that we do in which you can see that in Washington, D.
C.
for example, 16,000 units of existing affordable housing have been able to continue that way.
So we think about our residents such as Miss Betty, who shared her example, think about 16,000 people that could have that same experience.
If this were to be passed in Berkeley and also sharing previously my experiences as a tenant in Berkeley and facing the sale of the house that I lived in.
And the only way with the Berkeley rent board that was able to not sell, but I know that I, without Topa and Copa, I don't know if I'll be able to stay here long term.
So thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good evening council members.
I'm the Coleman.
I'm a renter in Oakland and also a staff owner at the East Bay permanent real estate cooperative, but we believe that housing is a right not a commodity and those who oppose Topa believe that they have a right to make money off of where people live, which is just super problematic and not okay.
So, I'm going to talk a little bit about this property.
It's a 10 unit property.
There's a lot of reasons that tenants need to be protected, especially with the example of our most recent acquisition, which is a 10 unit property that has been sold by corporate entities for the last 10 years and wrapped up so much deferred maintenance that by the time we acquired this property, it needed about $800,000 worth of repair and maintenance and this is a practice called passive eviction where owners and landlords let their tenants live in this property for as long as they want to.
The property is not rented to tenants because they're not happy with the way it's built, so they can raise rents and make more money because they think they deserve and have a right to make that money.
So we ask you to support Topa.
Thank you.
Hi, council members.
You guys look so excited to be here tonight.
My name is Iris.
I'm a community health education educator as well as a housing specialist in San Francisco.
Also someone born and raised in California.
I was supposed to start at this talking point, but my name's Iris.
I ask that you support the tenant opportunity purchase act.
This policy is essential for our community for the following reasons.
I'm just going to state Topa offers tenants a fair opportunity to purchase their homes.
People have been stating so many good reasons to support this topic.
But other than that, you're helping to not break up communities, right Igor? You hear me? All right, then.
So continue supporting those who support our communities, allow us not to be broken up, keep the culture that keeps the profiteers coming back to the bay time and time again.
So, you know, without the people who are building the culture, there is no culture community to keep money flowing through your neighborhoods.
So you might want to pay attention because these people came here to speak to you tonight.
Have a good night Igor.
Hi, folks.
My name is back.
I also go by a son.
I'm the executive director of the Northern California land trust.
We're based in South Berkeley.
We've been in Berkeley for now 50 years with the oldest land trust in the Bay Area and in the state of California.
Over the long history in this city, we have properties and many of your districts as many of, you know, and we have a very long track record of buying, rehabbing, stabilizing and keeping tenants house, including moving them across the stewardship and ownership pipeline, making them.
Property owners and taxpayers in this city, what we're asking for here is for you to support the tenant opportunity to purchase act, because it would present an opportunity for organizations like mine and organizations like various CLT to turn Berkeley residents and tenants into permanent members of our community and not only for them, but also for their children and their children's children.
So, I also want to give you a really quick story.
I just came back from DC.
It turns out capitalism is live and well over there and they already have.
So, thank you so much.
Thank you.
Even council members, my name is Leo Goldberg.
I am the co director with the California community land trust network and born and raised in Berkeley.
I think we know that the status quo isn't working.
We're losing black and brown and low income families.
Berkeley is a much less diverse place than when I was growing up near Solano Avenue, and we need to take some risks.
We can't wait for the federal state governments to bail us out.
Topra is not a risk.
It's a new, innovative program.
Like I said, that's been proven elsewhere.
We have 3 community land trust active in Berkeley and other nonprofits already doing anti displacement projects.
So these are.
The types of projects that Topra would support and allow us to have many more of these are projects that allow low income folks to stay in their communities, rather than being priced out or forced out.
So, I'll ask you to stand with us and support Topra, support the supplemental that's before the council tonight and thank you for the time.
Good evening, council members.
My name is Amanda Chang.
I am a staff member of Urban Habitat and a former resident of Berkeley.
I have been working with the Topra working group for the past year, and though I haven't been as part of this campaign as long as some of my peers who are here today.
I have watched time and time again as many of you have ignored misled and use the community working very hard to get you to listen to our concerns for your personal political campaigns.
I know you're tired of us being here.
We're tired too.
Like, we don't want to be asking you this for like, another 4 years, but we're not going anywhere.
So the more you push us forward, the more we want to hear from you.
So, the least you could do is read the policy you're going to vote on and at least have the mayor here.
I don't know where he is, but yes, we're not going anywhere and stop trying to get us to give up because we won't.
Thank you.
Hello, council.
My name is Avery Arbaugh.
I'm a student, a district 7 resident, a labor commissioner and a tenant in Berkeley.
I'm here today to speak in favor of Topra.
Hello, council.
My name is Avery Arbaugh.
I'm a student, a district 7 resident, a labor commissioner and a tenant in Berkeley.
I'm here today to speak in favor of Topra.
Topra to me means giving tenants the opportunity to own their home.
This is an opportunity that most tenants living in Berkeley without Topra will never have.
Giving tenants in our community the opportunity to live and own the housing that they live within is essential and prevents displacement within our city.
And creating alternatives to our current housing system where housing providers are accountable to our community is just as essential.
I strongly support Topra, but I understand that some council members here today are not ready to vote for it.
As such, I strongly support council member Cecilia Lunaparez supplemental in hopes that further administrative review will make the benefits of Topra even more clear.
Thank you so much.
Hi, my name is Celia Carrion.
I am a small property owner.
I am a resident of Berkeley for over 40 years.
I opposed Topra.
There was a community promise by the mayor last time that this was brought to council that has not been fulfilled.
He said there would be a comprehensive equity study measuring the impact on small property owners such as myself.
I find that Topra hamstrings.
I completely support offering to my tenants the first opportunity to purchase their property, to purchase their rental.
And I have done so before.
And if they can swing it, I love it.
I couldn't be happier.
I've had great tenants, but this Topra just completely hamstrings us.
We need solutions that increased rental housing availability and allow small property owners to enter the market, not fear tactics.
Not fear tactics.

Segment 2

My name is Rashi Kesarwani I live in Berkeley in my own home for 22 years.
I also own rental property in Berkeley and I'm here to support Topa.
This last year, my beloved neighbor, Ms.
Lillian Freeman died.
She was 97 years old.
She moved into her apartment in 1973.
She was the institutional memory and the institutional joy of our neighborhood.
And the reason Ms.
Lillian could live in her apartment for more than 50 years was because she didn't have a landlord.
It was owned by the Northern California Land Trust.
And I think that Topa should be passed because it allows us to hold on to many more of our neighbors like Ms.
Lillian, who have lived with us for a very long time, who we treasure and we want to keep them in our neighborhoods.
Thank you.
Good evening, council members.
My name is Jasmine Sozi.
I'm a staff member at the East Bay Community Law Center.
I'm a board member at the Bay Area Community Land Trust, and I'm a former resident of Berkeley.
I'm here to strongly encourage you to support Councilmember Lunaparra's supplemental and for advancing the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act.
After five years of deep community engagement, it's clear that our residents are ready for action.
We've held numerous listening sessions at McGee Baptist Church, knocked on doors, and gained the support of almost 50 local organizations that are standing here before you, like Friends of Adeline, Healthy Black Families, and the Berkeley Tenants Union.
The community has spoken, and it's time for us to respond by moving Topa forward.
With Berkeley's recent $10 million investment in the Small Sites Program, we've begun laying the groundwork for sustainable community-driven housing solutions.
This is a crucial step towards ensuring that affordable homes remain within the hands of the people who live here and not in the hands of investors.
Let's keep building on this momentum, support Councilmember Lunaparra's supplemental, and make housing a security for Berkeley residents.
Thank you.
Good evening.
My name is Sam Frankel.
I'd like to cede my minutes of money.
Good evening, City Manager, City Attorney, and Council.
It's my pleasure to be here today to speak on behalf of the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act, or what I'm going to call Tenants and Owners Prepare a Future Together.
So I added two extra letters, but what I do see, and with all respect to a prior speaker whom I know and love, I don't believe that it's contrary to the best interest of an owner, particularly small owners as well.
I've seen it, and in my personal experience only here, not as my job, but as a resident of Berkeley, I've met a number of people in Berkeley.
35, 40 years ago, when I was here as a student in the late 70s, I came back 14 years ago, and I asked Mayor Gus Newport, where did all the black and brown people go? And he said, I know money, it's been a massive displacement.
This helps to reverse that to provide more diversity and opportunity for buyers.
I tried for one week to buy in Berkeley, and my son and I were out of the market when all the cash offers and a million dollars minimum.
So I have a rental house in Seaside, and I rent in Berkeley.
But I do say that we have a crisis that can't wait.
It's like people saying we're going to fix it soon, like the climate crisis, and 20 years later, the window has closed.
So with respect to a level playing field, it's a fair price, and I was actually on the community group that did a lot of the meeting over months and years of this process.
I don't think there's anything unfair to either side.
It gives a real opportunity for families to gather together.
And I have a neighbor, actually, tenants who purchased their house together, and they now have a rooming house with young professionals and families living together.
So all these people who've been in Berkeley for decades are being displaced at rapid amounts.
Last point, we have one of the highest, and this scares and saddens me so much, I love elders, and I'm now an elder at 64.
Gosh, who would have known? Time flies.
We have the largest population and growth of elder people in Berkeley, and many of them are going to be unhoused and displaced when buyers buy the building, and they're displaced.
Thank you.
Good evening, Councilmembers.
My name is Matt Gustafson.
I'm a District 2 resident, a homeowner in Berkeley, and I also work for the Bay Area Community Land Trust.
I wasn't planning on speaking on this tonight, but I used to do a lot of community organizing with immigrant mothers, Latinx mothers in East San Jose around housing.
We did a lot of community input and interviews, and I have a lot of relationships with folks out there.
And when community members, renters, talked about ownership, the things that they talked about were health, safety, stability, predictability, affordability.
They did not talk about building as much equity or making profit off of the place that they lived in for the rest of their lives.
So I think what TOPA does is it provides a lot of those things that go along with ownership.
I think we need to expand our understanding of what it means to be a community, to be an owner, and to collectively own things.
TOPA is an investment in that ecosystem that we need to build that's going to take generations in this city.
Thank you.
Hello, good evening, Councilmembers.
My name is Tahira Dean, and I'm an attorney at Public Advocates based in San Francisco.
We are an education, transportation, and housing justice nonprofit.
And I come today before you to ask you to support the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act.
This policy is essential for this community that has witnessed drastic change in the type of residents that are able to live comfortably in Berkeley.
My organization studies the impact of development and increasing costs of housing across the Bay Area.
Berkeley is one of the communities we have seen that has become extremely unaffordable.
The city prides itself on being liberal, pro-tenant, and against big business.
And yet it has allowed displacement that has negatively impacted Black and Brown communities because it prevents pro-tenant policies like TOPA.
People are continuing to leave Berkeley not because they want to, but because there aren't enough opportunities for them to have stable housing.
Passing TOPA now is essential to preserving affordable housing and protecting those most vulnerable in this community.
One of the big criticisms we hear about TOPA is that it will have a high administrative burden for the city, but we can look to other funding like from the Vacancy Tax Measure M, which has a proportion that is aimed at affordable housing.
And that can be used to help curb any minimal administrative costs that TOPA will require.
Thank you.
I ask that you not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
You are not prepared to move this version of TOPA forward, that you rework it, that you identify what you believe are the flaws, and that you can come to an agreement just because we so desperately need affordable housing in Berkeley.
The housing prices are so incredibly egregious.
In fact, when you begin addressing Missy Middle, I hope you will consider allocating a certain number of those units to five plexes instead of four plexes so that one of them will be a below market rate unit.
I don't believe this is the panacea for everything, but we need to do something and we need to do what we can for anything in terms of affordable housing.
I do believe there needs to be oversight.
I live in a tenant-operated place that is completely misrun, and hopefully the oversight will be addressed.
Bye.
Can I get a couple of minutes? Okay.
Cool.
Cool.
I think that's four.
Hi, y'all.
I'm Sin.
I'm the Berkeley Student Cooperatives president this year and board rep for Wolf House.
I am going to read you all today our statement as the BSC, and I hope you all know that us as the longest-running student cooperative in North America recognize the weight that this holds.
Berkeley Student Cooperatives stands in solidarity with tenants across the Bay Area and is committed to advocating for the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act.
With granting tenants the right of first offer and refusal, there becomes a precedent of shifting power dynamics in housing and an opportunity to create space for historically marginalized communities.
In addition to this, tenants have the opportunity to waive their rights to qualified organizations, granting them the opportunity to make an offer on the property, specifically for the purpose of stabilizing housing for the tenants and preserving the property as permanently affordable.
Permanently affordable.
This opens up an unprecedented opportunity for the Berkeley Student Cooperative and so many other organizations committed to the cooperative movement and housing justice.
Such opportunities cannot be understated when it comes to the transformative change they will contribute to the tenant empowerment and collective power to advocate for affordable housing and ensuring such commitment to affordability from stewarding organizations.
As UC Berkeley continues to expand enrollment and homeownership grows increasingly out of reach for many, it is essential that the BSC is in alignment with our comrades in the struggle for affordable housing.
This is the BSC's commitment to expanding the Solidarity Economy.
As defined by the New Economy Coalition, the Solidarity Economy is the global movement to build just and sustainable economies where we prioritize people and the planet over endless profit and growth.
TOPA will afford dozens of Berkeleys the opportunity to become collective homeowners, grant co-ops like ours the opportunity to expand, and grant the collective people power to trump the greed of the few who are traditionally able to become homeowners.
This is tiring, y'all.
For all of the reasons shared, I stand in support with Council Member Luna Parra's supplemental.
Please, let us keep pushing TOPA forward.
Thank you.
Hello, everyone.
I think there might be a few co-operators left to cede their minutes.
A couple.
Thank you, guys.
Thank you, guys.
So, yeah, my name is Chris Shudd.
I think I've spoken here a couple of times.
I'm now the Vice President of External Affairs for the Berkeley Student Cooperative.
And, yeah, I just want to take a second and recognize how many of us are here.
You know who could recognize us? Our bright green and dark green shirts.
Yeah, there's a lot of us in this city.
And, you know, we're all part of this cooperative movement, this beautiful cooperative movement.
And I just wanted to read a couple of the Rochdale principles of cooperation, kind of that specifically, you know, highlight this kind of relationship.
As a co-op, Rochdale principle number two, democratic member control.
As a co-op, we believe that democratic and collective decision-making is an essential tool for our shared wellness.
Through TOPA, nonprofits and or tenants will need to come together to collectively decide if and how to go about stewarding the land, creating an opportunity for progress towards a more cooperative world.
Rochdale principle number four, autonomy and independence.
TOPA and the co-ops are aligned in the shared goal to create autonomous and self-help oriented spaces for the community.
TOPA grants tenants the unprecedented opportunity to advocate for themselves and create an ecosystem of shared responsibility and collective justice.
Rochdale principle number seven, concern for community, latest block party's theme.
Concern for the well-being and sustainability of the community are central to the BSC with our mission to provide quality, low-cost cooperative housing community to university students, thereby providing an educational opportunity for students who might not otherwise be able to afford a university education.
With this in mind, TOPA's intent to ensure housing remains affordable creates space for the BSC and other organizations to center the needs of the community and offer an alternative to harmful capitalistic practices.
Yeah, I kind of wrote a little thing to our co-opers, but some of the things were not entirely friendly.
I won't share all of it, but just speaking, you know, not even as a co-operative, but as a citizen of the city for almost four years, it's beautiful that we can be a part of this and yet sit here and have to try to convince our city council that this is a good idea instead of, you know, like having the support there.
I recognize Cecilia Luna Parra and I thank her for all the work she's done.
And I just, I'm really hoping for the rest of y'all.
I'm really, you know, I, we saw it a week or two ago when you guys made a terrible decision against the wants and in the face of dozens of your citizens and constituents.
And I just, you know, I hope you see us now, however many there are here, however many are online.
I hope you see us and I hope you see that this is something that we need and that as city council members of Berkeley, you should be jumping on this opportunity.
Thank you.
Good evening, council members.
My name is Michael Trujillo and I'm an attorney at the East Bay Community Law Center.
UBCLC has been researching and working on TOPA since 2015 now.
And I know many of you have met with us and given us feedback, heard from community members and contributed along the way.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Disappeared.
Okay.
Maybe she'll come back.
Liliana Spindler.
Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can.
All right.
Yeah, I'd like to speak about TOPA because I view TOPA as not being sustainable to the whole community.
It does not create owners and taxpayers out of tenants, but rather makes corporations owners.
The council member who proposed this version of TOPA didn't believe in it enough to stick around to see it through.
My tenants have affordable housing.
They call me when they need a repair.
And homeownership is not for everyone.
But if my tenant wants to be an owner and pay Berkeley's high taxes, just make an offer.
It's that simple.
That's it.
Thank you.
Next speaker is Margo Rose letter.
Thank you very much.
Can you hear me? Thank you very much for allowing me to speak.
My name is Margo Rose letter.
I'm a 30 year resident of Berkeley and a 25 year homeowner.
I have a single family home with an ADU, and I'm here to speak against the current version of TOPA and absolutely against the modifications presented by council member Luna Parra.
In particular, that understanding of how utilities are shared in a small unit, like an ADU and a single family home is absolutely absurd.
I'm here to speak against the current version of TOPA and absolutely against the modifications presented by council member Luna Parra.
What I want to proceed with is an understanding of what they call a two unit property or a single family home with an ADU.
Or it could be a single family home with up to four tenants.
The timeline for the right of first refusal, which is the right of first refusal, which is the right of first refusal, which is the simple income of being able to rent.
Particularly, I tend to rent to students because I have a large house and multiple students can live there together.
This would provide.
Please wrap up.
Okay.
And offer him sir timeline.
If I had to sell, if I had medical conditions, or an urgent family need.
Okay.
So, if I have a single family home and two unit properties, I have the right of first refusal.
And all their parents are on the, on the lease.
They are low income.
Yes.
But behind them are parents who could be for me.
I am objecting to the single family home and two unit.
Properties being included in this version of TOPA.
Thank you.
Hello.
Can you hear me? Yes, we can.
Okay.
I am Paul Reed.
And my sister and I own property in Berkeley.
We're not speculative buyers or corporate interest.
My family has lived in Berkeley for.
Oh, my God for years.
Anyway, I am against this version of TOPA.
Mostly because you didn't even have a written version to review for us to look at.
I don't think it's reasonable.
I also don't think that TOPA is creating any affordability.
It seems to be a great idea.
But I don't see any statistics or verifiable results.
I hear people talking about it, but I haven't seen any statistics or numbers that are verifiable.
And again, the fact that you don't have a completed draft for the public to review is a big issue.
I do agree.
We need affordable housing in every city, including Berkeley.
You know, throughout the entire country.
Housing is.
Something that everyone needs and it needs to be affordable.
Thank you.
It doesn't need to be affordable.
I vote no.
I'm urging you to vote no until you come up with a carefully written version of this.
That allows public review.
And input.
Thank you very much.
Next speaker is Danny.
Hi there.
Can you guys hear me? Okay.
Yes, we can.
My name is Daniel Winkler.
I'm a real estate broker in the East Bay.
I have an office in Albany.
I'm here today to speak against this TOPA ordinance.
For a whole variety of reasons, but just trying to touch on a few of them.
One, the people that are speaking that are worried about getting evicted.
At the time of a sale.
They're protected by Berkeley rent and eviction control laws, which are some of the most stringent laws in the United States.
And I'm here today to speak against this.
I'm here today to speak against this TOPA ordinance for a whole variety of reasons.
One, the people that are speaking that are worried about getting evicted.
They're protected by Berkeley rent and eviction control laws, which are some of the most stringent in the state.
And if there's somebody selling a building and then chasing people out, they go right to the rent board.
They get an attorney from East Bay law center and they're defended about an eviction.
So I don't understand this insecurity about housing when a building sells.
Because of these rules.
The second thing.
I don't believe the DC TOPA was effective.
There've been a lot of modifications to that since it was passed.
I'm over my time.
Thank you very much for hearing me.
Thank you.
Next speaker is Deb.
Hi, thank you for calling.
I'm happy to have you on the call today.
I think it's time to go through it.
And the very last thing.
It was a gentleman who spoke and said, 80 years are exempt.
How's the ADU is.
Are exempt.
Maybe they are exempt today, but once you start passing these laws, it's like a slippery slope and then you include everything else.
I don't believe the DC TOPA was effective.
There've been a lot of modifications to that since it was passed.
I'm over my time.
Thank you very much for hearing me.
Thank you.
Our next speaker is dead.
Thank you for allowing me to talk.
I agree with anti-displacement laws.
I agree with support.
Renters and affordable, sustainable housing.
I was a renter for longer than many of the speakers have been alive.
But now I, I bought a place.
I have a.
To a duplex and I'm using that second unit to help pay my mortgage.
I don't think I'm a bad person.
I'm.
I don't think I'm a bad person.
I think I'm.
You know, I'm on that ladder that we wanted to get on.
I think that those people that were talking before would like to get there and then we want to support people once they get there.
We don't want to.
Undermine them.
I mean, we want to support renters, but not, I think on the backs of kind of the small players.
We want to.
We want to support the people who buy the property.
We don't want to.
We don't want to have to wait.
Four or five units, something like that.
But this seems really dangerous to me.
These people who buy the property aren't going to want to be forced to wait 325 days.
Up to 325 days to settle.
And as my.
Please wrap up your comments.
The DC study showed that.
It was only helpful when there were more than 30 units, but we don't have enough money.
So I think it's really important.
We want to support the people who buy the property.
We want to support the people who buy the property.
We want to support the backs of the small property owners.
Let's not put the small people against each other.
Do that study.
That does.
It shows what effect it will have on small landlords before.
Push passing this law and hurting the people we're trying to help.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon or evening.
Sorry.
I'm also against.
I am a.
Property owner with my family.
Their properties were built in the 1930s and have stayed rentals since then.
We offer affordable.
Properties to our tenants.
The city of Berkeley has been a problem for me.
Because of some ambiguities.
And because of the administrative costs that we have witnessed.
Time and time again in Berkeley.
That befalls small property owners.
This seems to be targeted to small property owners, not the large property owners.
Once again.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hi, Dan.
Hi, can you hear me? Yes.
Yes.
I'm a small.
Owner and small housing provider.
And I'm a nurse and actually I use a lot of time.
To take care of my house, to provide a better.
To provide a better.
Work over time and the weekend.
To try to provide a better.
Housing.
So for the top, basically it's the.
You can see as so many speakers.
They actually from some sort of organization.
So, you know, we are.
We are trying to make sure that.
Harder people.
Would be pushing out.
So we would not have a chance.
Like are we all dependent on this? A little.
Income for our retirement.
Like if we wait to fall half year or some, even more than a half year to try to sell a house.
Like again, we're not against to sell the house to.
We're not against to sell the house.
If they will want to buy.
I mean, like for the, for the.
Please complete your, your thoughts.
Okay.
So for affordable housing, please do not put this burden for the small housing provider.
But we have to think about other way, like, you know, To reduce the cost of the, of the.
To provide the.
What, what, what are we trying to say? To.
To reduce the cost of increase.
The property tax.
All the maintenance costs.
Thank you very much.
Your time is up.
Thank you.
Lisa.
Oh, Lisa.
Can you unmute please? Lisa.
Okay, we'll go to the next speaker.
Karen.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Lisa's back.
Okay.
Lisa, can you unmute please? Yes.
Yeah, it's a mute already.
Can you hear her? We can hear, we can hear.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So she is totally against.
So why now? She is the landlord.
Berkeley.
And also because those are law that.
You guys are formulating right now.
That's totally against the landlord.
And also it's like.
Take out of the.
Why of the landlord.
And which.
When she purchasing property.
Nobody is saying that.
This will be a law.
Or any comprehensive.
Of like purchasing property in Berkeley.
Will be.
And also.
Will become the return of the law.
And also is.
Against the safety.
Right now.
When boy is like protecting for the.
Getting kicked out.
And so it's like continue.
And making the.
Damage of the property and owner will be paid for that.
And all the property owner.
And also.
Financials.
And also like the street.
Insurance.
And also the insurance.
That's a lot.
Please complete your comments.
Yeah, we told her.
I guess.
Nope.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Okay.
Good evening, vice mayor and city council.
First off a big thank you to the land use committee for giving us item and negative recommendation.
Topa is an outdated and ineffective policy that should never have been supported.
Looking at Washington DC where Topa has been in place for over 40 years.
There's no evidence that it reduces displacement.
There's no evidence that it's a good place to be.
And there's no evidence that it's a good place to be.
And so we need to support this bill.
We need to support the city's rental housing.
And similarly Copa in San Francisco has only been marginally effective.
And applied to larger buildings, making its application in Berkeley performative and a waste of city funds and effort.
Even with nonprofit support.
Only one or two buildings will be purchased annually, making it an inefficient use of resources.
One or two buildings can already be purchased by the land trust on the open market with the help of the small sites program.
And so we need to support this bill.
And we need to support the city's rental housing.
There's no evidence that it's a good place to be.
And so we need to support the city's rental housing.
We need to support the city's rental housing.

Segment 3

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.

Segment 4

s Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do You Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do.

Segment 5

I'm a member of the board of the city of San Francisco.
We have less than 2000.
And this is my biggest concern with Topa is that I feel that it is overbuilt for a small city.
We have big ambitions and we have big goals and I support those goals.
But we do not have the capacity to administer a program of this type.
And the only way that deals get done is if the city has affordable housing money.
And right now, the most I was able to eke out was enough money for about 2 projects a year.
So you have to have a source of funds as well to do these projects to make it worthwhile to have an expensive administration of the project.
And to do it in a way that is right sized for Berkeley.
And that is to take San Francisco's copa model.
And study that and I will be making a motion based on this.
I'd like also to study a requirement that after a not for profit obtains a co-operative.
And that is to be determined by the city of San Francisco that within a set certain number of years, maybe 3 that's to be determined.
A bonafide offer of going cooperative has to be made so few are just through.
To the copa program you actually have to make that offer to to the renters in the city of San Francisco.
And that is to be determined by the city of San Francisco.
The reality is that in Berkeley we do not put more than $300,000 a unit towards affordable housing.
I don't know at what size building $300,000 is enough per unit.
But I'm guessing that it would be $300,000 per unit.
And that's a realistic one that reflects what projects we're already doing for small sites.
And that also reflects the reality of how much our city can subsidize those units when they do come up.
I'm also interested in knowing about what it would take to administer a copa program in the city of San Francisco.
And what it would take to administer a copa program in the city of San Francisco.
And what it would take to administer a copa program in the city of San Francisco.
And last but not least I am interested in whether there could be something novel.
That would provide a right of first refusal for tenants.
Should they pull things together and be able to make an offer.
And I'm also interested in whether there could be something novel that a seller is looking at to a bona fide offer on the market.
So I'm going to package that into a motion because what I would like is for our staff to actually come back to us with something realistic this idea has been kind of knocking on my door for a long time.
And I would like to give them an opportunity to analyze this and come back with something that they think actually can work.
So the motion I'd like to make is to refer San Francisco's copa program to staff for analysis.
For them to look at a potential requirement.
For a potential right of first refusal.
That staff report to us on a threshold size of building that realistically.
We could begin applying the copa.
Program to that also provide information to us about the potential right of first refusal.
And the potential right of first refusal for seeking to purchase their own building.
And that is my motion.
Second, for the purpose of discussion.
Okay, thank you.
We'll now go to councilor Luna I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
I want to thank you for the flexibility and commitment associated with this very unique situation.
I know that there's little direction in the absence of an author and I'm grateful for the time and energy that you have put into this item and for being so flexible.
In meeting with my staff and I over the past several months.
I also want to point out that the reason that this has come back so many times is because the policy has been rewarded and be written to address the concerns of the community with the housing crisis.
I want to thank you for your commitment to the housing crisis.
I also want to thank you for Humbert's comments and highlight East Bay for everyone's support for Topa and Copa.
It makes absolutely no sense to oppose one tool of many towards housing justice simply because it doesn't exactly mimic another tool.
I respectfully disagree with you and I find that to be fallible and unimaginative towards solutions to our housing crisis.
I also want to thank you for your commitment to the housing crisis for Berkeley simply because currently we don't know.
With my supplemental, we will get those answers and know how much it will cost our city as well.
I want to thank the members of the Topa working group who have been working on developing a Berkeley-specific Topa-Copa ordinance for the past 9 years.
I want to thank endorsers including the East Bay community organization for their support of the ordinance.
I also want to thank district 7 organizations specifically.
Thank you to the Cal Berkeley Democrats, the Berkeley student cooperatives, Cal YDSA and the voice of the entire undergraduate student body, the Associated Students of the University of California for supporting and advocating for Topa.
I have spent months working with the Topa working group to find a way to move this policy forward.
Unfortunately, because so much time has passed since its initial introduction, both the City of California and the California Department of Transportation have not been able to provide an update.
This item requires a more thorough analysis to understand its financial implications for the city.
I have noted the concerns raised about this policy, particularly regarding staff capacity and administrative costs.
It is important to highlight that there have been significant changes to the policy since it was first budgeted for in 2022.
Without an updated budget referral or a thorough examination of the enforcement mechanisms, I don't feel that this is a good way to move forward.
Thank you.
Thank you.
At the urging of the Yes to Topa Coalition, I submitted a supplemental item after conversations with HHCS, the city attorney's office, the city manager, and tenant and affordable housing organizations.
This item would provide staff with direction so Topa can come back to Council with a fuller picture of its potential impacts.
And I'm prepared to take Topa on as a primary author when there is a path for me to do so.
I would like to make a friendly amendment first to council member Hans motion for staff in addition to what she has proposed to also refer the current policy to the city manager for the fiscal operational and administrative impact of it, as well as I know that council member Taplin had a couple other questions and it would be great to include those in the referral as well.
I'm going to decline.
I'm happy to explain later, but I don't want to take time while you have the floor.
I'm happy to explain.
And I don't know council member Taplin's, but certainly what you're asking for, I'm going to respectfully decline.
Okay.
Thank you.
Can I..
Can that go to a vote? Can it go to a vote? To amend the motion to approve the current version to staff as well, in addition to San Francisco's COPPA.
I am asking a motion.
Is that right? I can ask one more question? To amend the motion to..
You want to make a motion to To amend the motion on the table.
That is allowable.
To refer community, to refer the current version to staff as well.
I am asking a motion to amend the main motion.
If there is a seconder, and that motion prevails, then that will be incorporated into the main motion.
If it doesn't pass, then it won't be in the main motion.
Just to clarify the procedure here.
That is permissible.
Any member can make a motion to amend or make a substitute motion.
This is a motion to amend.
We're going to continue with discussion.
But that is correct, Mr.
Clerk and city attorney, that is procedurally proper.
Yes.
I have a procedural question.
So if it were to be amended, could I then withdraw my old motion? Yes.
You can.
I want to make sure.
Yes, you can.
So I can just take it off the table? Correct.
Okay.
I'll keep that in mind.
Thank you.
Okay.
Thank you, Mr.
Clerk.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
We'll go next to Councillor Bartlett.
Thank you.
And thank you, everyone, that's been working so hard on this through the years.
Subject to many, many, many conversations about TOPA.
And, you know, of course, it's wonderful, the idea of tenants owning the buildings, stabilizing the housing market.
You know, I first ran for office when I was in high school.
And I was involved in the housing rights initiative.
It was an idea to create organic housing that we came up with way back in the day.
And so really excited that we have that program.
It's active.
It's doing it.
It's in my district happening really nicely.
Very excited about it.
And TOPA, you know, interesting.
You know, it's one I want to learn more from someone in D.C.
that worked on it, some staff that worked on it.
So I'm really looking forward to a true analysis of the cost to make an informed decision.
And I do think there is also room, and I've had conversations with our local lenders as well, there is room for private banking products to be deployed to help tenants and affiliated bodies acquire buildings in Berkeley.
So maybe there's a way to sort of extend our reach financially.
You know, really excited about that.
And I will say for everything, you know, the key in Berkeley, just like everywhere else, the key to wealth and prosperity is land.
It always has been.
And the land is held in so few hands.
The prior generation has had a lock on land, and we are in a time of great land scarcity due to 50 years of the land not being cultivated for the next generation.
And now we are attempting to finally develop the land and let it be cultivated for the next generation.
So I think there is room for that.
I think there is room for the land.
And I do think there is a whole portfolio of tools we need to use going forward to make sure we can access the wealth of the land.
I think there's room for that in Missing Middle.
I think there's an ability in the Missing Middle project thesis to allow for some ownership in there.
So we have the very strong potential for ownership housing at SBBART.
Truly affordable home ownership with equity for the tenants, the wealth building.
And again, this is the neighborhood, this is the city that created the Fair Housing Act.
We made it legal to buy houses if you are of a different ethnic and gender persuasion in California and in the country.
It was adopted by the country.
So I think there is room for ownership.
I think there is room for ownership.
I think there is a basis for the renaissance we talk about that we harken back to, that the displacement now is the rotten fruit born from those old trees.
And the only way to really capture that and reverse that decline is through ownership of land and wealth building.
There is no other way.
Thank you.
I'm curious to see what we can develop in terms of deploying further tools.
I would love to hear from the city once we, if you are willing to study it, give us real information so we can see if it works.
Because I really, the information about Tope and D.C.
is conflicting some of my understanding.
I want to learn more from the stakeholders who have spoken.
We will come back to the commissioners who have not spoken.
We will come back to those who have previously.
So vice mayor, then Tregob, then Kisarwani, then myself.
Thank you.
We're in a very unique situation because the author of the item isn't here to guide us through the details of the item.
And we don't have a staff report.
And the devil is in the air.
I'm a little confused.
And maybe my colleagues can help me.
TOPA and COPA are two very different programs.
Yet this is called TOPA COPA.
So I'm confused.
Which is it? What is it? Okay.
I don't know.
Does anybody know? Okay.
Is there a question? I'm sorry.
I'm blank.
My face is up here.
Okay.
So when the referral from council member and council member Tregob does not deal with the content of the item.
It only is purely procedural and does not amend or introduce new material to the content of the policy.
When do we talk about how this actually works? Why are we sending staff off to study something when we don't even know what it says? Wouldn't it make sense to do it the other way around? To discuss it and hone it down and make it more understandable and maybe more realistic based on input from housing providers and people who know what's going on.
And then send it to staff as a referral to come back with the administrative costs.
So I'm a little concerned that, well, first of all, I'm concerned that we don't know what we're actually sending.
And secondly, I'm concerned that we're putting the cart before the horse.
So I have a lot of questions.
I've studied this very closely.
I was on land use.
And I'm very interested in the issue because I really want tenants to get a foot in the door of owning their own homes.
So I don't know when my questions can be answered, and I don't know by whom they can be answered.
I have a couple of questions that I would like to ask the land trust.
I'm not sure if I can answer all of them.
I can throw some of them out.
I had a very lovely conversation with the land trust.
They told me they don't look at properties of less than five units.
So I'm wondering, why does this propose single-family homes? And what is the reason for including single-family homes in this proposal? And what is the reason for including single-family home rentals? So what is the reasoning for including single-family homes in this proposal? I'd like to see, you know, us look at different models.
Five units, 10 units, 15 units, 20 units.
And we don't look at anything less than 20 units.
So maybe that's instructive.
But we don't know what we're doing.
Unfortunately, that's the situation that we're in.
I have a whole bunch of questions.
If this council votes to send it to staff, I'd like to be able to hear from staff.
I'd like to be able to hear from staff.
Their content questions.
So I'd like, actually, the motion to be amended to include content questions.
About Han.
I didn't refer to COPA.
Just COPA.
I'm sorry.
Council Member Lunapara is referring COPA TOPA.
So I'm asking you if you would amend your motion to include content.
So that we can really have a robust discussion about what we're doing here.
Because I don't think we've worked out the details.
And I think it's probably a good idea to do that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there a second to the Berkley amendment? Yeah.
Yes, yeah.
The purpose of the referral is for staff to be able to look at the content and see how it would actually play out in Berkley.
So that makes perfect sense.
That's not what the item says.
I'm reading from the item and it says, this is purely for staff to be able to look at the content and see how it would actually play out in Berkley.
So that's the purpose of the policy.
Yes.
The purpose is for staff to be able to look at the policy as it's written now and determine how it could apply in Berkley and then we can amend the content with that information of the content from staff of how it would actually play out in Berkley.
Thank you.
I have a question.
The housing policy has been revised actually several times.
And I think it needs to be revised again.
So are we sending the revised, are we saying to staff, please come back with revisions? That may be more practical based on the size of our city, our budget, the resources that we have.
I mean, we have limited resources on housing.
We have limited resources.
Is this the best way to do it? And I would like some analysis of that.
So.
So.
Especially with the adding the amendment to Councilmember Hahn's motion, I think the goal is to have several options for the city to adopt.
And I think that's the question.
And I think if staff brings those back to us, we can decide which of those options will be the best for the city.
So I think we're on the same page here and it's a matter of minor misunderstandings.
Okay.
Okay.
I guess that's it for now.
I do have very specific questions, but I don't think we have time for that.
Okay.
Thank you.
I first wanted to actually see if Councilmember Lunapara would be amenable to withdrawing for amendment and seconding a substitute motion, which would be to allow the City Manager to conduct an analysis of the fiscal, operational and administrative impact of the policy.
The referral will include analysis of the San Francisco COPA program and other known COPA slash DOPA programs that exist or are in development.
I'll deal with the process.
As well as a review of any comparable tenant acquisition that was in that substitute.
So I don't think that I would be very amenable to including everything else that was in that substitute.
But the reason I would like to do this is I would like to see something move forward tonight for analysis.
Yes.
I will withdraw my motion.
If that fails, then we will vote on Councilmember Han's motion.
Just to clarify, you're still seconding the Han motion too, right? Yes.
I'm also seconding that.
Yes.
People make motions and vote against their own motions in the past, so anything's possible.
Councilmember Trager, we saw it before.
Yes.
Okay.
So your motion is to refer the TOPA COPA to staff for the analysis, right? Yes.
Moved by Trager, seconded by Lita Parra.
Yes.
Plus the Panoply of Potential Solutions.
Yes, plus the Panoply of Potential Solutions.
Okay, so we'll clarify this I'm going to be brief.
A lot of things have been said.
I've been following this policy as it has wound its way through the City Council on multiple occasions now, and at the end of the day, and I agree with the Vice Mayor, it is important for staff to study the institutional and administrative implications of any policy that we pass.
That is why I signed on to Councilmember Luna Parra's item to begin with, and I really applaud her efforts to move forward with this, and I want to thank community members, and I have received emails, as we all have, on both sides of this.
There are questions about the cost, there are questions about what are going to be the cost versus benefits of this.
I can tell you that I got interested in TOPA after as a Rampart Commissioner, I stood with other Rampart Commissioners and some members of the City Council, particularly Councilmember Hahn, to try to save a property on Solano that had fallen into disrepair, where there was an effort by the landlord to evict those tenants, and thanks to the work of Councilmember Hahn in particular, and many others on the Council, certainly the Mayor, programs like the small site program were developed, and those tenants, the ones that hadn't moved out anyway, are now able to be part of an early adopter of this model of being able to own or manage the building as part of a cooperative structure.
So I would love to, I have seen the real life benefits of this.
It does allow people to stay housed.
It does allow for multi-generational opportunities to remain in Berkeley.
I believe that like someone in the public said, while it's not a panacea and no policy solution in and of itself is ever going to be, this can be an important tool in the future.
And I think if I'm honest with myself and I ran on studying things and looking at using an evidence-based approach, let's study the evidence.
Staff, are you available to provide resources should this be referred to study this policy? Because I have three policy housing staff in HCS.
One of those positions is vacant.
The other one's on a long-term leave.
So I have one, we have one person now to do this work.
So it's not going to happen fast.
And you know, I am not trying to go give everything on your plate.
I understand that this needs to be prioritized maybe behind some other items you're already working on, like middle housing.
But I appreciate that.
I mean, you know, I just got on the council.
So the decisions to move it forward through committees, I mean, I know committees and I know previous councils have analyzed this policy.
But for a variety of reasons, staff did not have the, as much as an opportunity to do so as they now could.
I know a lot of information that has been previously provided when it was introduced last year has changed.
And it would be prudent.
It would be the responsible thing to do to refer this to staff.
And that's why I'm making this substitute motion.
Thank you.
Councilor Kisilwani, and then I'm going to jump into the discussion.
Thank you very much, Mr.
Mayor.
Thank you to everybody who gave public comment tonight.
I apologize.
I'm not able to be in the chambers tonight.
I want to share that I have studied this policy, including the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act in Washington, D.C.
I actually held a one-hour forum with Councilmember Wengraf and subject matter experts.
And as somebody who also makes evidence-based decisions, I can safely say this is not an effective use of our scarce public resources.
We have just cause for eviction for almost our entire housing stock to protect tenants and make sure that there is a just cause for evicting somebody.
This council just enacted a very strong demolition ordinance.
So in the rare occasion that your building is going to be demolished,.

Segment 6

You will get a replacement unit at the same rent level that you previously paid if you want.
That is your right under our demolition ordinance.
Not only that, this council approved a budget that allocated 10 million dollars to our small sites program.
That enables the land trust to acquire a building to ensure that if there are low-income tenants in that building, they will not be displaced.
That land trust can have an opportunity to acquire the building and those units can become deed-restricted affordable units.
When I look at the nine-page Community Opportunity to Purchase Act program rules, the small sites program is basically the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act.
I don't understand why we need to have this only one staff person at HHCS take up their time when we can all just read this nine-page document and figure out that our small sites program is the same exact thing.
I think we need to be honest with ourselves that we do not need to study this policy anymore.
We know that it is not an effective use of our public resources and it is not an effective use of staff time to spend year after year studying something that we have no intention of passing.
This has been brought up since 2017 and maybe earlier when I was a commissioner on the Housing Advisory Commission.
That's seven years of spinning our wheels on something that the community, we're hearing from small property owners, they don't support it.
It doesn't create a single additional unit of housing and we already have the strongest tenant protections in this town that I just cited.
Let's look at the evidence and not pass any more waste of time referrals that waste our staff time and come back to us after multiple years because our staff don't really have the time to do this and then we just vote it down.
We know the game we're playing here and can we please just have the courage to say no for once and not waste everybody's time including the community's time and my time and the council time.
Thank you.
Okay I'm going to jump in and then we'll go to Taplin and Honapter.
I want to address the issue of is the Harrison ordinance the right approach for Berkeley and I think as everyone knows I worked for several years with the coalition to try to find a path to passing a TOEP ordinance in Berkeley.
We were unsuccessful and I do agree with Council Member Hahn that to compare Washington D.C.'s ordinance to Berkeley is not an apt comparison.
It is a major metropolitan city that has significantly more staff and resources and in addition to that they have more resources than Berkeley does to help support TOEP acquisitions as does San Francisco.
We were unsuccessful in 2022 to pass a housing bond in Berkeley.
I hope the voters pass Prop 5 to lower the threshold so we can so please vote yes on Prop 5 so we can actually pass housing bonds at a 55 threshold and get the money to help support acquisition preservation and construction of affordable housing.
We need a statewide preservation program to help support housing preservation.
Those resources don't exist right now and we unfortunately the MTC pulled the 20 billion dollar affordable housing bond from the Bay Area ballot armed for this year.
So our housing trust fund dollars we have an extensive discussion about this when we passed the budget in June are nearly tapped out.
We made a 10 million dollar investment the biggest investment we ever made to the small sites program which I created small sites program that's going to fund two projects.
So I fully support you know making it easier to buy and preserve existing naturally occurring affordable housing but we need the resources and so if we're going to do this we have to make sure we have a sustainable revenue stream to help support TOEP acquisitions and to support our non-profit partners to make sure that they have the capacity to deliver on these projects.
So one housing staff person planning policy person and then in addition to that there's a lot of staff resources that are involved in implementation at the Harrison ordinance.
City attorney's office, HHCS and so there are elements of this if there is something that moves forward that could be removed to reduce the staff burden such as requiring supportive partners, requiring verification of supportive partners.
There's a way to streamline this that doesn't require that it be so staff intensive and I have to say that there was fierce resistance from advocates to looking at a more streamlined version in the many many years that I was working on this and so here we are now that this is not going to pass tonight because we are trying to find a way to right size this for Berkeley but I do think that there's merit in studying this and getting information and looking at what the right approach is for Berkeley.
So I do frankly think the Harrison ordinance is not right size for Berkeley with one policy person with maybe one city attorney that can work on this with no money identified beyond the 10 million in the small sites program that's going to fund the two existing projects that we know about.
I just don't know how this is going to work realistically and I want to be realistic and I want to be effective in the policies that we set because I don't think it's fair to tenants to create a law that we can't really fully execute or implement because we don't have the resources and it's not fair to our staff.
It's also not fair to property owners who also are encumbered by these extensive delays in the sale process as well.
So I have been working on this for seven, eight years now and so my perspective is informed on the basis of the work that I've done, the extensive analysis I've done of other ordinances and this Harrison ordinance and this is too big for Berkeley.
There's a way to move something forward if our goal is housing preservation and that's why I think the Hahn motion is appropriate.
Let's move forward with the COPA policy.
Measure BBs on the Berkeley ballot that may pass, we don't know.
If that passes there'll be a right for tenant associations that could provide a vehicle to form tenants associations that can then go about working to come together to form partnerships to buy buildings.
So this could be step one, there could be a step two later but I think it's important to start somewhere and I think moving forward with the COPA policy which San Francisco has had on the books for a number of years and also other jurisdictions as well makes the most sense.
The practical reality is that unless we have Measure BB or we create some capacity for tenants to form associations to be able to come together to buy properties, this is essentially going to be a COPA policy because the only people that are going to have the capacity to go about and seek out these properties and go about putting money on the table to buy them are going to be nonprofits.
So let's just move forward with the COPA and explore COPA because that is really ultimately how it's going to work given the resources that we have currently.
So I fully support the right of tenants to have a right of first offer and to get notice about when a property goes on the market.
But we need the information, we understand the staffing and budget implications, we need to make decisions, we need to make trade-offs because we can't do everything.
And so if we do this, how are we going to fund it and what thing are we going to defer or what resource are we going to identify to do this? And there's a lot of pieces we don't have in place, we don't have the money in place right now.
So I'm going to support the Hahn motion with the understanding that this analysis will help set the stage for looking at how the city can explore moving some policy forward and also with the understanding that there are pieces that need to be put in place including the funding.
But we're not prepared, I don't think Berkeley's ready to pass the Harrison ordinance.
I tried for six, seven years to move something forward, we weren't able to do it and clearly more work is needed, more analysis is needed.
And so for that reason I'll support the main motion.
Council Member Taplin.
Thank you very much.
I just want to say that I think the things the Tribune substitute motion is calling for, calls for, are largely things that are supposed to happen in the drafting of legislation and throughout the committee process.
So I would encourage each of us as we are authoring items to work with staff to better understand the costing, the administrative needs and the implementation needs before submitting and certainly not to abandon our items.
That being said, I do want to be cognizant of the capacity of our one HHCS staffer if I'm not mistaken HHCS oversees the neighborhood preference policy, the age-friendly Berkeley plan, it's a conglomerate department.
And if we're going to ask staff to study things I want to make sure that we're prioritizing those things that are going to be most realistic and right size for Berkeley.
That being said, as I said in my first round, I am strongly interested in programs that create actual tenant acquisition ownership opportunities.
And I'm wondering if Council Member Hahn would be amenable to a friendly amendment to include in her motion that we ask staff to see if there are any such programs in comparable cities in California.
Programs comparable to what? Programs that have successfully created pathways for direct tenant acquisition and ownership comparable to Berkeley.
So, yes, I mean, to study, to see what other communities have been successful with.
Absolutely, I will add that, but I need to check with my seconder who is a parliamentarian extraordinaire, and I'm not sure he's going to say yes, let's see.
I would be delighted to second the amendment.
I will try to translate that into my motion, I'm writing it up so you'll have a chance to see that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, and before I go to Hahn, I have a friendly amendment, which is I would like us to explore the idea of giving tenants notice when a property goes on the market.
I think that just the nonprofit will get notice, I think the tenant should also get notice as well.
No.
Okay, thank you.
And I am typing it up, so hopefully we'll be able to show it.
So, thank you, and I just, I don't want anybody to think that I don't support the goals of TOPA, but I will say that I think that the goals of TOPA, and I don't want anybody to think that I don't support the goals of TOPA, but I will say that I think as newer council members coming in, I would say maybe 90% through this conversation that we've been having for a long time here on council, you might not be aware of the degree to which this has been considered.
And as at the time I was the chair of the land use committee, we held numerous meetings and we held numerous hearings.
We held hearings that were like 3, 4 hours long.
We heard from a huge crush of people who came and wanted to speak far, far more than we have here today, and a lot more letters.
And this was discussed.
We don't have a written report, I know that, but this was also discussed extensively with staff.
And so for those of us who are saying like we have been studying this for a long time, and we know that the administrative burden to run a program that may literally not have more than one or two projects possible per year, and when you know how thinly staffed our housing staff are, I feel like we can't just give them something complicated and controversial, quite frankly, to study that I certainly am already convinced after my many, many, many tens and tens of hours, I want to say hundreds, but it might be that much, might be over 100 hours of looking at this.
I just don't want to send them on a wild goose chase.
And that is why I am referring something a little more compact that I believe we can achieve maybe 80 or 90% of what we hope to achieve with TOPA, and maybe we can find that model, that more compact model that more cities can replicate.
Maybe one of the reasons why no one, not even East Palo Alto, which I know was kind of on the brink of it, very, very few jurisdictions, and certainly small jurisdictions, haven't been able to successfully replicate this.
Maybe we can be the creative ones who come up with something right-sized for smaller cities that can work here in Berkeley and that many more cities can follow.
So my motion is with full love for the outcomes and full support for these programs and for these ideas, but with a genuine desire to focus our staff on what I believe after my numerous years, less years than the mayor for sure, but numerous years looking at this, what I believe will actually be feasible.
So I just want to be clear.
Some of us have been looking at this for a long, long time, and staff has given us a lot of their direct input and feedback.
So I actually wanted to ask my seconder if I could amend my motion and put in a $150,000, up to $150,000 budget referral, learning that we only have one person, one person.
I think if we don't attach some money to this and get some outside help to do this study, it's going to be a long time before it comes back to us.
And the last thing I want to do with this is to slow down actual affordable housing projects that are in the queue right now being worked on.
So maybe I could ask the city manager.
Mr.
Budenhagen, do you think $100,000 or $150,000 can be an up to number? What number would I put in here that's realistic for us to get some help and move this study? $100,000 would be sufficient, I'd say.
$100,000, okay.
So I'll also say, we still have to go through a process to bring that person on.
So even that's not like..
No, it's not immediate, I know.
But it relieves this one individual who is essentially doing three people's jobs from the pressure of knowing that we're all waiting on them.
And again, a lot of this is about the reality of the resources we have as a city to support our affordable housing goals that are ambitious.
And I don't want to bring that person's back.
So, Council Member Traeger, would you add a budget referral of $100,000? Enthusiastically.
Okay, so just to repeat what I have on my motion now is to refer to the city manager to study and return to council recommendations for a program based on San Francisco's COPA and to study additional concepts, including a potential requirement to go co-op within a certain number of years of purchase.
Consider the threshold where COPA would apply, taking into consideration operational and fiscal realities.
A report on the administrative costs and sources of funds to support our small sites program.
And then to consider the potential to require notice and a possible right of first refusal for tenants.
I'm sorry, right? Maybe I'm using the terminology wrong.
No, I want them to be able to match a market offer.
So I think that's right, a first refusal.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Traeger.
I'm sorry, what was the right of first refusal? Is there someone who can nod? That's correct.
Yes.
What a right of first refusal is.
So right of first refusal for tenants or groups of tenants.
And then I want to make sure I captured yours, Council Member Taplin.
Council Member Taplin.
Yes.
What I'm doing to achieve these goals.
Okay.
Okay.
And then finally, I'm referring $100,000 to the budget process to support study of, to support this study.
That's, I think, where we are with this motion at this time.
Thank you.
Thank you.
A couple of things.
So does this motion go through RRV? Does this item go through RRV process? Yes, it would.
Okay, so I want to thank the people who are still here tonight.
And I want to address my comments to the students at the Co-op.
I personally am very in favor of cooperative ownership.
And in Manhattan, there are lots and lots of apartment buildings that were turned into cooperatives.
And it was a great, a great movement.
And those pre-war apartment buildings still are owned cooperatively.
So, but TOPA is not cooperative ownership.
And this is the thing that, that everybody needs to know, because there's a lot of misinformation.
If your name is not on the title of the property, you do not have any equity in that property.
Your name has to be on the title.
And TOPA doesn't give you that opportunity.
Your name is not on the title.
And TOPA doesn't give you the opportunity to purchase that property.
So that's one of the reasons why I'm opposed to it.
If this were truly about tenants opportunity to purchase, your name would be on the title and you would have equity.
What TOPA is doing is just transferring one ownership to another ownership.
And that's what I'm opposed to.
And that's what I'm opposed to.
So my understanding is that when you do a land trust purchase and do TOPA, you lose the benefits of rent control.
And your unit is no longer covered by rent control.
So it may be deed restricted to a certain income level, so you lose the benefits of rent control.
So I just wanted to say that, because I feel like there's a lot of misinformation out there about what TOPA actually is.
So I don't know, I'm having a hard time following, doing this motion on the dais.
And it keeps changing.
So if you could type it up and share screen.
I'm not on the Zoom.
Yeah, let's, can we do that before the vote? Do we need to do that right now? She was asking.
No, I'm finished.
Okay, because we have to restate the motions before the vote.
Councilor Bartlett.
Oh, thank you.
I was just curious from the author of the customer on your motion.
So in your conception that would study after acquisition by the organization of the property, within a certain amount of years, they're supposed to transfer it to the tenants and some kind of cooperative model or some sort of joint tenancy ownership.
Yeah.
San Francisco's COPA.
Let me just pull it up.
I have it.
Explicitly says that after purchase by a qualified not-for-profit, they can convert to co-op.
And what I'm suggesting is that we devise some kind of a requirement that the not-for-profit that purchases, make an offer or, you know, offer to the tenants the opportunity to go cooperative within a certain number of years of their purchase.
Okay.
I don't see another raised hands or people in the queue.
So is there anyone else wishing to speak? Okay.
Why don't we first ask the clerk to summarize the TREGA motion.
Yes, if I leave anything out, please jump in.
It's to refer the current item.
The Harrison item.
The Harrison item to the city manager to conduct analysis, various components of analysis, and include the San Francisco COPA program and other similar tenant purchase programs in the analysis as well.
Is that right? Yeah, I just finished.
Well, I was also responding to some of the discussion on the dice.
So my substitute motion is to refer a COPA TOPA policy to the city manager to conduct an analysis of the fiscal, operational and administrative impact of the policy.
The referral will include analysis of the San Francisco COPA program and other known COPA TOPA programs that exist or in development, as well as a review of any other comparable tenant acquisition and ownership program and their interface with existing partly tenant protection ordinances before $100,000 to staff for the purpose of this analysis.
If the seconder will second that.
Yes, second.
So to clarify, it's referring the Harrison proposal or the concept of a COPA TOPA? So this is my intent was to refer the concept of a COPA TOPA.
We can look at the Harrison as a starting point, but I want to ask the seconder, which actually she was the lead on the item, to see if that still meets the spirit.
Thank you.
I'm only, I'm concerned that that opens up the scope even larger and then becomes basically fully infeasible to do all together.
So I think it would be best if I've limited to the Harrison item, but.
And we can revise it.
Yeah, that's helpful to just get clarification.
Thank you.
Because I didn't understand what you were referring.
So that's helpful for me to know as I consider how I'm going to vote on it.
So we'll go to Councilor Han.
Do you want to present your motion? Are you able to share it? I did share it with you through Google Docs.
Yeah.
You have a lot going on.
Say something while you're looking? Yeah.
Okay.
I also just wanted to mention to my colleagues, I looked over the condo conversion ordinance because condo conversion is a way for tenants to get ownership.
And our condo conversion ordinance gives the first right of refusal to the tenant.
So what I think we need to do is actually reform the condo conversion ordinance if we're really interested in giving tenants an opportunity to purchase.
So I think that's a good idea.
But I think a lot of it is just.
Yeah, something to think about.
Another great idea, but I think I'll have to add 100,000.
Okay, so thank you, Mayor.
Refer to the city manager to study and return to Council with recommendations for a program based on the current situation.
And I would like to see a proposal that would be in the budget for 2022, a potential requirement to offer to go co-op, a requirement within a certain number of years of purchase, to consider an appropriate threshold where COPA would apply, taking into consideration operational and fiscal realities, report on administration costs and sources of funds consider the potential to provide notice and write a first refusal for tenants or groups of tenants to match the best market offer and study models other jurisdictions have in place to achieve these tenant acquisition goals and refer $100,000 to the budget process to support the study.
Yes.
So everyone's clear now on what the motions are.
And so let's now proceed to a vote on the substitute motion, the Trageb-Lunaparra motion.
Okay, Council Member Kesarwani? No.
Taplin? No.
Bartlett? Yes.
Trageb? Aye.
Han? No.
Wengraft? No.
Lunaparra? Yes.
Humbert? No.
Mayor Aragi? No.
Okay.
On the main...

Segment 7

motion.
Council member Kesarwani.
No.
Taplin.
Yes.
Bartlett.
Yes.
Tregub.
Aye.
Hahn.
Yes.
Wengraf.
No.
Lunaparra.
Yes.
Humbert.
Yes.
And Mayor Ardee.
Yes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Vice Mayor Wengraf for chairing in my absence.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Vice Mayor Wengraf for chairing in my absence.
We are adjourned.
Thank you.