Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Small Sites topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves substitute budget, reducing small-sites allocation to preserve marina and general fund balances
Summary
Berkeley City Council passed a substitute budget motion that reduces precommitted small-sites funding by $1.4 million while preserving overall affordable-housing trust fund resources; the motion passed on a roll call (5 yes, 3 no, 1 abstain).
Berkeley City Council voted to approve a substitute member-driven budget that reduces the immediate allocation for the city's small-sites affordable-housing program by $1,400,000 while keeping the total housing trust fund dollars at roughly the same level.
The substitute motion, described on the record as differing from the mayor's proposal only in how much is precommitted to small sites, passed on a roll call with recorded votes of Yes: Kisarwani, Taplin, Bartlett, Blackabee, Humbert; No: O'Keeffe, Munna Parra, Mayor Ishii; Abstain: Treggum. The clerk announced the motion carries.
Why it matters: Several councilmembers emphasized that small sites were an explicit commitment tied to voter-approved Measure U1 and that cutting the line could delay or imperil projects in the pipeline. Opponents of the mayor's larger small-sites precommitment argued that reducing the immediate allocation preserves flexibility to address a Marina Fund deficit and other pressing fiscal needs.
On the council floor, one councilmember supporting the mayor's approach said, "The small-sites program is the most effective use of funding to keep someone housed rather than rehousing them once they're already unhoused," and indicated they would support the mayor's budget because of that commitment to anti-displacement funding. Another councilmember backing the substitute said the substitute "puts more into the Marina Fund and is more fiscally responsible" given current deficits and long-term solvency concerns.
Staff produced a side-by-side spreadsheet during debate showing the two proposals differed primarily on (1) the duration of a vacancy freeze for the City Attorney risk manager position (three months vs. six months) and (2) whether an investigator position would be frozen (one proposal freezes it, yielding about $203,444). Those personnel decisions, combined with where smaller discretionary items were placed, explained how the substitute freed funds to shore up the marina and general fund while reducing up-front small-sites commitments.
Councilmembers on both sides said the total amount of affordable-housing trust-fund dollars was effectively the same across the two proposals; the dispute was whether to precommit $3.9 million to small sites now or leave $2.5 million uncommitted for other priorities. Multiple councilmembers reminded colleagues that some small-sites projects were already in the pipeline and could be affected by a reduction.
The council closed the public hearing on the item and moved on to the remaining agenda items after the vote. The action changes the budget priorities for FY2026 by shifting immediate commitments away from small-sites precommitment while aiming to address near-term fiscal gaps.
What happens next: The council proceeded to consider and ultimately adopt the FY2026 Annual Appropriations Ordinance and related financing items later in the meeting.
