Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracts Consent Agenda topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise concerns about unilateral community field agreement and negative fund balance; consent agenda item passes
Summary
Public commenters told council that a community field permit agreement was executed by an interim city manager without council approval and that the new community field fund showed a negative $184,000 cash balance; council passed the consent agenda motion clarifying October 7 actions related to Community Field #1.
During public comment the council heard specific complaints about Community Field No. 1 and about use of the consent agenda.
Joshua Hunter, a Berkeley resident, said he had obtained an executed permit agreement that the school district approved and that was signed by then-interim city manager Nate Geiser on October 31, 2024. Hunter told council the city charter vests authority for city contracts with council and requires review by the city attorney and asked whether the council had seen and reviewed the executed agreement. He also said the community field fund showed a negative $184,000 cash balance as of November and questioned an interfund loan from the general fund that he described as “not appropriate” and as potentially inconsistent with state law and the charter because the funds had been spent without prior appropriation.
Greg DuRasse and other commenters also criticized the expansion of the consent agenda, saying some items on consent (including prior contracts) were not routine and deserved public discussion.
Council proceeded to approve the consent agenda, which included motion M125 (a matter described on the consent calendar as "approving a motion to clarify the October 7, 2024 actions relating to Community Field No. 1, authorizing the Community Field No. 1 permit fees and terms as presented in the October 7, 2024 city manager's report"). Council member Hennen moved the consent agenda with support from Council member Black; Miss Mitchell called the roll and each councilmember voted yes. The clerk announced "The consent agenda has passed." The council took no separate roll-call vote on Hunter’s request for follow-up during the public-comment period; the concerns were entered on the record and raised as part of public comment.
Ending: The consent agenda, including motion M125 clarifying October 7 actions related to Community Field No. 1, passed by roll call with unanimous "yes" votes; members of the public asked for further review and corrective action relating to contracting authority and the community field’s negative cash balance.
